The Bibliography Challenge!
When I was an undergraduate, one of my classes had this super evil library scavenger hunt. It was full of psychotic questions like, “The following quote [insert random bizarre quote] is a line from a book. Find it.” This was before the internet and there were 100 questions like this.
Me and my group were working, like, 8 hours a day every day for two weeks. We were so mad about that stupid assignment and the awfulness, etc. And we were having trouble. So we started to get desperate. To try desperate things. For example, we narrowed one question down to four books. But we couldn’t find the answer in any of them. So we called the authors. All stalker-like, we got their phone numbers and friggin called them at home and read them the quote and asked them if they wrote the book that had the quote and if so, which book was it in? We talked to professors. We broke into email accounts. We pretended to be research assistants for professors that didn’t exist and got librarians to find stuff for us. We were like Veronica Mars, but with more rage.
Well, I wrote nasty things about that horribly hard assignment on the course evaluations. It was the worst assignment EVER, I concluded.
Fast forward a few years and I was in grad school, doing a research project. Everyone in the class was having trouble finding stuff, but I wasn’t. They all asked me how I was finding stuff. So I told them. They looked at me like I was crazy. And it hit me: everything I knew about doing research, I learned from that one awful assignment. Everything.
In addition to the stalking of authors, one of the most helpful things I learned is that bibliographies are fantastic ways to find sources. Instead of pouring over databases, grab books on topics slightly larger than your topic and turn directly to the bibliographies. Don’t even read the books. Just read the bibliographies. You’ll be amazed how much easier it is when someone else has done the research for you. Something I commonly do is to go to the library, find 20 books, pile them on a table and pour through the bibliographies. (Let someone else put the books away.) So useful.
So, here are the rules of the challenge:
1) Work in groups
2) You have only the class period. Fifty minutes. After that, time is up.
3) Start with one person’s topic and then work your way through everyone else’s topic. Get through as many people as you can, but don’t exceed the time limit. Rock paper scissors to see who goes in what order if you can't decide.
4) For each topic, find 20 books written on a broader topic. Don’t open the books yet.
5) Once you have 20 books, put them on a table and flip directly to the bibliographies.
6) Write down any journal articles that apply to each person's smaller topic from each bibliography.
7) When you’ve gotten through the 20 bibliographies, it’s time to move to the next person in the group.
8) Repeat for each person until the time limit is up.
9) Bring your lists of articles to class on Monday. The group with the most articles wins a prize.
If you have questions while you're working, send me an email. I'll try to keep my computer next to me the whole time. Good luck, y'all!
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Kassandra's Analysis of "Why the Church is as True as the Gospel"
Kassandra Hymas
Writing Honors 150
Professor Kerry Spencer
September 24, 2011
Why the Church is as True as the Gospel: Critical Analysis
At first glance Mr. England seems to use extremely dense language and long winded passages,
when in fact he uses his vast vocabulary to produce rich phrases to accurately depict the full
power of the gospel, inviting his audience to think logically into the church, giving gospel topics
a highly educated viewpoint while keeping it simple with his testimony.
Mr. England’s greatest assets in this article is his extensive word choice and organization of
them. In order to explain to members the full capacity of the gospel one must use words with
substance to create rich phrases. One example of a powerful phrase is, “Suddenly I felt
something, vaguely familiar, burning to the center of my heart and bones- and then, it seemed,
physically turning me around to look at the transfigured face of Elder Harold B. Lee, the visiting
authority.”(219) Through words combinations like “burning to the center” and “physically
turning me around,” Mr. England gives us a very life like feeling, giving us a sense of that power
that comes from the Holy Spirit.
The second greatest strength of this article is making the reader really think logically about the
church. After discussing how limited and various our understanding of the gospel he says, “That
is precisely where the church comes in. I believe the Church is the best medium, apart from
marriage (which it must resembles in this respect), for helping us gain salvation by grappling
constructively with the oppositions of existence, despite our limited and various understandings
of ‘the gospel.’ I believe that the better than any other church or organization is at such help, the
‘truer’ it is. And when I call the Mormon church ‘the true church’ I mean that it is the best
organized means for providing such help because it is divinely organized and directed-is made
and kept effective by revelations that have come and continue to come from God, however
“darkly” they, of necessity, come to our own limited and various understandings.” (221)
Choosing a church, and following a church is a generally a pathos decision. It is emotional in
everyday. I would say that most people would even call the LDS church an emotional
attachment. We are first directed by feelings, we support each other emotionally, and we rely on
emotion to understand the truth of our history. Although a church may appeal to the pathos of a
person, Mr. England describes the church from a logical standpoint. He explains his belief that
the church is superbly organized, in order for us to get the best out of spiritual experiences.
One of the last strength's of Mr. England is after discussing in depth topics he wraps it up, and
keeps it straightforward with his simple testimony. He starts out so simple by sharing the
experience of feeling the spirit for the second time. This first statement itself starts off
uncomplicated, and becomes more intricate as he explains not just his experience but also adds
his experience of studying the gospel. For readers who have not felt that special power, the
experience intrigues them, and they are drawn into wanting more. For example: Mr. England
explains, “How many boring stake conferences would I attend to be even once in the presence of
such grace? Thousands-all were. That pearl is without a price. And because I have since learned better what to look for and find there - understanding of and edifying, inspirational experience
with the members of the Church-the conferences are no longer boring. Thus, one of the earliest
and most important pillars of my faith come, not through some great insight into the gospel, but
through an experience I could have had only because I was doing my duty in the Church,
however immaturely.” (220) Throughout the article, Mr.
England sometimes becomes a little
engrossed in his advanced educational viewpoints, sometimes to the point of misunderstanding,
although through his simple testimony, he keeps the article understandable and grounded.
Eugene England’s article “Why the Church is as True as the Gospel”, paints an accurate picture
of the gospel, by using an array of vocabulary and power phrases, inviting audiences to think
deeply, while giving highly educated views on topics yet grounding them with his simple
testimony. Mr. England makes some very substantial points in this article. It was very interesting
to read viewpoints not often thought of.
Writing Honors 150
Professor Kerry Spencer
September 24, 2011
Why the Church is as True as the Gospel: Critical Analysis
At first glance Mr. England seems to use extremely dense language and long winded passages,
when in fact he uses his vast vocabulary to produce rich phrases to accurately depict the full
power of the gospel, inviting his audience to think logically into the church, giving gospel topics
a highly educated viewpoint while keeping it simple with his testimony.
Mr. England’s greatest assets in this article is his extensive word choice and organization of
them. In order to explain to members the full capacity of the gospel one must use words with
substance to create rich phrases. One example of a powerful phrase is, “Suddenly I felt
something, vaguely familiar, burning to the center of my heart and bones- and then, it seemed,
physically turning me around to look at the transfigured face of Elder Harold B. Lee, the visiting
authority.”(219) Through words combinations like “burning to the center” and “physically
turning me around,” Mr. England gives us a very life like feeling, giving us a sense of that power
that comes from the Holy Spirit.
The second greatest strength of this article is making the reader really think logically about the
church. After discussing how limited and various our understanding of the gospel he says, “That
is precisely where the church comes in. I believe the Church is the best medium, apart from
marriage (which it must resembles in this respect), for helping us gain salvation by grappling
constructively with the oppositions of existence, despite our limited and various understandings
of ‘the gospel.’ I believe that the better than any other church or organization is at such help, the
‘truer’ it is. And when I call the Mormon church ‘the true church’ I mean that it is the best
organized means for providing such help because it is divinely organized and directed-is made
and kept effective by revelations that have come and continue to come from God, however
“darkly” they, of necessity, come to our own limited and various understandings.” (221)
Choosing a church, and following a church is a generally a pathos decision. It is emotional in
everyday. I would say that most people would even call the LDS church an emotional
attachment. We are first directed by feelings, we support each other emotionally, and we rely on
emotion to understand the truth of our history. Although a church may appeal to the pathos of a
person, Mr. England describes the church from a logical standpoint. He explains his belief that
the church is superbly organized, in order for us to get the best out of spiritual experiences.
One of the last strength's of Mr. England is after discussing in depth topics he wraps it up, and
keeps it straightforward with his simple testimony. He starts out so simple by sharing the
experience of feeling the spirit for the second time. This first statement itself starts off
uncomplicated, and becomes more intricate as he explains not just his experience but also adds
his experience of studying the gospel. For readers who have not felt that special power, the
experience intrigues them, and they are drawn into wanting more. For example: Mr. England
explains, “How many boring stake conferences would I attend to be even once in the presence of
such grace? Thousands-all were. That pearl is without a price. And because I have since learned better what to look for and find there - understanding of and edifying, inspirational experience
with the members of the Church-the conferences are no longer boring. Thus, one of the earliest
and most important pillars of my faith come, not through some great insight into the gospel, but
through an experience I could have had only because I was doing my duty in the Church,
however immaturely.” (220) Throughout the article, Mr.
England sometimes becomes a little
engrossed in his advanced educational viewpoints, sometimes to the point of misunderstanding,
although through his simple testimony, he keeps the article understandable and grounded.
Eugene England’s article “Why the Church is as True as the Gospel”, paints an accurate picture
of the gospel, by using an array of vocabulary and power phrases, inviting audiences to think
deeply, while giving highly educated views on topics yet grounding them with his simple
testimony. Mr. England makes some very substantial points in this article. It was very interesting
to read viewpoints not often thought of.
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Christopher's Analysis of "Why the Church is as true as the gospel"
Critical Analysis of Why the Church is as True as the Gospel
Through his article, “Why the Church is as True as the Gospel,” Eugene England enlightens his audience upon his views of the divinity of not only the Gospel teachings of the Mormon church, but also the activities, meetings, and the physical aspects of it. England gives many examples of why he feels that the physical properties of the church are “true,”explaining that although the church is run by people, and many many feel it is faulted, it is actually still ordained of God, and perfect. Though many examples are given, and much testimony is borne, the conviction of England to the audience was lost. Through weak appeals to pathos and ethos, usage of wordy and obscure examples, and overall extravagance, many of the potentially valid in England’s thesis are lost and are never comprehended by his educated audience.
To begin his article, England chooses appeal to pathos. He expresses his boredom of church meetings as a child. “I was convinced when I was a boy, that the most boring meeting in the Church, perhaps in the world, was a ‘quarterly stake conference.”’ (219) With an attempt to evoke emotion in his reader, England successfully creates a net, connecting with his primarily LDS audience, and for only moments, grabs their attention. This introduction is a rare and false first impression of England’s authorial style, and is perhaps the only naturally comprehensible passage in his entire work.
In one of his many attempts to connect with his audience, in an ethos-like manner, England speaks of his previous experiences, hoping to enhance the interest of the audience, and make his word more trustworthy. “The Church is as ‘true’ as- that is , as effective for salvation-as- the gospel : the Church is where the fruitful opposition between liberal and conservative values, faith, and doubt, secure authority and frightening freedom, individual integrity, and public responsibility-and thus where there will be misery as well as holiness, bad news as well as good.” (227) Though his thesis is expressed, much of the validity, in the mind of his readers, is lost and becomes astray. This example, being one of extreme length, is just one of the many paragraphs containing many, many words, and such little value. Through his run-on sentences, and lengthy examples, the audience is once again tethered to another “beside the point” rant.
By looking at wordy examples such as, “Life in this universe is full of polarities, and is made full by them. Complain about them, even try sometimes to destroy them, with dogmatism, or even try to destroy them with self-riotousness, or a retreat into the innocence that is only ignorance, a return to the Garden of Eden, where there is deceptive ease and clarity, but there is no salvation.”(220), England makes his audience question not the message of his text, but rather the reason of placement of the examples. Passages such as this one tend to lead the audience astray, pressing their attention with vaster concepts and distractions than they are prepared to read. Though England’s audience is a generally educated one, even the most concentrated and scholarly members of his audience will far too often find themselves lost in England’s examples. Through passages such as this one, England attempts to supplement his topic, but rather, digresses from his principal thesis, dragging his audience behind him.
England’s point is expressed. Though it takes, ten pages, thousands of words, many run-on sentences, and many abstract junctions, his point is made. The problem is that even to an educated audience, the amount of wordage, digressions, and diction lead not to a clear understanding of the text’s meaning, but rather a sense of completion, but not comprehension. “If we cannot accept the Church and the challenge it offers with the openness and courage and humility they require, then I believe our historical studies and our theological enterprises are mainly a waste of time- and possible destructive.” (228) Looking at this sentence in the conclusion of his essay, we are only hinted towards one thing, that England supports the Church, and feels that it is in fact as important as the Gospel. Yet, through how much extravagance must the audience skim through to finally understand England’s point?
Though England makes valid points and does provide his reader with thoughts that may help them understand the meaning of his text, many points are unfortunately lost to obscurity. England uses many examples of previous experiences to appeal to ethos, and allow his audience to trust his experiences, and even initially pay attention to the relatable topics. England uses his skills of rhetoric and diction to convey his true beliefs to his audience. So, why are so many points lost and such validity thrown to the air? Through weak appeals to pathos and ethos, usage of wordy and obscure examples, and overall extravagance, many of the valid points in England’s thesis are lost and are never comprehended by his educated audience.
Through his article, “Why the Church is as True as the Gospel,” Eugene England enlightens his audience upon his views of the divinity of not only the Gospel teachings of the Mormon church, but also the activities, meetings, and the physical aspects of it. England gives many examples of why he feels that the physical properties of the church are “true,”explaining that although the church is run by people, and many many feel it is faulted, it is actually still ordained of God, and perfect. Though many examples are given, and much testimony is borne, the conviction of England to the audience was lost. Through weak appeals to pathos and ethos, usage of wordy and obscure examples, and overall extravagance, many of the potentially valid in England’s thesis are lost and are never comprehended by his educated audience.
To begin his article, England chooses appeal to pathos. He expresses his boredom of church meetings as a child. “I was convinced when I was a boy, that the most boring meeting in the Church, perhaps in the world, was a ‘quarterly stake conference.”’ (219) With an attempt to evoke emotion in his reader, England successfully creates a net, connecting with his primarily LDS audience, and for only moments, grabs their attention. This introduction is a rare and false first impression of England’s authorial style, and is perhaps the only naturally comprehensible passage in his entire work.
In one of his many attempts to connect with his audience, in an ethos-like manner, England speaks of his previous experiences, hoping to enhance the interest of the audience, and make his word more trustworthy. “The Church is as ‘true’ as- that is , as effective for salvation-as- the gospel : the Church is where the fruitful opposition between liberal and conservative values, faith, and doubt, secure authority and frightening freedom, individual integrity, and public responsibility-and thus where there will be misery as well as holiness, bad news as well as good.” (227) Though his thesis is expressed, much of the validity, in the mind of his readers, is lost and becomes astray. This example, being one of extreme length, is just one of the many paragraphs containing many, many words, and such little value. Through his run-on sentences, and lengthy examples, the audience is once again tethered to another “beside the point” rant.
By looking at wordy examples such as, “Life in this universe is full of polarities, and is made full by them. Complain about them, even try sometimes to destroy them, with dogmatism, or even try to destroy them with self-riotousness, or a retreat into the innocence that is only ignorance, a return to the Garden of Eden, where there is deceptive ease and clarity, but there is no salvation.”(220), England makes his audience question not the message of his text, but rather the reason of placement of the examples. Passages such as this one tend to lead the audience astray, pressing their attention with vaster concepts and distractions than they are prepared to read. Though England’s audience is a generally educated one, even the most concentrated and scholarly members of his audience will far too often find themselves lost in England’s examples. Through passages such as this one, England attempts to supplement his topic, but rather, digresses from his principal thesis, dragging his audience behind him.
England’s point is expressed. Though it takes, ten pages, thousands of words, many run-on sentences, and many abstract junctions, his point is made. The problem is that even to an educated audience, the amount of wordage, digressions, and diction lead not to a clear understanding of the text’s meaning, but rather a sense of completion, but not comprehension. “If we cannot accept the Church and the challenge it offers with the openness and courage and humility they require, then I believe our historical studies and our theological enterprises are mainly a waste of time- and possible destructive.” (228) Looking at this sentence in the conclusion of his essay, we are only hinted towards one thing, that England supports the Church, and feels that it is in fact as important as the Gospel. Yet, through how much extravagance must the audience skim through to finally understand England’s point?
Though England makes valid points and does provide his reader with thoughts that may help them understand the meaning of his text, many points are unfortunately lost to obscurity. England uses many examples of previous experiences to appeal to ethos, and allow his audience to trust his experiences, and even initially pay attention to the relatable topics. England uses his skills of rhetoric and diction to convey his true beliefs to his audience. So, why are so many points lost and such validity thrown to the air? Through weak appeals to pathos and ethos, usage of wordy and obscure examples, and overall extravagance, many of the valid points in England’s thesis are lost and are never comprehended by his educated audience.
Rex's Analysis of "Why the Church is As True as the Gospel"
Rex McArthur
Professor Kerry Spencer
Writing 150H
September 20, 2011
Sum of Perfection
Aristotle said that, “The whole is more than the sum of its parts,” Meaning that a body of imperfect parts can achieve something by working together that even all the parts working alone couldn’t accomplish. This is an idea that Eugene England stresses in his article, “Why the Church is as True as the Gospel,” which was a preface to a book written under the same title. It is a common catch phrase among members of the the Church to say things like, “the Church is true, but the people aren’t,” or “the Gospel is perfect, but the Church is human, and therefore prone to mistakes.” The Church is made of imperfect parts, but England argues the Church is entirely true, not just the gospel doctrines and principles, but the actual, physical embodiment of the Church. He makes this point very effectively to his audience of Mormon readers by first appealing to logos and their sense of logic by applying analogies. He also appeals to their pathos by sharing personal stories we can sympathize with, and their ethos by quoting from figures we recognize. The combination of these effectively relay his point to the Mormon audience that would be the main readers of this article.
The first way he makes his point is by making simple analogies that would appeal to the readers sense of logos. The use of something of more simplicity leads to a logical agreement with his argument about the church. Michael Novak made a comparison how bonds in marriage can help us grow. Marriage is the assault against our “lonely egos,” and we don’t only need marriage to be imperfect for us to achieve perfection, but we desperately want it as well. Novak states, “My bonds to [my family] hold me back... from many sorts of opportunities. And yet these do not feel like bonds. They are, I know, my liberation. They force me to be a different sort of human being, in a way in which I want and need to be forced.” England applies this to the Gospel by making the point that the church can push us to be better because of its bonds and restrictions. These bonds that are made to hold us back really do force us to be better people. We become the kind of people that we want to be, but are incapable because of our own lack of self discipline. In the Church, we are often taught that the Gospel is the only way to achieve true happiness. By following in Christ’s footsteps, and accepting these restrictions and bonds, we become something else entirely. We are, as Novak puts it, liberated.
England continues the analogy to appeal to logos. He points out that, “In the life of the true Church, as in a good marriage, there are constant opportunities for all to serve.” And it is because of the imperfections that we are allowed to serve. Imagine a church where everyone is perfect. You wouldn’t be able to serve in leadership positions because of your imperfection, and would not be able to learn near as much as you could. Instead, the Church allows imperfections in the leadership because imperfections can help both parties in understanding each other, and grow together towards the ultimate goal of perfection. This helps the Church achieve its ultimate goal, salvation for everyone. One sided marriages and imbalanced religions can cripple the quest for perfection. This appeal to logos by England effectively relays the message to his target audience.
Another way the author makes his point by appealing to the emotion of the audience is by sharing very personal stories.These stories are a blatant appeal to the audiences’ sense of pathos. He shares with us a story about his time as a Branch President in Minnesota. He speaks about the imperfections of the Church, and how they helped the ward grow closer together. He talks of a man they had to bring back into the fold of activity, a woman who was abused by her husband, and a family whose son died in a drunk driving accident. “The Church blessed us all by bringing us together” (225). He is definitely appealing to the emotion of the audience. The audience will be very receptive and sympathize with the people in these stories. The people struggled and were helped through the Church. The members, though not perfect, extended a hand of help in this time of need. The comforting of those that stand in need of comfort is a large mission of the Church, and not only the perfect are allowed to comfort. In fact, the imperfect are needed to comfort. This helps the imperfect on both ends grow. Helping and receiving help from imperfect people is not just a side benefit of the church, but an intended consequence of the perfect gospel being run by imperfect people.
Showing a sense of authority is a great way to get an audience to agree with you.
England employs this to sway his audience by simply quoting a Prophet and President of the Church. He says, “Finally, as President McKay put it...” He then proceeds to give the quote which sums up his point quite well. The power of this specific quote lies in the authority behind it, not just the substance of the quote. Members of the Church are going to be much more receptive to council when they know it was spoken over the pulpit by a prophet. As a Mormon, writing to a Mormon audience, England knows this, and he uses authority figures to effectively communicate his point. That makes this an extremely effective example of appealing to the ethos of the target audience.
Eugene England does a great job of getting his point across by identifying his audience, and then speaking in a way that will appeal to them. He makes the point that the entire church is true, and that the organization is set up in a way that it is the ideal way for all of the saints to achieve salvation. England does so by directly appealing to the logos, pathos and ethos of his audience. First, he uses logic by sharing analogies. He also appeals to the emotion by sharing his personal experiences while a Branch President. Last of all, he appeals to the Ethos of the audience, by showing an example of a prophet making his point to the whole church in a conference address. The article is effectively structured to make his point, and the sum of the parts do add up to be more than the parts could ever be. In fact, the sum is perfection.
Professor Kerry Spencer
Writing 150H
September 20, 2011
Sum of Perfection
Aristotle said that, “The whole is more than the sum of its parts,” Meaning that a body of imperfect parts can achieve something by working together that even all the parts working alone couldn’t accomplish. This is an idea that Eugene England stresses in his article, “Why the Church is as True as the Gospel,” which was a preface to a book written under the same title. It is a common catch phrase among members of the the Church to say things like, “the Church is true, but the people aren’t,” or “the Gospel is perfect, but the Church is human, and therefore prone to mistakes.” The Church is made of imperfect parts, but England argues the Church is entirely true, not just the gospel doctrines and principles, but the actual, physical embodiment of the Church. He makes this point very effectively to his audience of Mormon readers by first appealing to logos and their sense of logic by applying analogies. He also appeals to their pathos by sharing personal stories we can sympathize with, and their ethos by quoting from figures we recognize. The combination of these effectively relay his point to the Mormon audience that would be the main readers of this article.
The first way he makes his point is by making simple analogies that would appeal to the readers sense of logos. The use of something of more simplicity leads to a logical agreement with his argument about the church. Michael Novak made a comparison how bonds in marriage can help us grow. Marriage is the assault against our “lonely egos,” and we don’t only need marriage to be imperfect for us to achieve perfection, but we desperately want it as well. Novak states, “My bonds to [my family] hold me back... from many sorts of opportunities. And yet these do not feel like bonds. They are, I know, my liberation. They force me to be a different sort of human being, in a way in which I want and need to be forced.” England applies this to the Gospel by making the point that the church can push us to be better because of its bonds and restrictions. These bonds that are made to hold us back really do force us to be better people. We become the kind of people that we want to be, but are incapable because of our own lack of self discipline. In the Church, we are often taught that the Gospel is the only way to achieve true happiness. By following in Christ’s footsteps, and accepting these restrictions and bonds, we become something else entirely. We are, as Novak puts it, liberated.
England continues the analogy to appeal to logos. He points out that, “In the life of the true Church, as in a good marriage, there are constant opportunities for all to serve.” And it is because of the imperfections that we are allowed to serve. Imagine a church where everyone is perfect. You wouldn’t be able to serve in leadership positions because of your imperfection, and would not be able to learn near as much as you could. Instead, the Church allows imperfections in the leadership because imperfections can help both parties in understanding each other, and grow together towards the ultimate goal of perfection. This helps the Church achieve its ultimate goal, salvation for everyone. One sided marriages and imbalanced religions can cripple the quest for perfection. This appeal to logos by England effectively relays the message to his target audience.
Another way the author makes his point by appealing to the emotion of the audience is by sharing very personal stories.These stories are a blatant appeal to the audiences’ sense of pathos. He shares with us a story about his time as a Branch President in Minnesota. He speaks about the imperfections of the Church, and how they helped the ward grow closer together. He talks of a man they had to bring back into the fold of activity, a woman who was abused by her husband, and a family whose son died in a drunk driving accident. “The Church blessed us all by bringing us together” (225). He is definitely appealing to the emotion of the audience. The audience will be very receptive and sympathize with the people in these stories. The people struggled and were helped through the Church. The members, though not perfect, extended a hand of help in this time of need. The comforting of those that stand in need of comfort is a large mission of the Church, and not only the perfect are allowed to comfort. In fact, the imperfect are needed to comfort. This helps the imperfect on both ends grow. Helping and receiving help from imperfect people is not just a side benefit of the church, but an intended consequence of the perfect gospel being run by imperfect people.
Showing a sense of authority is a great way to get an audience to agree with you.
England employs this to sway his audience by simply quoting a Prophet and President of the Church. He says, “Finally, as President McKay put it...” He then proceeds to give the quote which sums up his point quite well. The power of this specific quote lies in the authority behind it, not just the substance of the quote. Members of the Church are going to be much more receptive to council when they know it was spoken over the pulpit by a prophet. As a Mormon, writing to a Mormon audience, England knows this, and he uses authority figures to effectively communicate his point. That makes this an extremely effective example of appealing to the ethos of the target audience.
Eugene England does a great job of getting his point across by identifying his audience, and then speaking in a way that will appeal to them. He makes the point that the entire church is true, and that the organization is set up in a way that it is the ideal way for all of the saints to achieve salvation. England does so by directly appealing to the logos, pathos and ethos of his audience. First, he uses logic by sharing analogies. He also appeals to the emotion by sharing his personal experiences while a Branch President. Last of all, he appeals to the Ethos of the audience, by showing an example of a prophet making his point to the whole church in a conference address. The article is effectively structured to make his point, and the sum of the parts do add up to be more than the parts could ever be. In fact, the sum is perfection.
Matt's Analysis of "Why the Churchis as True as the Gospel"
Matthew Walden
Professor Kerry Spencer
English 150H
26 September 2011
The One True Church
“The Church is true;” we hear it every Sunday. However, what makes the Church true? Ultimately, we can determine for ourselves that the gospel is true, but that does not directly indicate that the Church is true. In fact, many other churches have adopted the “Gospel of Jesus Christ” as their official doctrine, and yet, they are still missing the fullness of the truth. It seems we testify about a true church, even though we are not sure what the definition of a true church is. In his essay entitled “Why the Church Is as True as the Gospel,” Eugene England uses personal anecdote, analogy, and appeals to logos to effectively show members of the LDS Church that the Church is indeed true and integral to salvation.
Brother England makes extensive use of personal anecdote to get his point across. For example, Brother England explains how when, as bishop, he read Book of Mormon passages to a young woman who was trapped in a cycle of despair, and that he knew that he had the power “to apply the atoning blood of Jesus Christ”(220). By sharing this very personal story, the reader becomes better acquainted with Brother England’s point: that the trueness of the Church can be found easily in its application of the gospel of Christ. Because the proof is contained in the experience of the author, the point is clarified and more straightforward.
Additionally, Brother England has a passage in his essay where he contrasts his experience as bishop of the Stanford ward, where he had to understand the gospel as “idealistic, abstract, and critical”(224), with his experience as a Bishop in a Utah young families ward, where the experience was “practical, specific, sacrifices, exasperating, and more satisfying and redemptive”(224). Once again, through the use of his own experience, Brother England is able to present two different views of the gospel: one of which is a theoretical, big picture view, and one of which is a practical and applicable view. By sharing these two views, Brother England shows his preference for the latter, strengthening his point that the church functions best as the gospel in action.
In another instance, Brother England uses anecdote when he discusses his childhood experience in church, Brother England describes the memorable aspects of his church visit, and he compares these aspects to what he remembers now. He describes the “Singing Mothers”(Jorgensen 219), and how the stake conferences were “boring”(219). These phrases are in direct opposition to the “presence of such grace”(219) that he had felt while listening to the words of President (then Elder) Harold B. Lee. Through the use of his anecdote, Brother England is effective in showing that the church is more than just a boring infrastructure, but a more divinely inspired infrastructure.
Throughout his essay, Brother England also draws upon effective and relevant analogy to get his point across. For example, in order to illustrate the fact that “There must needs be opposition in all things,” Brother England gives examples of how most philosophical ideas come with clear opposition, including “reason vs. emotion….. Men vs. women…. and justice vs. mercy” (220). Through the use of this likening, Brother England points out that all of these so-called “opposing things” actually work together to accomplish a clear goal. By doing this, Brother England is simply warming people up to his point: that opposition in the church is necessary and good.
In another instance, Brother England, spends a large portion of his essay comparing the church to a marriage, encouraging the reader to “substitute the word ‘marriage’ for church’” in the following passages. This analogy clearly and effectively helps to define the church in contrast to the gospel. This is because when the church is compared with marriage, it becomes clearer as to why the church is essential, which is to force us to change ourselves in order to be compatible with the teachings of the gospel.
Finally, Brother England uses scriptural comparison in order to get his point across, often citing the works of Paul, Lehi, or Joseph Smith. The reason he does this is so the audience, a group of informed members of the LDS church, would better relate to the points presented in the essay. In a sense, Brother England uses a sense of ethos through his scriptural analysis, as he builds off the knowledge of well-respected LDS heroes.
All in all, the core of Brother England’s essay is based around an appeal to logos. Brother England uses principles from the gospel, which he assumes his audience knows is true, and logically applies them to the church, bolstering the church’s validity. For example, Brother England presents the principle, from the Book of Mormon, that there “must needs be opposition in all things”(220). Because his purpose in writing is to defend the truthfulness of the church, he applies this statement to the church, and makes the claim that the church’s imperfections are constructive, thereby refuting and clarifying the contested statement that the “…gospel is true….but the church is imperfect”(220). Essentially, Brother England logically binds those who believe in Christ’s gospel but not the holiness of our church.
In a later part of the essay, England uses logos through the act of defining key words. For example, Brother England defines the “true church” in the beginning of his essay, saying that the true church helps us to “gain salvation by grappling constructively with the oppositions of existence”(221). By defining a term that is central to the meaning of the essay, Brother England uses logos to directly address the issue at hand.
Finally, in his conclusion, Brother England states “the church is the instrument provided by God in order to return to him”(228). In the pinnacle of his argument, Brother England provides a complimentary, yet alternative definition of the Church. Through the use of logos, Brother England essentially builds up his reliability, so that he can end with a final thesis statement.
In Conclusion, Brother England employs the use of anecdote, analogy, and logos in order to prove the validity of his claim: that the Church is just as true as the gospel. Through his syncretic blend of temporal argument and spiritual subject matter, Brother England is able to effectively change the perspective of his audience. He is able to prove to the audience that the organization and practices of the church are as divinely inspired as any teaching of Jesus Christ.
Professor Kerry Spencer
English 150H
26 September 2011
The One True Church
“The Church is true;” we hear it every Sunday. However, what makes the Church true? Ultimately, we can determine for ourselves that the gospel is true, but that does not directly indicate that the Church is true. In fact, many other churches have adopted the “Gospel of Jesus Christ” as their official doctrine, and yet, they are still missing the fullness of the truth. It seems we testify about a true church, even though we are not sure what the definition of a true church is. In his essay entitled “Why the Church Is as True as the Gospel,” Eugene England uses personal anecdote, analogy, and appeals to logos to effectively show members of the LDS Church that the Church is indeed true and integral to salvation.
Brother England makes extensive use of personal anecdote to get his point across. For example, Brother England explains how when, as bishop, he read Book of Mormon passages to a young woman who was trapped in a cycle of despair, and that he knew that he had the power “to apply the atoning blood of Jesus Christ”(220). By sharing this very personal story, the reader becomes better acquainted with Brother England’s point: that the trueness of the Church can be found easily in its application of the gospel of Christ. Because the proof is contained in the experience of the author, the point is clarified and more straightforward.
Additionally, Brother England has a passage in his essay where he contrasts his experience as bishop of the Stanford ward, where he had to understand the gospel as “idealistic, abstract, and critical”(224), with his experience as a Bishop in a Utah young families ward, where the experience was “practical, specific, sacrifices, exasperating, and more satisfying and redemptive”(224). Once again, through the use of his own experience, Brother England is able to present two different views of the gospel: one of which is a theoretical, big picture view, and one of which is a practical and applicable view. By sharing these two views, Brother England shows his preference for the latter, strengthening his point that the church functions best as the gospel in action.
In another instance, Brother England uses anecdote when he discusses his childhood experience in church, Brother England describes the memorable aspects of his church visit, and he compares these aspects to what he remembers now. He describes the “Singing Mothers”(Jorgensen 219), and how the stake conferences were “boring”(219). These phrases are in direct opposition to the “presence of such grace”(219) that he had felt while listening to the words of President (then Elder) Harold B. Lee. Through the use of his anecdote, Brother England is effective in showing that the church is more than just a boring infrastructure, but a more divinely inspired infrastructure.
Throughout his essay, Brother England also draws upon effective and relevant analogy to get his point across. For example, in order to illustrate the fact that “There must needs be opposition in all things,” Brother England gives examples of how most philosophical ideas come with clear opposition, including “reason vs. emotion….. Men vs. women…. and justice vs. mercy” (220). Through the use of this likening, Brother England points out that all of these so-called “opposing things” actually work together to accomplish a clear goal. By doing this, Brother England is simply warming people up to his point: that opposition in the church is necessary and good.
In another instance, Brother England, spends a large portion of his essay comparing the church to a marriage, encouraging the reader to “substitute the word ‘marriage’ for church’” in the following passages. This analogy clearly and effectively helps to define the church in contrast to the gospel. This is because when the church is compared with marriage, it becomes clearer as to why the church is essential, which is to force us to change ourselves in order to be compatible with the teachings of the gospel.
Finally, Brother England uses scriptural comparison in order to get his point across, often citing the works of Paul, Lehi, or Joseph Smith. The reason he does this is so the audience, a group of informed members of the LDS church, would better relate to the points presented in the essay. In a sense, Brother England uses a sense of ethos through his scriptural analysis, as he builds off the knowledge of well-respected LDS heroes.
All in all, the core of Brother England’s essay is based around an appeal to logos. Brother England uses principles from the gospel, which he assumes his audience knows is true, and logically applies them to the church, bolstering the church’s validity. For example, Brother England presents the principle, from the Book of Mormon, that there “must needs be opposition in all things”(220). Because his purpose in writing is to defend the truthfulness of the church, he applies this statement to the church, and makes the claim that the church’s imperfections are constructive, thereby refuting and clarifying the contested statement that the “…gospel is true….but the church is imperfect”(220). Essentially, Brother England logically binds those who believe in Christ’s gospel but not the holiness of our church.
In a later part of the essay, England uses logos through the act of defining key words. For example, Brother England defines the “true church” in the beginning of his essay, saying that the true church helps us to “gain salvation by grappling constructively with the oppositions of existence”(221). By defining a term that is central to the meaning of the essay, Brother England uses logos to directly address the issue at hand.
Finally, in his conclusion, Brother England states “the church is the instrument provided by God in order to return to him”(228). In the pinnacle of his argument, Brother England provides a complimentary, yet alternative definition of the Church. Through the use of logos, Brother England essentially builds up his reliability, so that he can end with a final thesis statement.
In Conclusion, Brother England employs the use of anecdote, analogy, and logos in order to prove the validity of his claim: that the Church is just as true as the gospel. Through his syncretic blend of temporal argument and spiritual subject matter, Brother England is able to effectively change the perspective of his audience. He is able to prove to the audience that the organization and practices of the church are as divinely inspired as any teaching of Jesus Christ.
Jamie's Analysis of "Why the Church is As True as the Gospel"
Jamie Jasperson
Dr. Kerry Spencer
Honors Writing 150 Section 109
26 September 2011
Faith and Feelings
In a letter he wrote to his brother Theo in 1889, Vincent Van Gogh said, “Let’s not forget that the little emotions are the great captains of our lives and we obey them without realizing it” (Brooks). Oftentimes we mistake emotion for weakness. The boy who cries when he skins his knee is considered a sissy; the girl who cannot hold back her tears during Bambi is a crybaby. In reality, emotion is an important aspect of human nature. We make decisions and judgments based on how we think and feel about things. This is why many people choose to use an appeal to emotion, or pathos, as a tool of persuasion when making arguments. Eugene England effectively utilizes pathos as a rhetorical device in his argument “Why the Church Is as True as the Gospel.”
England opens his argument by explaining the opposing side. He says, “One of the clichés often repeated by Mormons is that the gospel is true, even perfect, but the Church is, after all, a human instrument, history-bound, and therefore understandably imperfect – as if it were something to be endured for the sake of the gospel” (Jorgensen 220). England explains that he once believed this “cliché,” but changed his mind after an experience he had when he was twelve years old. While attending a stake conference where then Elder Harold B. Lee presided as a visiting authority, England was privileged to sit near the front. During Elder Lee’s words, England felt “the presence of the Holy Ghost” for one of the first times in his life (219). A mere feeling may hold little or no weight with a lay audience, but England understands that the Latter-day Saint members in his audience will recall times in their own lives when they felt the Spirit and their opinions were changed. They will begin to see his point of view because they personally believe that feelings of the Spirit always teach truth.
Following his experience, England began to understand the importance of an imperfect church. Those who believe that the gospel is more true than the church believe in “a perfect system of revealed doctrines and commandments based in principles which infallibly express the natural laws of the universe” (220). England presents the idea that the universe and all true laws that exist within it are “fundamentally paradoxical” (220). The Book of Mormon prophet Lehi taught that opposition must exist in all things. It logically follows to assume that an imperfect church must exist in opposition to a perfect gospel. But England is not only arguing logically with this idea; he again appeals to the emotions of his audience through his use of Book of Mormon scripture. Citing scripture to back-up an argument sends a subliminal message to England’s audience: if you believe this scripture, then you believe in what I am saying. And why do Latter-day Saints believe in the truth of the Book of Mormon? Because of a feeling they had when they read it, a feeling that told them that the book was true. In essence, then, England is arguing that people who believe the Book of Mormon is true believe that Lehi’s words are true. If they believe in Lehi’s words, then they must also believe that something must exist in opposition to a perfect gospel. He presents the idea that this something is the Church.
England not only draws on his own personal spiritual experiences and the words of the scriptures are proof for his argument, he also turns to the words of the prophet David O. McKay. After quoting President McKay, England says, “Most of my profound spiritual manifestations, those that have provided the rock-bottom convictions I have about the reality of God and Christ and their divine work […] have come, as President McKay affirmed, ‘as a natural sequence to the performance of duty’ in the Church” (223). Again, members of England’s audience will reflect on their own beliefs. They believe in God and Christ, but they also believe in the prophet, President McKay. They base their testimonies of these things in the spiritual feelings they received in response to prayer about the topic. Latter-day Saints place great value in feelings, particularly those of a spiritual nature, as valid sources of truth. England’s understanding of this concept helps him convince his audience to agree with him.
In his concluding statements, England says, “we cannot properly know of the truth of Christ’s restored gospel unless we understand - and act on – the truth of his Church” (228). This argument attacks the emotional connection of England’s audience. Do they believe in the gospel? Then they must believe in the Church. Just as they obtained their belief in the Book of Mormon through feelings they experienced while reading, Latter-day Saints believe in the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ because of spiritual impressions they have received. England is drawing upon these feelings not only as proof that the gospel is true, but also as proof that his argument is sound.
Much of the strength of England’s argument lies in his appeal to the spiritual emotions of his Latter-day Saint audience. He knows that they believe in the validity of emotion as proof of truth and he uses this concept to make a concrete argument. Appealing to pathos is considered an effective tool in arguing because we use feelings to help us make important decisions. Arguers who connect with the emotions of their audience can persuade audience members to agree with their side of the argument.
Brooks, David. "From Vincent to Theo." The Vincent van Gogh Gallery. Van Gogh Museum,
Amsterdam, 9 Sep 2011. Web. 22 Sep 2011.
Jorgensen, Sarah. Comp. Reading for Intensive Writers. 5th ed. Provo: BYU Academic
Publishing, 2007. 219-28. Print.
Dr. Kerry Spencer
Honors Writing 150 Section 109
26 September 2011
Faith and Feelings
In a letter he wrote to his brother Theo in 1889, Vincent Van Gogh said, “Let’s not forget that the little emotions are the great captains of our lives and we obey them without realizing it” (Brooks). Oftentimes we mistake emotion for weakness. The boy who cries when he skins his knee is considered a sissy; the girl who cannot hold back her tears during Bambi is a crybaby. In reality, emotion is an important aspect of human nature. We make decisions and judgments based on how we think and feel about things. This is why many people choose to use an appeal to emotion, or pathos, as a tool of persuasion when making arguments. Eugene England effectively utilizes pathos as a rhetorical device in his argument “Why the Church Is as True as the Gospel.”
England opens his argument by explaining the opposing side. He says, “One of the clichés often repeated by Mormons is that the gospel is true, even perfect, but the Church is, after all, a human instrument, history-bound, and therefore understandably imperfect – as if it were something to be endured for the sake of the gospel” (Jorgensen 220). England explains that he once believed this “cliché,” but changed his mind after an experience he had when he was twelve years old. While attending a stake conference where then Elder Harold B. Lee presided as a visiting authority, England was privileged to sit near the front. During Elder Lee’s words, England felt “the presence of the Holy Ghost” for one of the first times in his life (219). A mere feeling may hold little or no weight with a lay audience, but England understands that the Latter-day Saint members in his audience will recall times in their own lives when they felt the Spirit and their opinions were changed. They will begin to see his point of view because they personally believe that feelings of the Spirit always teach truth.
Following his experience, England began to understand the importance of an imperfect church. Those who believe that the gospel is more true than the church believe in “a perfect system of revealed doctrines and commandments based in principles which infallibly express the natural laws of the universe” (220). England presents the idea that the universe and all true laws that exist within it are “fundamentally paradoxical” (220). The Book of Mormon prophet Lehi taught that opposition must exist in all things. It logically follows to assume that an imperfect church must exist in opposition to a perfect gospel. But England is not only arguing logically with this idea; he again appeals to the emotions of his audience through his use of Book of Mormon scripture. Citing scripture to back-up an argument sends a subliminal message to England’s audience: if you believe this scripture, then you believe in what I am saying. And why do Latter-day Saints believe in the truth of the Book of Mormon? Because of a feeling they had when they read it, a feeling that told them that the book was true. In essence, then, England is arguing that people who believe the Book of Mormon is true believe that Lehi’s words are true. If they believe in Lehi’s words, then they must also believe that something must exist in opposition to a perfect gospel. He presents the idea that this something is the Church.
England not only draws on his own personal spiritual experiences and the words of the scriptures are proof for his argument, he also turns to the words of the prophet David O. McKay. After quoting President McKay, England says, “Most of my profound spiritual manifestations, those that have provided the rock-bottom convictions I have about the reality of God and Christ and their divine work […] have come, as President McKay affirmed, ‘as a natural sequence to the performance of duty’ in the Church” (223). Again, members of England’s audience will reflect on their own beliefs. They believe in God and Christ, but they also believe in the prophet, President McKay. They base their testimonies of these things in the spiritual feelings they received in response to prayer about the topic. Latter-day Saints place great value in feelings, particularly those of a spiritual nature, as valid sources of truth. England’s understanding of this concept helps him convince his audience to agree with him.
In his concluding statements, England says, “we cannot properly know of the truth of Christ’s restored gospel unless we understand - and act on – the truth of his Church” (228). This argument attacks the emotional connection of England’s audience. Do they believe in the gospel? Then they must believe in the Church. Just as they obtained their belief in the Book of Mormon through feelings they experienced while reading, Latter-day Saints believe in the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ because of spiritual impressions they have received. England is drawing upon these feelings not only as proof that the gospel is true, but also as proof that his argument is sound.
Much of the strength of England’s argument lies in his appeal to the spiritual emotions of his Latter-day Saint audience. He knows that they believe in the validity of emotion as proof of truth and he uses this concept to make a concrete argument. Appealing to pathos is considered an effective tool in arguing because we use feelings to help us make important decisions. Arguers who connect with the emotions of their audience can persuade audience members to agree with their side of the argument.
Brooks, David. "From Vincent to Theo." The Vincent van Gogh Gallery. Van Gogh Museum,
Amsterdam, 9 Sep 2011. Web. 22 Sep 2011.
Jorgensen, Sarah. Comp. Reading for Intensive Writers. 5th ed. Provo: BYU Academic
Publishing, 2007. 219-28. Print.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)