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.
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
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.
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Welcome Fall 2011!
We'll be having all sorts of good times together this semester.
The syllabus is here and, yes, there will be a quiz.
Happy Semester! And welcome to Writing 150H!
The syllabus is here and, yes, there will be a quiz.
Happy Semester! And welcome to Writing 150H!
Thursday, March 10, 2011
You'll be sad next week when we're back in our regular classrooms
But for Friday's class, let's do one more non-classroom activity.
Instructions:
Instead of coming to class,
1) find somewhere cozy
2) and maybe bring a snack
3) flip through Readings for Intensive Writers
4) read the first paragraph of five articles
5) based on that, choose the article that is most interesting to you and read it in its entirety.
6) leave a comment on this post about why you chose that article to read and what you thought of it.
7) if fifty minutes haven't passed, repeat steps 1-6.
8) if fifty minutes still haven't passed, go do something else until it has. something fun. maybe eat another snack.
you'll get homework points for the activity. and BTW, I haven't gotten a ton of the "proofs" you needed for Monday and Wednesday's classes. I'll overlook it until Monday, so if you want the homework points from those (and there might be a lot of homework points because I totally forgot about the original RFIW assignment from the syllabus!) then do the activities and send me the proofs ASAP. (You can also bring them on Monday if you want.)
Instructions:
Instead of coming to class,
1) find somewhere cozy
2) and maybe bring a snack
3) flip through Readings for Intensive Writers
4) read the first paragraph of five articles
5) based on that, choose the article that is most interesting to you and read it in its entirety.
6) leave a comment on this post about why you chose that article to read and what you thought of it.
7) if fifty minutes haven't passed, repeat steps 1-6.
8) if fifty minutes still haven't passed, go do something else until it has. something fun. maybe eat another snack.
you'll get homework points for the activity. and BTW, I haven't gotten a ton of the "proofs" you needed for Monday and Wednesday's classes. I'll overlook it until Monday, so if you want the homework points from those (and there might be a lot of homework points because I totally forgot about the original RFIW assignment from the syllabus!) then do the activities and send me the proofs ASAP. (You can also bring them on Monday if you want.)
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Another good day for hunting and not being stuck in a classroom!
I hope Monday's MOA hunt was informative for you. But did you know that there are *more* great works categories than just Art? Yeah. You probably knew that.
Here's the thing. To write a paper about a great work, you have to, like, *be exposed* to great works. But there are a lot of those. How do you pick? So here's what I want you to do with our class time this beautiful Wednesday:
1) Obtain a copy of the Great Works list. You can get this from the student advisement center in the basement of the MSRB, or you can download it from online.
2) Next you need to *go* somewhere. Use the GW list to guide you. For example:
You can do this alone or in groups. Have fun!
Here's the thing. To write a paper about a great work, you have to, like, *be exposed* to great works. But there are a lot of those. How do you pick? So here's what I want you to do with our class time this beautiful Wednesday:
1) Obtain a copy of the Great Works list. You can get this from the student advisement center in the basement of the MSRB, or you can download it from online.
2) Next you need to *go* somewhere. Use the GW list to guide you. For example:
- If you find that you're drawn to the theater/musical options of the list, go over to the HFAC, find out when stuff is playing; choose something you want to watch; buy your tickets. (You don't have to see anything *right then,* but you want to be ready.)
- If you want to do something sciency, walk yourself over to one of the science buildings. See if they have any special events planned. Talk to department offices or wander the halls looking for flyers. Find a professor and ask them if you can come observe a class. Make arrangements.
- On the other hand, if you are a lover of literature, you could go to the library and find the book you need to read. Find books about the book you need to read. Check them out and start reading.
- There are other options, right? I can't remember right now because both of my children are yelling at me about how they don't want to go to bed. Consult the list and figure out an appropriate place to go. Ooo, the international cinema, right? That might be a good place to visit.
You can do this alone or in groups. Have fun!
Sunday, March 6, 2011
MOA Scavenger Hunt Monday in leu of class!
Somewhere on Blackboard--I believe in the Great Works Aids folder?--there is a list of Art terms. See, sometimes for GW you have to analyze fields you aren't familiar with. And to do that you need to know terms from that field.
Your job for class today is to make your way throug the MOA and find an example for as many terms on the list as possible. And when you're done find as many OTHER terms and examples you can without going over the time limit of fifty minutes.
You can do this alone or in groups and you can meet any time of day you want. In fact my nine o'clockers will have to use another time than our class because I think the museum is closed until ten.
Email me with questions and keep checking the calendar to see what next class will be!
Your job for class today is to make your way throug the MOA and find an example for as many terms on the list as possible. And when you're done find as many OTHER terms and examples you can without going over the time limit of fifty minutes.
You can do this alone or in groups and you can meet any time of day you want. In fact my nine o'clockers will have to use another time than our class because I think the museum is closed until ten.
Email me with questions and keep checking the calendar to see what next class will be!
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Middle of the Course Survey!
We're right in the middle of the semester, so it's time for a little eval.
1) What was your favorite thing we've done so far this semester?
2) What would you like to spend more time on?
You get homework points for answering those questions. Leave a comment to get it. If you want to stay anonymous that's fine. Just say your comment is from anonymous. Then later email me for the points.
1) What was your favorite thing we've done so far this semester?
2) What would you like to spend more time on?
You get homework points for answering those questions. Leave a comment to get it. If you want to stay anonymous that's fine. Just say your comment is from anonymous. Then later email me for the points.
Monday, February 28, 2011
I talked about this Grammar Rant in one of my classes today and promised a link.
It's about spelling, but if you find it interesting, you can click on the "grammar rants" label and get more of my spouting. Some of it might even be useful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)