Quantcast
Channel: Sam Brunson – By Common Consent, a Mormon Blog
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 339

Do Church Members Have a Scriptural Obligation to Revere Christopher Columbus?

$
0
0

That’s quite the lengthy post title, right? Fortunately, the answer is far more succinct:

No.

Of course, I can elaborate too. I base that no on two considerations. First, there’s no textual reason to believe that Nephi sees Columbus in the vision he recounts in 1 Ne. 13. Second, whether it refers to Columbus or not (and see point 1), it doesn’t say anything about the person being an exemplar or in any way worth of our respect, emulation, or celebration.

Look, I know what I’m writing flies in the face of a long history of reading Nephi virtually as if he wrote “Columbus.” That’s what I grew up understanding, and I suspect it’s what most (if not all) of you reading this grew up understanding.

That belief derives from 1 Ne. 13:12, which reads:

And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land.

The identification of this “man among the Gentiles” probably goes back at least as far as July 4, 1854 when Brigham Young said that the Almighty “moved upon Columbus to launch forth upon the trackless deep to discover the American Continent.” While Young doesn’t specifically reference the Book of Mormon, it’s not too big a stretch to assume that he’s alluding to it.

But take a look at the verse: it doesn’t say anything about Columbus. In fact, it doesn’t say anything about this being the first European to cross the “many waters” to the Americas. (And yes, I know Columbus wasn’t the first. But even if he had been, that wouldn’t mean Nephi’s vision referred to him.) Rather, it says a Gentile was “wrought upon” by the Spirit, crossed the many waters, and encountered his brothers’ descendants. So sure, it could have been Columbus. But it also could have been Leif Erikson. It could have been Davy Jones. It could be any of the Afghan refugees currently coming.

In fact, all we have to do is go to the next verse to realize that whoever this Gentile Nephi saw was, his was not a unique mission. In verse 13, we read:

And it came to pass that I beheld the Spirit of God, that it wrought upon other Gentiles; and they went forth out of captivity, upon the many waters.

Note that this parallels precisely what happened to the Gentile mentioned in verse 12: like him, the Spirit of God wrought upon other Gentiles, too. These later ones went out of captivity, whatever Nephi meant by that. (Honestly, it makes me think more of Australia than the Americas, but whatever.)

So could Nephi have seen a vision of Columbus? Sure. Why not? But, on the other hand, there’s no textual need for it to be Columbus and reading it virtually anybody else who travelled from somewhere that isn’t the Americas to the Americas is precisely as plausible a reading.

But that means it’s not implausible that it could be referring to Columbus. So if we decide that Columbus is the best reading, are we stuck with celebrating him?

Again, no. In Nephi’s vision, he doesn’t make any moral statements about the person who came. Sure, the person was “wrought upon” by the Spirit of God, but that doesn’t suggest any level of worthiness. In 1828, Webster defined “wrought upon” as “influenced; prevailed on.” So the Spirit of God prevailed upon somebody–perhaps Columbus, perhaps not–to cross the many waters and arrive in the promised land. That person was followed by others who were similarly prevailed upon. And, in fact, Nephi saw the multitudes of people who came smiting and scattering his people. In his vision, this represented punishment for the bad behavior of their ancestors, but not necessarily punishment by a worthy group.

Essentially, Nephi’s vision represents a coda to the story of the Book of Mormon. But it’s a tremendously vague coda, one meant to reflect divine displeasure with his people, not divine pleasure with the colonizers. Which means, for at least two reasons, we’re under no obligation to celebrate Columbus nor to make excuses for him.

Photo by Gatis Marcinkevics on Unsplash


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 339

Trending Articles