Captain Moroni Exemplifies the Sermon on the Mount—Here’s Why
This article is condensed from a much longer and more detailed article in BYU Studies Quarterly. That complete treatment can be found here.
A Seeming Contradiction
When you think about it, there seems to be a huge disparity between two features of the Book of Mormon: the Sermon on the Mount on one hand, and the wartime activities of numerous Nephite leaders, including Captain Moroni, on the other.
After all, the Sermon on the Mount clearly seems opposed to violence. In it, we hear about not resisting evil, turning the other cheek, going another mile when compelled to go one, loving our enemies—and so forth (3 Ne. 12:39–44). Numerous Nephite leaders, in contrast, were immersed in violence. It is handy to think of Captain Moroni as representing such figures, since his wartime activities are so dominant in the book of Alma: we see him in significant detail.
So the question is: How can the Book of Mormon highlight Captain Moroni’s wartime efforts––and even praise him––when it also includes the Sermon on the Mount, whose teachings would seem to condemn him?
Mormon’s Perspective
This is a natural question. It is helpful to notice, however, that Mormon himself did not seem to see any kind of conflict between the Lord’s Sermon and Nephite leaders’ war efforts––including Captain Moroni’s. He included both in the record, but he did not seem to think there was any contradiction between them. If he had, surely he would have found a way to criticize the wartime involvement of multiple Nephite leaders––a list that includes Nephi, King Benjamin, Captain Moroni, and Mormon himself. But Mormon doesn’t do this. He even goes out of his way to praise Captain Moroni for his spiritual qualities—and he does so specifically in the context of Moroni’s wartime efforts (Alma 48:11–18). He does the same regarding King Benjamin, calling him a “holy man” while simultaneously describing his leadership in war (W of M 1:13–18).
For Mormon, then, there was actually no contradiction between the Lord’s Sermon––which he included in the record––and these leaders’ war efforts. This suggests that we should not be quick to assume such a contradiction either. Indeed, we can actually gain Mormon’s perspective––and dissolve the apparent conflict between Captain Moroni and the Sermon on the Mount––by making important observations under six central topics.
1. The Savior’s Personal Conduct
It is easy to think there is an inherent conflict between the Sermon on the Mount and violence, and therefore that the Sermon is completely anti-violence in character.
But this cannot be true, since the Lord Himself commits acts of violence, and He gave the Sermon.[i] Moreover, He has also instructed that His people can exercise violence in certain circumstances––specifically, when they are forced to defend themselves against aggression.[ii] And not only has He instructed in this way, but He has also helped His people defend themselves militarily.[iii] Such features of the scriptural record clearly preclude the idea that the Lord’s Sermon prohibits violence per se: the Lord cannot really be forbidding in the Sermon what He Himself explicitly teaches and does elsewhere.
2. The Moral Difference between Aggressors and Victims
The Sermon on the Mount, then, does not prohibit violence in itself. But it obviously does not permit all violence. We can start to see what the dividing line might be by noticing the fundamental moral distinction between acts of aggression and acts of defense. Most recognize, for instance, that the violent conduct of a victim who is defending herself against rape is nothing like the violent conduct of her assailant. Both might be acting violently, but, morally speaking, no one would think to compare their actions. Nor would we compare the conduct of a victim—who, say, is merely defending himself against being murdered—with the conduct of the aggressor who is attempting to murder him
This is why, although both Alma and Amlici exercised violence toward one another (Alma 2), including in hand-to-hand combat (vv. 29–31), Amlici was wrong, and Alma was right. Although both wielded swords, their wieldings were not remotely the same. One was an aggressor, while the other was merely defending against that aggression. And, of course, the Lord actually intervened to help Alma in his defense (vv. 30–31)––something He did with regard to the Nephites generally. Thus, while the Nephites were prohibited from committing acts of aggression or offense themselves (see 3 Ne. 3:20 and Mormon 3:14), the Lord specifically approved the violence necessary for the Nephites to defend themselves.
3. The Sermon on the Mount and the Righteous State of Heart
One reason the Lord’s Sermon seems to contradict the behavior of Captain Moroni and others is that it is easy to assume that its instructions (for example, “turn the other cheek”) are meant to apply to every dimension and scale of life.
This is a mistake, though. Notice that the Lord does not use images of serious threats to one’s life or limb in the Sermon on the Mount (rape and murder, for example); much less does he employ images of military peril to a whole society. The scale of life the Lord chooses to speak of is the scale of everyday living. He is addressing his audience as normal, everyday citizens faced with the circumstances of ordinary life. Thus, rather than speaking of extreme circumstances like murder and war, he simply speaks of cheeks, miles, and cloaks.
A second reason the Sermon seems to contradict the behavior of Captain Moroni and others is that it is easy to assume its instructions are behavior oriented––that they are about our physical conduct. If we think this way, it is natural to suppose that if merely slapping someone’s cheek is forbidden, how could something like wielding a sword not be forbidden—indeed, forbidden even more stringently?
But the Lord’s Sermon is not really about our outward behavior. Its injunctions actually teach a larger point than just what to do if someone literally slaps us. The prescriptions are metaphorical expressions that teach us a certain way of living, evoking in us a sense of the kind of people we are to be. After all, the Lord condemns lust, not just physical immorality, and he condemns anger, not just murder. “Suffer none of these things to enter into your heart,” he emphasized (3 Ne. 12:29).
The Lord is thus teaching a higher standard than simply avoiding certain kinds of behavior; he cares about who we are inside. This is reinforced when we realize, (1) that, as New Testament commentators frequently point out, the references in this passage to smiting, going another mile, and so forth, relate specifically to the circumstances of the Jews—i.e., to the Roman customs of slapping and of forced labor; and (2) that the Lord nevertheless repeated these very same expressions to the Nephites—who experienced no such customs from Roman occupiers. This repetition clearly indicates that the specifics of these edicts are secondary and that what matters is the state of heart they exemplify.
Not only that, but if the Sermon were concerned specifically with behavior, it would simply be adding to the Law of Moses, not replacing it. It would just be giving us new rules to follow––rules regarding cheeks, miles, and articles of clothing.[iv] But of course the Sermon on the Mount is not doing that. Rather than giving us new rules for our outward behavior, it is, again, teaching what we are to be like inside. We are to have righteous hearts. This means an attitude of humility and earnestness toward following the Lord and an attitude of patience and unselfishness in dealing with others.
4. The Righteous State of Heart and Violent Conduct
This righteous condition of heart does not prohibit all violent conduct. This is obvious when we think about the Lord: although His state of heart is not only righteous but perfect, He Himself commits acts of violence. Since the Lord performs such acts with a perfect and devoted heart, it should not be surprising that mortals can be expected to have a righteous state of heart under violent circumstances as well—situations in which the Lord countenances and even commands the violence necessary for self-defense.
Think of King Benjamin. Many write and speak of his saintly demeanor in the early chapters of Mosiah. What might be less familiar is the degree to which he was forced to engage in war prior to this time (Words of Mormon 1:13–14). And specifically around the time of these wars, Mormon explicitly describes King Benjamin as reigning over his people “in righteousness”—indeed, as a “holy man” (W of M 1:17). And, of course, Nephi, Mormon, and Mormon’s son Moroni all enjoyed visions, revelations, and angelic ministrations, clearly demonstrating the righteousness of their hearts. And yet, with such hearts, all of them took up the sword to defend their people against Lamanite assault.[v]
5. The Conduct of Book of Mormon Leaders
With such righteous hearts, we would expect these Nephite leaders to conduct themselves in war differently than others might. And that is what we see. From Shule in the book of Ether to numerous Nephite leaders throughout Mormon’s record, we see leaders: (1) who are righteous, and who encourage righteousness in their people; (2) who demonstrate surprising generosity of spirit toward those who are attacking them; and (3) who fight only in defense, never initiating aggression of their own. The record displays all of this in detail (a matter fully covered in the original article in BYU Studies Quarterly).
All of this indicates that these leaders actually did live the standard taught in the Sermon on the Mount: they lived it as it applied to their threatening and violent circumstances. As already indicated, and as will be discussed further below, not all circumstances are the same—which guarantees that the application of central gospel principles, including the Sermon on the Mount, will not always look the same. That is what we see in numerous prophetic Book of Mormon leaders.
6. The Conduct of Captain Moroni
All of this leaves us with one question: What about Captain Moroni: did he behave like these other leaders in the Book of Mormon? Did he possess, as they did, the righteous state of heart taught in the Sermon on the Mount?
The reality is that he did. The record shows us in detail that Captain Moroni conducted himself in war the same way these others did—figures who were actually prophets. Possessing the same state of heart, he behaved the same way they behaved. Here is a brief review (many details and nuances are addressed in the original article in BYU Studies Quarterly).
Personal Righteousness and the Encouragement of Righteousness in Others
Among numerous other examples,[vi] the text reports Moroni engaging in “mighty” prayer (Alma 46:13, 16, 17) and receiving revelation from the Lord in the form of a full sentence (Alma 60:33). He also: straightforwardly declares that the Nephites “owe all our happiness” to “the sacred word of God” (Alma 44:5); explains the purpose of the Nephites’ defense against Lamanite invasion in terms of “our religion and the cause of our God” (Alma 54:10); and states that he is engaged in defense specifically to honor “the covenant which I have made to keep the commandments of my God” (Alma 60:34). And, of course, Mormon says of him that: his heart “swelled” in thanksgiving to God (Alma 48:12); he was a man “firm in the faith of Christ” (Alma 48:13); he “gloried” in keeping the commandments of God (Alma 48:16); and he rejoiced in “doing good” (Alma 48:16).
And Captain Moroni was not interested only in his own righteousness. He also implored the people at the time of the title of liberty (when they were faced with treacherous Nephite dissenters) to “keep the commandments of God,” framing all their efforts in the context “the faith of Christ” (Alma 46:23–27). Later, when they were facing Lamanite assault, his very first effort in preparing the Nephites to defend themselves was to prepare them spiritually—to be faithful to the Lord (Alma 48:7). Indeed, his purpose was to allow the Nephites to “live unto the Lord their God” and to maintain “the cause of Christians” (Alma 48:10).
In all of these ways, and more, Captain Moroni clearly demonstrates his own spiritual devotion, as well as his encouragement of the Nephites generally to be faithful to the Lord.
Generosity of Spirit
Mormon also tells us that Captain Moroni, though embroiled in war, “did not delight in bloodshed” (Alma 48:11). Indeed, like other Book of Mormon leaders, Moroni displayed a surprising generosity of spirit in view of his circumstances. Note, for example, that he gave Zerahemnah’s army every chance to end the battle it was losing (Alma 44:1), and later ceased this battle altogether on the simple condition that the Lamanite attackers enter a covenant that they would never again aggress against the Nephites (Alma 44:19–20). He also managed on two occasions to completely surround an army of Lamanites, and, although he could have slain them at will (and although the Lamanites had been attacking them for years), spared their lives and permitted them to surrender (Alma 52:31–39; 55:20–24). This was in stark contrast to the Lamanites who, in one theater of the war, spared only the chief captains of the Nephites whom they took prisoner—and actually killed all of their other prisoners of war (Alma 56:10–12). And later, at the end of one battle in the final year of the war, Moroni extracted a covenant from the Lamanite invaders that they would no longer aggress against the Nephites, and then simply sent them in peace to live with the people of Ammon (Alma 62:14–17). He did the same a second time, later that same year (Alma 62:19–28).
These are only examples, of course; similar generosity is evident multiple other times.[vii]
It is not uncommon for those embroiled in war to become hardened, cynical, and even cruel in their conduct—to actually seek blood and to lust after revenge (think of Mormon’s soldiers, for example, in Mormon 3:9–11, 14). Indeed, as mentioned above, in one theater of the war, the Lamanites actually killed most of the Nephites they took as prisoners. But this was not true of Moroni. Although he was engulfed in war for nearly fifteen years, even in the final year of war he was willing to spare his attackers. Time and again he demonstrated the same generosity of spirit that was exhibited by other Nephite leaders.
Fighting Only in Defense
With all this in mind, it is no surprise that Captain Moroni also fought purely in defense. This was a Nephite principle, and we are told more than once that Moroni’s motivation in taking up the sword (as well as the motivation of those he led) was the same: strictly to defend Nephite lives and Nephite society.[viii]
It is true, of course, that Captain Moroni pursued offensive tactics as he led such military defense, but that’s just what they were: tactics. Such actions were not aggressions, but instead integral and legitimate elements of the Nephites’ defense—and they were necessary in the first place only because the Nephites were already engaged in a defensive war that was not their doing. Much like the Allies in World War II—who conducted countless offensive actions in defense against the Axis powers’ aggression—the Nephites’ actions were similarly entirely defensive in character. They had not instigated the hostilities, after all, but were merely defending against them. Think of Captain Moroni himself. He initiated no aggression, he invaded no lands, and he sought no power over other populations. He fought only because, and when, the Lamanites were invading and assaulting his people in their own lands.
In sum, it turns out that Captain Moroni was just like other leaders in the Book of Mormon: he was not only personally righteous, but also encouraged righteousness in the people; he repeatedly demonstrated generosity of spirit toward his Lamanite attackers; and he fought only in defense, never starting a war or initiating aggression of his own. Every indication is that Captain Moroni possessed the same state of heart possessed by prophetic Nephite leaders who also faced enemy assault: the condition of heart taught in the Sermon on the Mount.
Why It is Easy to Trip Ourselves Up in Thinking about Captain Moroni
The biggest reason, I think, why it can seem hard to reconcile Captain Moroni (and other prominent Book of Mormon leaders) with the Sermon on the Mount is that our circumstances are so different from theirs. Life with family, friends, neighbors, and so forth supplies the domain in which most of us practice the teachings of the Lord’s Sermon. For us, having a righteous state of heart means that we are to be patient and unselfish toward these people in our lives and that we are to resist the temptation for retaliation when we suffer insult, for example.
Prominent Book of Mormon leaders did not enjoy such luxury. If we want to consider their conduct against the standard taught in the Sermon on the Mount, we have to recognize at the outset that their circumstances were very different from our own. They repeatedly faced invaders who were trying to kill them—and not only them, of course, but their families, their people, and their way of life. What does living the standard taught in the Sermon on the Mount look like in circumstances like that? This is the central question in all efforts to understand the Lord’s Sermon: What does the righteous state of heart entail, not just in situations of ordinary life, but in circumstances of literal peril—where one’s land is being overrun, one’s very society is under violent attack, and one’s family is being slaughtered?
That is precisely what the Book of Mormon shows us. Prominent Book of Mormon leaders—from Shule and King Benjamin to Mormon and Moroni—faced exactly these circumstances. And, possessed of the righteous state of heart, they behaved in completely identifiable ways: they led active military defense against their aggressors’ onslaughts, but they simultaneously: (1) were personally righteous, and encouraged righteousness in those they led; (2) treated their attackers in surprisingly generous ways; and (3) fought only in defense, never seeking to gain power and never initiating hostilities of their own.
Such behavior was completely consistent with the Sermon on the Mount; indeed, their extraordinary conduct demonstrates what living the Sermon simply meant in their extraordinary circumstances—circumstances of pervasive threat and violence. When we appreciate this, we see that they did not violate the Sermon on the Mount in their circumstances. They actually manifested it.
This, I believe, is why Mormon was so content both (1) to include the Sermon on the Mount in his record, and yet (2), in the same record, to extol the righteousness of multiple leaders who engaged in war. He saw no contradiction, because, once we understand certain key concepts, there is no contradiction.
This is what we see in Captain Moroni. When we read with care, we see that he, too, possessed the righteous state of heart in war, and that he, too, conducted himself accordingly. In view of the extreme circumstances imposed on him, it is hard to imagine anyone who could have done better. Far from contradicting the Sermon on the Mount in his violent and threatening circumstances, Captain Moroni actually manifested it.
In the end, while it might seem ironic, the Lord’s most famous Sermon is actually exemplified by the Book of Mormon’s most famous warrior.
****
Duane Boyce is co-author, with his daughter Kimberly White, of the recent book, The Last Safe Place: Seven Principles for Standing with the Prophets in Troubled Times.
Notes:
[i] The scriptures regularly demonstrate the Lord’s willingness to employ violence. Incidents range from the destruction at the time of Noah (Gen. 7:13; Moses 7:34, 43), to His destruction of numerous Nephite cities following his crucifixion (3 Ne. 9:3–12), to the destruction He will visit on the wicked incident to his Second Coming (e.g., Malachi 4:1; Isaiah 11:4; 66:15–16; 1 Nephi 22:23; 2 Nephi 30:10; Doctrine and Covenants 1:13; 29:17; 45:50; 63:34; 133:50–51)—to multiple episodes in between (e.g., Exodus 9, 12, 14; John 2:14–17; Matthew 21:12–13; Jacob 7:15–20; Alma 19:21–23; Alma 33:10).
[ii] See Alma 43:46–47; 54:10; 60:28, 33–34; D&C 134:11; 98:33–36.
[iii] See Alma 2:29–31; 16:6–8; 43:23–24; 48:15–16. Other passages that either report or presuppose the Lord’s help include: Words of Mormon 1:13–14; Mosiah 1:13–14; Alma 2:16–19, 28; 44: 3–5; 57:25–26, 35, 36; 58:10–12, 33, 37, 39; 59: 3; 60:20-21; 61:13, 21; Helaman 4:24–25; 7:22; 12:2; 3 Nephi 3:15, 21, 25; 4:10, 31, 33; Mormon 3:3, 15.
[iv] Kimberly Sloan pointed this out to me.
[v] The central role of our hearts (vs. just our outward behavior) is a common thread in scripture. Jesus, for example, told the Pharisees: “Ye are like unto whited sepulchers, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity” (Matt. 23:27–28; see generally verses 23–39). Similar denunciations appear in Matt. 6:1–8 and Luke 7:37–50; they also appear in Luke 18:9–14, where the Lord contrasts the prayer of a humble publican with that of a proud Pharisee: both were performing the same outward behavior—praying—but inwardly they could not have been more different, and that is what the Savior emphasizes. All of this is related to Mormon’s general statement (apparently quoting the Lord) that “a man being evil cannot do that which is good; for if he offereth a gift, or prayeth unto God, except he shall do it with real intent it profiteth him nothing. For behold, it is not counted unto him for righteousness” (Moro. 7:6–7). There are multiple other examples as well, of course.
[vi] For numerous indications of Captain Moroni’s spiritual devotion, see: Alma 46:12, 18, 20; 44:3–6; 54:10; 56:2; 60:34; 61:19.
[vii] The generosity of both Captain Moroni and the people he led is evident in multiple places. This includes his complete willingness to end the war if the Lamanites would cease their assault. See, for example: Alma 48:21–23; 50:25–36; 55:18–19; 54:6–11; 60:32.
[viii] See, for example, Alma 35:14; 43:9–10, 45, 47; 48:10, 12–14, 24; 49:7; 56:46; 60:17; 61:10.
The post Captain Moroni Exemplifies the Sermon on the Mount—Here’s Why first appeared on Meridian Magazine.
Meridian Magazine