Virtue in Moroni 9:9
At first glance, the wording used in Moroni 9:9 causes modern readers to take offence at the idea that a rape victim’s virtue could be taken away. I argue we are misreading the verse due to how language, and in this case the word “virtue”, has changed over the last 200 years and propose an alternative reading that coincides well with other passages in the Book of Mormon and modern prophets.
Moroni 9 is a letter from the prophet Mormon to his son Moroni. In the letter, Mormon describes horrific scenes of violence as the Nephite civilization teeters on the edge of annihilation. The animalistic blood-lust from both warring nations is meant to instruct about the perils of complete anarchy against the Spirit of God and the light of Christ that exists in all people. But modern readers take issue with verse 9 where Mormon describes the Nephite’s terrible sexual violence against the Lamanite women. When describing rape, Mormon writes that the Nephites deprived Lamanite women “of that which was most dear and precious above all things, which is chastity and virtue.”
As has been posted in several blogs and chat rooms, readers are either puzzled or offended by the idea that rape would deprive a woman of her virtue, or moral character as we understand the word. The idea seems to fly at the face of justice by suggesting the victim is tainted or impure by something she had no control over, as if it was her fault. I agree that this interpretation does not sit well with me nor does it coincide with other passages of scripture. But what if our uneasiness about the scripture is actually pointing us to the right interpretation?
The reason we’re uneasy with the scripture is because we know the women were victims not of their own volition. Indeed, the act of rape is so terrible precisely because consent was rejected and replaced with violence. It was not their decision, therefore their moral character should not be questioned. For the same reason, we agree with Christ who rebuked the Pharisees for claiming a man was blind because of his parent’s sins¹. If our own spiritual compass tells us the sin lies with the aggressor and not the victim, what then do we make of Mormon’s word choice?
Well, to start, Mormon didn’t use the word virtue because he didn’t speak English. The word choice falls on Joseph Smith as he worked with the gift and power of God to translate the ancient Book of Mormon text into English. So why did he use the word? I’m admittedly not a linguist, but I did some research on the origin and definitions of the word virtue. Virtue comes from the Latin virtus where vir means “an adult male²” with the connotation of strength and power while -tus means “provided with³”. Combined, the general definition as described in the Webster 1828 dictionary is “strength”, “acting power”, “efficacy”, or “secret agency”⁴. This makes sense, especially as you consider the fact vir means adult male instead of just male, which is mas in Latin⁵. Adult males in ancient societies had all the power, particularly the power to choose. Therefore, virtue in its original sense and in how it was most commonly used in the 19th century had nothing to do with moral character.
The word virtue appears twice in the Book of Mormon and six times in the Bible (only in the New Testament)⁶. In all cases, the word virtue is not used to describe moral character but rather strength, power, efficacy, or agency. Try reading the passages below with both the “moral character” and “power” interpretation — which one do you think is the better fit?
And now, as the preaching of the word had a great tendency to lead the people to do that which was just — yea, it had had more powerful effect upon the minds of the people than the sword, or anything else, which had happened unto them — therefore Alma thought it was expedient that they should try the virtue of the word of God.— Alma 31:5
And Jesus, immediately knowing in himself that virtue had gone out of him, turned him about in the press, and said, Who touched my clothes? — Mark 5:30
I hope you agree with me that Jesus did not lose moral character when he was touched and a person was healed.
Returning to Moroni 9:9, if you replace virtue with agency (the power to choose), the verse makes a lot more sense and lines up better with our understanding from other scripture and modern prophets. Our individual agency is indeed dear and precious above all things. It is why the war in Heaven was fought — Satan wanted to force us to follow his path while God’s plan gave us agency to choose. Rape is so terrible because it rejects the victim’s agency. Mormon was lamenting the abuse of sacred creative powers and the overriding of agency⁷, not condemning innocent victims.
[1] See John 9:2–3
[2] See https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/vir#Latin
[3] See https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-tus
[4] See http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/virtue
[5] See https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mas
[6] Virtue appears a combined eight times in the Bible and Book of Mormon. Here are all of those instances: Mark 5:30, Luke 6:19, Luke 8:46, Philippians 4:8, 2 Peter 1:3, 2 Peter 1:5, Alma 31:5, Moroni 9:9.
[7] Interestingly, the word agency never appears in the Book of Mormon. It occurs in scripture only six times: four times in the Doctrine and Covenants (sections 29, 64, 93, and 101) and twice in the book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price.
