<i>Enos</i> Encoded: Narrative Structure in the Small Plates

If the Book of Mormon possesses, in the words of the late Elder Neal A. Maxwell, “divine architecture,” then it follows that one task of theology ought to be to seek God in the structure of the book.2 In this vein, Adam Miller argues that “theological readings aim to develop a text's latent images of Christ.”3 Given that the Book of Mormon is, whatever else it may be, a narrative, then those searching for God in it would do well to pay attention to the ways the text's narrative structure (i.e., its “divine architecture”) develops “latent images of Christ.” Miller gestures toward a methodology for divining Christ in texts when he writes that the power of theology “derives from its freedom to pose hypothetical questions: if such and such were the case, then what meaningful pattern would the text produce in response?”4 In what follows I offer such a theological reading of the small plates of Nephi, paying particular attention to the book of Enos.5My point of departure is the following hypothetical question: What image of Christ emerges if we take Jarom and Abinadom at their word? After receiving the small plates from Enos, Jarom asks, “What could I write more than my fathers have written?” (Jarom 1:2). Given that he does in fact write more, I take his question to be rhetorical, especially since he, too, received revelations and prophesied. Nevertheless, he declares that “the plan of salvation” recorded by his fathers “sufficeth me” (Jarom 1:2). Abinadom similarly states: “that which is sufficient is written” (Omni 1:11). Following Miller's approach, I assume that when Abinadom writes “that which is . . . written,” he refers to the record of the small plates up through Enos. My task is therefore to flesh out the meaningful pattern that emerges from the small plates when we begin with this assumption.Using the tools of narratological analysis, I will show how Enos's experience configures the narrative of the small plates in a way that highlights its underlying transformative ethos. The narrative desires not just that readers be convinced that Jesus is the Christ (see the Book of Mormon title page), but also that they be transformed by entering into a particular sort of relationship with Him. Enos models how to do this through his wrestle before God.To aid the reader in following my argument, I offer an overview of the sections that follow. In the first section, I introduce key narratological terms that inform my interpretation of the small plates. These terms help flesh out some of the narrative implications of the language used by Jarom and Abinadom. In this section I also briefly explain how the small plates make use of the hermeneutic and proairetic narrative codes, drawing on the work of literary theorist Roland Barthes. In the second and third sections, respectively, I develop a hermeneutic reading of the small plates (with an emphasis on the vision of Lehi in 1 Ne. 1, which gives the small plates a narrative beginning) and a proairetic reading of Enos. These two sections contain the meat of my argument. Whereas the hermeneutic reading is concerned with the enigmatic figure that Lehi sees in the opening chapter of the small plates, I will show how the text traces an emerging awareness among the Nephites that this figure is the promised Messiah, who is ultimately identified with Jesus. The proairetic reading will focus on Enos's wrestle, which is both (1) inspired by his father's preaching about the gathering of Israel and (2) framed as a ritualistic sacrifice. It is in the relationship between the hermeneutic and proairetic codes where the transformative ethos of the small plates is most clearly manifest. In the fourth section, I explore some of the implications of reading Enos's wrestle through a sacrificial lens before offering some concluding remarks.To understand how Enos's experience configures the narrative of the small plates, it is important to lay out the narratological concepts that inform my analysis. The first is what narrative scholar Peter Brooks calls the sense of an ending and its role in creating narrative meaning: “The sense of a beginning . . . must in some important way be determined by the sense of an ending. We might say that we are able to read present moments—in literature and, by extension, in life—as endowed with narrative meaning only because we read them in anticipation of the structuring power of those endings that will retrospectively give them the order and significance of plot.”6 Narrative meaning is a function of the relationship between the component parts of a narrative like its beginning and its ending. Endings specifically have structuring power; they link the parts of a narrative together in a way that allows meaning to emerge. Implicit in Jarom and Abinadom's language of sufficiency is the claim that Enos endows the small plates with the sense of an ending. As such, what happens in Enos retrospectively conditions how we understand the beginning of the small plates (even after having already read the beginning). In this way, Enos gives the narrative of the small plates the “order and significance of plot.”The second narratological concept, coherence, is related to the first. According to the literary scholar H. Porter Abbot, there is a longstanding assumption in the history of interpretation that narratives possess “some kind of deep coherence.” Narratives are, in other words, “‘whole’ in the sense that everything in a narrative somehow belongs and contributes to its meaning.”7 Narrative meaning may be a function of the relationship between the different parts of a narrative, as Brooks explains, but it is also predicated on the assumption that these parts logically cohere. The assumption that the small plates constitute a coherent whole means that their beginning and end contribute to their meaning. Given that the small plates contain numerous books and authorial voices, the argument that they constitute a coherent whole is not immediately apparent. Sharon J. Harris has recently argued that Enos is a written instantiation of an oral text.8 As an anonymous reader of my essay remarked, one implication of Harris's argument is that Enos could be viewed as a “freestanding” book, one that could be read as narratively independent of the small plates. As intriguing as Harris's argument and its implications are, the reading I propose in this essay would be completely elided if we read Enos as separate from the small plates. Reading the small plates as a narrative whole thus allows us to see important insights that would otherwise be obscured.The third narratological concept, closure, is also related to the first. Philosopher Noël Carroll has argued that “closure yields a feeling of completeness. When the book, there is to Whereas point about endings is that they structure narratives and thus contribute to the of narrative the of The feeling of a sense of that the has what to Jarom and Abinadom's which is to they are with the way Enos the small plates. there is more text that after Enos, it is Enos that a sense of is it about the in Enos that Jarom and Abinadom Sharon J. Harris a when to the order of the Book of may have the record Book of that these its the that would to the of the of The implication of the Book of order is for the small plates we the and of the whole I Harris's sense of the of the small plates, especially as they to with the of I Enos is among the books in a sense of narrative I will to these I to attention to the narrative significance in the structure of the small narratological terms help explain the narrative implications of Jarom and Abinadom's language about the sufficiency of the small plates up through Enos. they to the small plates as a coherent narrative, one that be read in meaningful and they the role of Enos in the narrative meaning. In this way, they lay the for my reading of the small we to the text what out is that the small plates with vision of an figure and with Enos's which he as a wrestle before The sense of a beginning in the small plates is thus by and and the sense of the ending is by that other in As Roland in his literary book to the hermeneutic and to the proairetic both of which codes the to how the will I will the role of in as it to the small plates. the hermeneutic to the title of The title a question: What is question will not be by the of the us as hermeneutic the function it is to in ways a its and the of which the question its constitute an and to its In the small plates, the hermeneutic when he his reader to a figure his sees and is not immediately out of the of Ne. narrative by the of the figure and thus the reader to The of that as the reader the of the small plates that this figure is the Messiah, who is also the of who is, gestures toward this of when he writes of “that . . . they in Christ and the in his . . . and not more for Ne. emphasis In other words, the of the the figure that Lehi sees with his to reading through his use of the hermeneutic from the of his record to narratively his readers to is more to the than the of as the Lehi sees in The hermeneutic in 1 may the reader toward but it does not constitute the ending that configures the meaning of function belongs to the book of Enos. Enos on the proairetic a and of the proairetic “The proairetic to that a narrative a his on an and we what the of this will We to see if he his is is thus by than by a a to have The of the proairetic in Enos be in what calls Enos's Enos his experience as a wrestle, the text clearly separate that are in and that an of an (i.e., Enos an to his if the of that in the the of 1 Nephi, in which the of the figure that Lehi sees is only after the reader is not for the to Enos's of up an important function of the proairetic in Enos. the his Enos and In a they are up in a of Enos's his which to the does not just it After for Enos then for the Nephites and for the Lehi after he the of the Enos, too, when the of his its of more important than Enos's the also As Enos his to be in the 1:11). at what is the most important function of the proairetic in Enos. the Book of is and that is the (see the title by use of the hermeneutic what it like to into a relationship with In this way, his wrestle to the underlying transformative ethos of the small the Book of Mormon first to the of its with the one it that of its of which as of the most and in the Book of The as Adam Miller has were about their of its in the As has there is a in language from a for in 1 to a for in The may like just a of that the two terms the in and whatever the by the small between and in terms of and fact of the that they as a of the of his sees the in language as than he it the Book of of the of both the and as may be, it does not in the Book of it as an how an from to link “the of the to a at by this not to does this by use of the hermeneutic In the opening chapter of the Book of he vision of out of the of will link this figure to and the of a reader to do from the the text is at this this sense of with an a to about “the of a emphasis Reading the the of a of of in the of at the of his interpretation on of a on the then of Jesus writes would have sense for the narrative to on the in the of and I read it in the of the narrative of the small plates. a it is not to Lehi means Jesus Christ when he of a in Ne. his from the of those who the is to Christ in the not Lehi has in the Messiah, clearly is in the in this he also the of the When he first his father's vision of out of the of Ne. his reader in the of from the of is this Given that he from is he the God his from the only to questions: are the that Lehi they What is the book Lehi is to is the in the it the who gives the does not to these In he Nephi, do not make a of the which my written” Ne. 1 is of that but does not these and the reader to 1 Ne. to his for from the that my would the God up among the a Messiah, in other words, a of the the of the of the figure in immediately the in other that he that the link between and not and that he to the at in and he than to make the he a in he for his readers the of the his In this way, of is in his of the hermeneutic of does not from but like his language that to the emerging awareness of Christ as to their of In his first recorded to the his about with a about as I it must be that in the the that this be his he among the among they which are the more of the they thus it there is other on that would their Ne. I have already how the small plates use the as other than a title to What is what language about who what is the Christ for the first else explain what means if they already too, that he only the an the Jesus Christ to 1 Ne. to it with the from his from reading the plates, the but not these In the language of the small plates my that especially the of Christ is an hermeneutic is not the only of narrative that the of the The structure of the narrative the As the reader follows the of the Book of them on their toward their to sort of to this of narrative by the of In 1 Ne. 1 he a record about a and role the of Israel with an of a from the of Israel reading a book about “the of a and also the of the Ne. Lehi and the reader thus to that Christ is the through their and related reading by reading the book by one of the Ne. and the reader by reading the of Lehi (i.e., the small The Book of Mormon is, as they the narrative structure of the small plates is a that contributes to the of The the the from the the and more their of Christ the following in Lehi sees a vision of an out of the of and about “the of a Ne. from in the he that this will be of the Ne. is to the of and by the end of his Lehi to have a and more of this of the Messiah, their and their he this figure to Ne. after the is in the does the of to the is by in the the Nephites in the of at this with the Nephites at their from their does the small most on the of Christ in Ne. As has in a could a the to that with a promised a not he on the pattern in the of his narrative, as has In together the of the and the of the Book of Mormon into a of together of the two with in the of Enos, to which I first there are between the way 1 and the way Enos his As Harris has both are both begin their with and both the of their his case, Enos only his If we that Enos on these then a between his and more of the hermeneutic numerous that he does not immediately as a way of the his Enos the proairetic the narrative by the he that an in Whereas narrative are at the Messiah, Enos's his wrestle before an experience that will his relationship not just with God but also with his and have the of Enos's experience in different and for both the of Enos's sees Enos's narrative as a take on the of of in In to the Book of Mormon other narratives and in this sense as sort of argues that Enos's a with As Enos to the not only does he to but he also into a with God that his relationship to Harris the of Enos, specifically the the of as to the of Enos's and I the of Enos I would attention to the way it highlights the proairetic Enos's in his to the out his whole and not only the of his but the of that in the the reader also and then as of Enos's God What will is then immediately is in both that God Enos's and how In this way, the proairetic in Enos the narrative by the to what happens in to the hermeneutic in which to not with Jarom and the narrative is up with the theological implications of Enos's understand what is at in Enos's wrestle, I will my with what we might the in and, at in my The to make two (1) Enos's wrestle is a for and (2) his is of the We this as an of of The sense in of Enos this has in an to make Enos's experience to readers (see 1 Ne. in from Enos's of to his for in the first his of Enos with the following Enos his he to Enos's to as the of his Enos does not the this the of by the of the to in the and I the words which I my and the of the and the words of my deep into my and my and I before my and I in and for emphasis Enos to not because of the between and up by his in to his father's that deep into his say that Enos, and how do his words of Enos's The key from Enos is of the Harris of these words in and Enos's wrestle to the Enos's wrestle as a ritualistic in which he his to God through his and I Harris's of the of the as well as of Enos's wrestle as an in of I propose which both the and their as the for the the of the of they which have in the of they which have the of the and the of they the of which for them from the of the and their be The of Ne. from of and to the and role in reading to the is at to them that they are a of the of Israel Ne. to be this to after reading the first point he has to do with relationship with the of have read these that might the of the that he with the of Ne. In other words, specifically the and gathering of Israel and the role to be by the of we from of the hermeneutic to be Jesus about the of the is thus between to and the of Israel Ne. everything in between to the power of In this way, his to the as the that the of Israel to God through and contain which with the to the of (i.e., Jesus The different might have the of the two on this from if the link between Jesus and Israel by some the of the gathering of Israel to the figure of Jesus I is the theological in which about the of the deep into Enos's and into the where he before his of his wrestle, Enos his narrative with to the not the way does in the opening of his father's As there are in which Enos on his the of his the and in order to his to those of his in as and the before God in Enos would be as the of which the where the one important Enos's language from that of the well as that of the Book of Mormon in the only other that Whereas and both to a wrestle with Enos that he before as as the are between Enos and the I propose that Enos's wrestle be read to a different that of sacrifice. a reading is by of Enos's In Enos out whole these words but a Christ . . . and offer whole as an offering (Omni emphasis In of Enos's out offer . . . as an the of the offer only to the sacrificial through which words us to read Enos's in the Book of Mormon two if sacrificial the of Ne. Ne. Ne. as it them toward who the of a and a Ne. the Book of Mormon does not offer about what the of like among the it to assume it the of in the In between a and an offering in the of a which is between and which an for an offering a from an to a are by the that is I that in before Enos gives to God his as an offering Enos in the sacrificial of Enos's wrestle is a different of Enos's relationship with Enos's experience the from the of in the of to the in According to that the of the of with them the of and It will be that Enos may not have as a and he therefore would not have the to offer the in to the of and and As to refers to the of for (see to than the by Enos's experience is also by a of the his offering thus calls for The fact that his and its from the of and the of the and in Ne. and not to as a Jesus does in Ne. a different sort of read Enos's offering in of this has important first to Enos's Enos is an just which and two which the of that is Enos. The of the text has not by for Enos does not from a of a Enos's on this the of allows for an more the of in sacrifice. As has God of a “The one who is offering a to before to be . . . in the before power be to a function of that from the of The of such that it the of the one who As the of Enos in to the of in the sacrificial of the of the of a and than the Christ to not as some of a but as an of As with Enos, one must whole to the of the but one to the are and be emphasis second implication is a relationship . . . the of Given that God a with a how make a one that is an of than an to else from in other words, do we the of the and into a relationship with God that is not by on the of “The to is to but the that to be of the relationship and not the for God desires a relationship with us in which but does not us to into a relationship with because he gives us As his we are in the of to in to the of that the a as as to could out of the and be an of the that he his only emphasis The of is an of the desires that we into a relationship with one that is by not the of into this of I is what Enos in his wrestle before this for the late Elder us that “the only we have to on is else already belongs to Him. in the offering of will is Elder this thus the only which is also a third implication of Enos's wrestle as a is that the relationship between and to Enos's of If Enos does not out to a of does he does he experience The reading of Enos he must have some I a different has argued that the ritualistic with sense of of and Enos the of in than Enos's for some he If this is the case, it is that in the is it the immediately to his in and the of what refers to more as “the of What Enos and what and will is the that has to do with the of than it does with the of In other words, Christ the of and up to Enos the means of is what means when he that a In thus to Enos has more it is of thus us the of the of What is more, Enos is not the only in that the of in this In the and as to their in the their vision of the in and have their before they these In of these do the the specifically in of a of the way, for on other in the of some In it is by the are before In section the in In these the of as a for entering into a more relationship with a sort of ritualistic that to In this Enos's experience with the sacrificial of both the and the of the Enos's wrestle before the through the lens of allows us to see the between and offering his Enos to which is by the ritualistic of his and in this way, he into a relationship with What is more, the he does his attention then to his the and then to his the his with As the with the of God is not with his but through the whole to the whole small plates are a narratively a of the of authorial it be for readers to the of the that the plates drawing the tools and concepts of I have out one my way of reading the function of the hermeneutic and proairetic codes in the text allows us to see how the narrative both the of the and to see how the will is more, a focus on the narrative structure of the small plates insights that would otherwise use of the hermeneutic gives to the of which Jesus Christ as the The of the proairetic in Enos that a of relationship with a sacrificial wrestle, in Enos's more important than just In this way, the two codes work together by with In this way, they the transformative ethos that at the of the small the small plates a transformative ethos the Book of Mormon in with other According to different ways of in with the . . . . . . present us with the who has this and a more of If the Book of Mormon written for claim not just by but also by the text's one must have to do with its on and not just its this is into the structure of the