tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-39206409655367810542024-03-12T20:00:47.758-05:00Clean CutCutting my own path...Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.comBlogger354125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-28251120369182489432015-11-20T07:55:00.002-06:002016-04-04T10:33:03.458-05:00Why I Love the LDS Church Enough to Both Criticize It AND Step Away From It<div>
<div>
In March (2015), <a href="http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/barackobama/barackobamaselma50anniversarymarch.htm" target="_blank">on the 50th Anniversary of "the March" in Selma, Alabama, President Barack Obama delivered a masterful speech</a> with the Edmund Pettus Bridge as a backdrop. He captured the spirit of America and the importance of drawing inspiration from specific episodes of our history to better shape the present.<br />
<br />
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJBXSdLLg4sqH8cpso6A-YTUvR52wKD2slDDT3-ZpDfjQAIbmHmWjoFlWZ8zHqXblp1LzJYOJQFSyKZJ7QV8CtY9UKIivhCCNbWTnZaVS1ZQEWEuNaAnZCLLqil__7h5nl_oC1l2gNIQh6/s640/blogger-image--534469350.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJBXSdLLg4sqH8cpso6A-YTUvR52wKD2slDDT3-ZpDfjQAIbmHmWjoFlWZ8zHqXblp1LzJYOJQFSyKZJ7QV8CtY9UKIivhCCNbWTnZaVS1ZQEWEuNaAnZCLLqil__7h5nl_oC1l2gNIQh6/s400/blogger-image--534469350.jpg" width="398" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
I especially love this quote: </div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>What greater expression of faith in the American experiment than this; what greater form of patriotism is there; than the belief that America is not yet finished, that we are strong enough to be self-critical, that each successive generation can look upon our imperfections and decide that it is in our power to remake this nation to more closely align with our highest ideals?</b></blockquote>
I re-read and re-listened to President Obama's remarks, and was moved each time. Not only did it capture my patriotic commitment to speak out against injustice in order to make America better, but it likewise encouraged me to look inward at the imperfections of my church and courageously work to remake it to be better--to be a church more focussed on compassion than righteousness and purity. I was about to blog about the connection between love and loyalty and criticism but Rachel Held Evans beat me to the punch with her powerful column on CNN: “<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/13/living/evans-america-church/index.html">Strong enough to be self-critical: In America AND the church</a>."<br />
<br />
She was later <a href="http://www.alternet.org/belief/can-woman-make-evangelical-christianity-sane-again" target="_blank">interviewed by Valerie Tarico</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Tarico</i>: Some fellow believers see your questioning and critique as a betrayal of Evangelicalism. But in one of your recent blog posts, “<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/13/living/evans-america-church/index.html">Strong enough to be self-critical: In America and the church</a>,” you came down hard on the side of criticism as a sign of love and loyalty. You said, “Mature people and mature communities are strong enough to be self-critical and wise enough to speak the truth in love.” Are there limits on that? </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Held Evans</i>: A lot of cultures set limits on how much you are allowed to ask. They encourage curiosity and questioning up to a point but your answers need to fall within a certain framework of what the answers are supposed to be, and I think I pushed up against that one too many times for some critics. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Criticism can be hard to do well, and I am often clumsy at it, but <b>those who advocate for reform in the Church often do so out of a deep love for it.</b> I want the Church to be a more hospitable place for LGBT people, precisely because I want the Church to grow and thrive and welcome all of God's children through its doors. I want the Church to embrace science precisely because I want the Church to remain relevant in the world and tenable for those who shouldn't feel like they have to choose between their intellectual integrity and their faith. In my work, <b>I feel it's important to hold both the good and the bad of my faith tradition truthfully, candidly. If I weren't deeply invested, I wouldn't care. I wouldn't speak up.</b></blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<i>That</i> right there is a perfect summary of my own personal feelings regarding <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-church-is-made-up-entirely-of-human.html" target="_blank">the LDS Church</a>. I've loved it enough to be critical, however clumsily at times. Yet regardless of one's heart, so many Mormons view <i>any</i> criticism as "anti-Mormon" and jump to question one's motivation. Yet I persisted in blogging and speaking up on Sunday's because my interest in reform was greater than my interest in preserving the status quo.<br />
<br />
It didn't matter to me if now and then someone misunderstood my lack of acquiescence as a lack of faith or even compassion. <i>I</i> knew where I stood. And my leaders knew where I stood. I wanted the LDS Church to be <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-truth-all-families-deserve-to-be.html" target="_blank">a more hospitable place for LGBT people and their families</a> and to welcome all of God's children through its doors. I wanted to <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2010/12/womens-place_10.html" target="_blank">add my voice to those concerned about gender inequality</a>. And I wanted to add my knowledge of our history to lend perspective to our present circumstances. Because "to love something is to see it for what it is, flaws and all. <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/13/living/evans-america-church/index.html" target="_blank">To love one's country, or one's church, is to invest in making it better</a>." And I deeply believed that I could likewise <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-church-is-made-up-entirely-of-human.html" target="_blank">love my church</a> just like I love America enough to be critical of its shortcomings.<br />
<br />
<b>It's been years since I've believed in such a thing as a "one and only true church." I'm a Mormon in the mold of <a href="http://mormonstories.org/gina-colvin/" target="_blank">Gina Colvin</a> of "<a href="http://athoughtfulfaith.org/" target="_blank">A Thoughtful Faith</a>." I don't need the church to be true. I just need it to be good. And <a href="https://divinity.uchicago.edu/sightings/rifts-mormon-family-what-just-happened" target="_blank">the infamous handbook change is most definitely NOT good</a>. I don't even need the church to be right. I just need it to be ennobling. And this was anything but noble. In fact, I feel <a href="https://divinity.uchicago.edu/sightings/rifts-mormon-family-what-just-happened" target="_blank">it's exclusive, divisive, and hurtful</a>.</b><br />
<br />
<b>My idea of Zion is so much more inclusive--one that welcomes all of God's children. Thus, I will now use my personal authority to love without conditions and be radically inclusive. Those are my values. And I've never felt more Christian.</b> After all, Jesus was a radical activist, bent on bringing the practice of love and compassion to a religious orthodoxy mired in man-made religious rules. And that's why he was killed--he was seen as a threat to conventional wisdom.<br />
<br />
Conventional wisdom has been that Mormons over-emphasize righteousness and purity over <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/grace-like-oasis-in-desert.html" target="_blank">grace and mercy</a>, but the historical Jesus was actually quite subversive to the righteousness/purity system of the contemporary religious establishment. I saw this most clearly while reading Marcus Borg's "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Meeting-Jesus-Again-First-Time/dp/0060609176/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1447964576&sr=1-1&keywords=meeting+jesus+again+first+time" target="_blank">Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time: The Historical Jesus and the Heart of Contemporary Faith</a>". One of my favorite quotes in the book is the following:<br />
<br />
"<b>Compassion, not holiness, is the dominant quality of God, and is therefore to be the ethos of the community that mirrors God</b>" (Borg, p. 54.)<br />
<br />
In other words, "an interpretation of scripture faithful to Jesus and the early Christian movement sees the Bible through the lens of compassion, not purity." Borg uses a specific example on page 59 that is particularly relevant to <a href="https://divinity.uchicago.edu/sightings/rifts-mormon-family-what-just-happened" target="_blank">the handbook policy nightmare</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I am convinced that much of the strongly negative attitude toward homosexuality on the part of some Christians has arisen because, in addition to whatever nonreligious homophobic reasons may be involved, homosexuality is seen (often unconsciously) as a purity issue. For these Christians, there's something "dirty" about it, boundaries are being crossed, things are being put together that do not belong together, and so forth. Indeed, homosexuality was a purity issue in ancient Judaism. The prohibition against it is found in the purity laws of the book of Leviticus.<br />
<br />
It seems to me that the shattering of purity boundaries by both Jesus and Paul should also apply to the purity code's perception of homosexuality. Homosexual behavior should therefore be evaluated by the same criteria as heterosexual behavior. It also seems to me that the passage [<a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%203:28" target="_blank">Galatians 3:28</a>] in which Paul negates the other central polarities of his world also means, "In Christ, there is neither straight nor gay." Granted, Paul didn't say that, but the logic of "life in the spirit" and the ethos of compassion imply it.</blockquote>
</div>
I know that speaking and writing this isn't going to make me popular among Mormons who believe the prophets have got it all figured out and we should just follow them. But as John Pavlovitz wrote, I'm resigned to "<b>be the Samaritan: judged, despised, but merciful</b>." So I appreciate voices such as Marcus Borg above, and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezQjNJUSraY" target="_blank">Matthew Vines</a>' insights into the Bible and homosexuality. And I appreciate <span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;">Natasha Helfer Parker, </span>who <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/mormontherapist/2015/11/when-what-is-normal-is-declared-sin.html">just a few days ago wrote the following:</a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I know it is difficult for many within the Church to hear an LDS therapist take the position that homosexual behavior, in of itself, is not a sin and not completely dismiss me. I have advocated for a long time that LGBTQ individuals be held to the same standard as heterosexuals when it comes to the Law of Chastity. And for many this will mean I am taking a blasphemous position. But let’s please remember that we have a history of redefining sin; with several clear examples being interracial marriage/sexuality, polygamous marriage/sexuality, and what is considered appropriate marital behavior for heterosexual couples. Those sins have been redefined largely due to the social pressures and education/research of the time. Not because of God. But because of us. The <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng">essay written by the LDS Church</a> on the policies around denying the priesthood to black males explicitly says our own biases got in the way. And now we “disavow” past racist teachings once considered doctrine. So it is completely feasible that we may not currently understand all that will change, shift and be revealed in the future in regards to LGBTQ issues. And when the positions we have taken as a church lead to so much heartache, rejection, unhappiness, mental illness, family & community turmoil, excommunication, and even high rates of suicide – you better believe I’m on the side of ‘we are making a mistake.’ I don’t have the luxury to wait around for authority figures to decide for me, while I’m in the trenches with capable hands to help those who are bleeding.</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
It has been both hard and rewarding as <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/05/where-truth-flies-you-follow-if-you-are.html" target="_blank">I've participated in the LDS church post faith-transition</a>. I wouldn't be the person I am today had I not traveled this unique path. I'm glad <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/12/on-being-seasick-while-staying-in-boat.html" target="_blank">I stayed in the boat as long as I did, even when I was seasick</a>, because I was able to help fellow passengers and helping felt good. But lately I've been stunned as it appears <a href="https://divinity.uchicago.edu/sightings/rifts-mormon-family-what-just-happened" target="_blank">the crew of the boat, rather than reform the culture onboard, have preemptively begun throwing people overboard</a> in order to "protect" a minority from being exposed to potential hurt. Already, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/useful-or-not-i-value-truth-over.html" target="_blank">just like in the past,</a> people settle their conscience by pointing the finger at God. <b>I'm too sickened by institutional bigotry and discrimination to stay. Whether the metaphor is a boat or a bus, I'm tired of being confined by a segregated boat/bus, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-church-is-made-up-entirely-of-human.html" target="_blank">entirely a human construction</a></b>. Moreover I had already learned and<span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"> </span><a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/05/where-truth-flies-you-follow-if-you-are.html" target="_blank">previously written</a><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"> that "</span><b><u>I am in the drivers seat of my own search for the divine--not the Church™."</u></b><br />
<b><u><br /></u></b>Still, I went along for the ride in the <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2010/12/on-church-and-being-lead-astray.html" target="_blank">collective vehicle of the church</a> that sustains fifteen men as "prophets, seers, and revelators" (<a href="http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2015/08/how-we-know-thomas-monson-is-prophet.html" target="_blank">regardless of if or how often they actually do any of those things</a>). And while I wrote that <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-churchs-cardinal-sin-of-blasphemy_28.html" target="_blank">many Mormons have their own "grievous sin" of elevating their leaders into the realm of idolatry</a>, I acknowledged:</div>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It's not my place to grab the steering wheel (<a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/121.34-46?lang=eng">not even God coerces</a> the driver), [but] I still have a responsibility to love and help the driver as best I can. I believe our prophet-leaders are entitled to our sympathy, our support, and our suggestions. We're not lemmings just along for the ride. We're free agents. It would be easier to just sit back and trust the authorities. But we've seen what happens when we go down that path. (And that path starts looking a lot more like Satan's plan than God's plan.) </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The easy path is to <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/05/when-prophet-speaks-is-thinking-done.html">let someone else do all the thinking for you</a>. It's harder to follow prophets when you have to seek revelation/inspiration for yourself to <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-prophet-is-not-always-prophet-only.html">discern when a prophet is acting as a prophet</a>, discerning if the counsel is inspired and/or applies to your circumstances. If all we do is tell people to sit down and shut up in the proverbial boat, we're no longer expecting people to exercise freedom of the mind and think for themselves, seeking their own spiritual confirmation. Or is the expectation to be told what to do, just obey, and get in line and don't rock the boat? If so, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/04/an-eternal-quest-freedom-of-mind.html">Hugh B. Brown is probably rolling in his grave.</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/04/an-eternal-quest-freedom-of-mind.html"></a><u>Obviously there's an extreme line somewhere that I wouldn't want to cross in becoming that annoying back-seat driver</u>. I want to always remain loving and respectful, but I feel I have a duty to alert the driver of dangers I may see out my window, especially if the drivers attention is so focused on the road ahead that he doesn't see what the passengers in the back seat may see. Of course it would be extreme if all someone did was ride along in order to criticize your driving. But there's another extreme of actually having an insight that might help the driver out but failing to speak up because of fear it's not your place. <u>And it would be an extreme driver indeed that was too stubborn to listen to suggestions</u>. I believe in trying to navigate the healthy middle ground between the extremes.</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<b>The two underlined sentences above underscore the fact that if I were to continue actively participating, I risk becoming that annoying back seat driver. The gap between my conscience and the direction of the leadership of the LDS church has never been wider. And the truth is that I find as much truth and goodness outside of the LDS church, and far less frustration.</b><br />
<br />
Unlike many who are resigning their membership, I'm not "divorcing" the LDS church--my Mormon identity is too entwined--but I will be separating. As a matter of fact, I think there are <a href="http://www.feministmormonhousewives.org/2015/11/to-resign-or-not-to-resign-that-is-the-question/" target="_blank">persuasive public reasons NOT to resign</a>. <b>They would have to kick me out for loving <i>too much</i></b>. It's now a matter of principle. As I step away, I commit to extend grace and show love. It's not healthy to be antagonistic, and that would only hurt my family and my marriage. I want to maintain the loving relationships I <i>do</i> have with both friends and family.<br />
<br />
I've been active all my life. It's been years since I've believed in such a thing as a "one and only true church" but I've still managed to attend church to try to be a bridge builder, and because I believed in <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2011/12/heretical-beliefs-and-feeling-welcome.html" target="_blank">big tent Mormonism</a>, or even better, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/11/zionexpanding-grid-mormonism.html" target="_blank">expanding grid Mormonism</a>. I showed up to look for and contribute to goodness, as well as appreciate the truths that I <i>do</i> find in Mormonism, even while personally rejecting that which <a href="http://www.mormonsformarriage.com/why-we-as-lds-members-support-marriage-equality/why-should-lds-members-care/i-would-really-rather-be-dead-stuart-matis/" target="_blank">I now see causes harm</a>. Mostly I figured it was as good as any place to practice the gospel of Jesus Christ that I <i>do</i> believe in (compassion and grace) among people who are radically different than me. It hasn't always been easy, but I have a local community whom I truly love and who truly love me and my family. Many of them are <b>true Christians who prioritize love over dogma</b>.<br />
<br />
But <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/kiwimormon/2015/11/something-broke-open-today/" target="_blank">something broke open</a> in our church culture with these <a href="https://divinity.uchicago.edu/sightings/rifts-mormon-family-what-just-happened" target="_blank">recent handbook changes</a>. The culture now officially <i>excludes</i> people I personally deeply desire to <i>include</i>. I cannot in good conscience participate with an organization that stubbornly insists on <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/mormontherapist/2015/11/when-what-is-normal-is-declared-sin.html" target="_blank">labeling that which is normal as "grievous sin</a>."</div>
</div>
<div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhOxquLDgUEyNDVFfQOpFJaATpBNW2d3PTjLOwwuvGgB9Omwdqf-OoUrJpANC6bNP47V-0JzbMHNio7GIkFFoqKnXNpRKN1fUGl5Pw2l9j4tkxlp-GJjoCc1hdFpsmUn7n0QrDIMc56wMWD/s1600/Abomination.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhOxquLDgUEyNDVFfQOpFJaATpBNW2d3PTjLOwwuvGgB9Omwdqf-OoUrJpANC6bNP47V-0JzbMHNio7GIkFFoqKnXNpRKN1fUGl5Pw2l9j4tkxlp-GJjoCc1hdFpsmUn7n0QrDIMc56wMWD/s1600/Abomination.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
The institution doesn't appear anxious to learn from its own mistakes, such as when it was <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/11/when-mormon-church-was-dead-wrong-and_11.html" target="_blank">too stubborn to see how it wrongfully labeled good people and persisted in being too stubborn to change for too long</a>; long after society had awakened to a new truth about racial equality. Society likewise is awakening today to a new truth regarding our LGBT brothers and sisters but the LDS church is reluctant to accept it. It digs in even deeper (because heaven forbid we be influenced by "the world") and elevates <a href="http://rationalfaiths.com/where-is-the-book-of-mormon/" target="_blank">its Family Proclamation over the Book of Mormon</a>. It labels good people who commit to each other in marriage as "apostates," and deprives their <i>children</i> (in the present) of the blessings and ordinances it spends countless resources and energy on convincing others (in the present) to urgently embrace.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, when most Mormon apologists read the foregoing they'll dismiss it as an "attack." That's one of the unhealthy aspects prevalent among many Mormons with whom I interact: any criticism is seen as an attack or "anti-Mormon." There isn't much discernment between loving critics and antagonistic critics. <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/kiwimormon/2015/04/uncritical-lovers-mormonisms-problem-children/" target="_blank">Most welcomed are the uncritical lovers</a>. Nevertheless, Mormons are my tribe, my heritage, my people, and I want them to be better just as I know they want me to be better. I don't want to be antagonistic. I want to be compassionate. Moreover, whenever people spew forth antagonistic stuff about Mormons, they just get more and more defensive. I want to extend grace and show love.<br />
<br />
But this <a href="https://divinity.uchicago.edu/sightings/rifts-mormon-family-what-just-happened" target="_blank">sucker punch from Salt Lake</a> took all the wind out of me. It's too painful. My wife isn't going anywhere (she's the stake primary president) but she supports my decision to step away from active participation in the LDS church as a way of maintaining my own sanity and well-being and to be able to focus on loving and putting my own family first (because I could easily let this eat at me and ruin my balance.) I don't want to become a stumbling block to the people in the pews next to me, nor to my own family, so <b>it's finally reached that point where I need to take a serious sabbatical (indefinitely) because the gap between my conscience and the LDS church is unbridgeable at present</b>.<br />
<br />
<b>I still find inspiration in the teachings of Jesus, but they're often missing or misrepresented in church.</b> But I applaud, as the New York Times put it, those "<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/19/opinion/stung-by-edict-on-gays-mormons-leave-church.html?_r=0" target="_blank">growing number of churches of various denominations [that] have come to embrace all people</a>" just as God made them. <b>I will now spend my days using my personal authority to INCLUDE rather than EXCLUDE. To embrace ALL people. Because we're ALL broken and we ALL need God's grace. </b>Another friend of mine who has left the LDS church to find her calling in the Lutheran church put it this way: "<b>When we freely admit that we're broken and need God's grace, it opens us up to be vulnerable with each other, to tend to each other in sorrow and pain, to be compassionate with each other, to find growth and healing together in community. </b>The gospel, y'all. It's a thing."<br />
<br />
<b>I have a dream that one day the LDS church embraces <i>that </i>gospel of grace, rather than refuse to admit its own brokenness and imply infallibility by never apologizing for its wrongs and mistakes (past or present.)</b> And I have a dream that one day Latter-day Saints will join in singing with their Community of Christ cousins my new favorite hymn: "<a href="http://www.cofchrist.org/for-everyone-born" target="_blank">For Everyone Born, A Place At The Table</a>."<b> I sing of justice, joy, compassion, and peace with great conviction, because it represents everything I've come to believe about the Divine</b>.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">For Everyone Born, A Place at the Table</span></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
For everyone born, a place at the table,</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
for everyone born, clean water and bread,</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
a shelter, a space, a safe place for growing,</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
for everyone born, a star over head.<br />
<br />
Refrain:<br />
<b><b><br /></b></b> <b><b>And God will delight when we are creators</b></b></div>
<b> </b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>of justice and joy, compassion and peace;</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>yes, God will delight when we are creators</b></div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>of justice, justice, and joy.</b><br />
<br />
<br />
For woman and man, a place at the table,</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
revising the roles, deciding to share, </div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
with wisdom and grace, dividing the power,</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
for woman and man, a system that's fair.<br />
<br />
Refrain<br />
<br />
For young and for old, a place at the table,</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
a voice to be heard, a part in the song,</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
the hands of a child in hands that are wrinkled,</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
for young and for old, the right to belong.<br />
<br />
Refrain<br />
<br />
For just and unjust, a place at the table.</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
abuser, abused, with need to forgive,</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
in anger, in hurt, a mind-set of mercy, </div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
for just and unjust, a new way to live.<br />
<br />
Refrain<br />
<br />
For everyone born, a place at the table,</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
to live without fear, and simply to be,</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
to work, to speak out, to witness and worship,</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
for everyone born, the right to be free.<br />
<br />
Refrain:<br />
<b><b><br /></b></b> <b><b>And God will delight when we are creators</b></b></div>
<b> </b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>of justice and joy, compassion and peace;</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>yes, God will delight when we are creators</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>of justice, justice, and joy.</b><br />
<div>
<b> </b>
<br />
<div>
<div>
<b> </b></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com22tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-14588160607630137112015-11-16T15:55:00.002-06:002015-12-02T14:24:01.134-06:00A Call For Simple-Minded Mormons To RepentA family member just shared with me today a public Facebook post by a man named Dustin Sweeten that starts with the words "come on members of the LDS church, be honest..." followed by how<a href="https://divinity.uchicago.edu/sightings/rifts-mormon-family-what-just-happened" target="_blank"> this rift in the Mormon family</a> is all about following a prophet of God or not:<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1M4QOSFE1J2AcuZOOu9brDewx_lODcOTpsk1lBgBWAlwbEsGE-Ei8VkhBsQr3YBDy5kRwm80rqKk1A7y0OD5V6XqCNEWKoGnqJfIdRbcxAd4w300pu7xDb7hAaQvPxbX7agfLFYe3XEIF/s1600/bad+FB+post.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1M4QOSFE1J2AcuZOOu9brDewx_lODcOTpsk1lBgBWAlwbEsGE-Ei8VkhBsQr3YBDy5kRwm80rqKk1A7y0OD5V6XqCNEWKoGnqJfIdRbcxAd4w300pu7xDb7hAaQvPxbX7agfLFYe3XEIF/s1600/bad+FB+post.jpg" /></a></div>
<div>
<br />
<br />
<b>I'll be honest. I have a strong testimony and conviction of Jesus Christ. But I also have a testimony of the fact that He doesn't control men like puppets (even prophets). He works with what He's got, but we all <a href="http://www.patheos.com/Mormon/Living-with-Fallibility-James-E-Faulconer-11-21-2014" target="_blank">have our own bias', including prophets (who aren't infallible</a>). They can and do make mistakes, including <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/11/when-mormon-church-was-dead-wrong-and_11.html" target="_blank">boneheaded decisions and policies that hurt real people</a>, because that's what it means to be fallible.<br /><br />Our loyalty ultimately is to God, not to men. And if you see no difference between God and prophets, then that is the epitome of <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-churchs-cardinal-sin-of-blasphemy_28.html" target="_blank">idoltry. And it's time time for you to repent</a>.</b><br />
<b><br /></b>
PS: If Dustin Sweeten (or anyone else who applauded his words) reads this, please just skip everything I said and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Evwgu369Jw" target="_blank">watch this short Brene Brown video to understand the difference between empathy and sympathy</a>. Christians in deed (as opposed to just word) show empathy. Showing <a href="http://bycommonconsent.com/2015/11/16/mosaic/" target="_blank">love is more important than establishing your dogma</a>.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/1Evwgu369Jw/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1Evwgu369Jw?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<b><br /></b></div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com17tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-87272546720782467702015-11-11T10:26:00.002-06:002020-11-25T18:10:19.815-06:00When The Mormon Church Was Dead Wrong And Too Stubborn to See It<div>
This past week I've experienced a roller coaster of emotions. My wife and I welcomed a baby boy into our family. This most peaceful and good news was followed two days later by the <a href="http://radiowest.kuer.org/post/new-lds-church-policy-same-sex-families" target="_blank">sad and troubling news that our collective Mormon family will now officially exclude</a> many (one is too many) priceless souls from joining the collective church family. Though the gospel of Jesus Christ is radically inclusive, the LDS Church is anything but. Even if you want to hope that the <a href="https://divinity.uchicago.edu/sightings/rifts-mormon-family-what-just-happened" target="_blank">news is okay</a>, you have to admit that <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQ976ymOA_8&feature=youtu.be" target="_blank">the optics of this are brutal</a>. And I'm left with the same question as Arwen Taylor, who hit the nail on the head:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Here's what I want to ask everyone who defends the new anti-gay family policy: What can you imagine the church doing that you would absolutely not support? Can you imagine the church taking an action that would cause you to say, 'No, this violates my conscience, this goes too far, this is not done in love?' Because if not, then you don't get to make moral arguments in support of this; you've ceded your moral reasoning to someone else's authority.</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
At every single juncture in the past we've been demonstrably wrong about homosexuality. A few months ago I implied my personal belief that our church persists in being <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/dear-elder-christofferson.html">wrong about homosexuality in a carefully worded open letter to Elder Christofferson</a>. (A counselor in my stake presidency expressed concern to me about suggesting the Brethren are "wrong", but that just <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-churchs-cardinal-sin-of-blasphemy_28.html" target="_blank">sparked another blog post on how if we acknowledge they're fallible then we should probably stop pretending that they <i>can't</i> be wrong.)</a><br />
<br />
To learn of the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/07/us/mormons-gay-marriage.html" target="_blank">problematic handbook changes</a> feels like a <a href="https://divinity.uchicago.edu/sightings/rifts-mormon-family-what-just-happened" target="_blank">sucker punch straight out of Salt Lake</a>. And to be clear, my sorrow lies with Salt Lake, not my local ward and stake. My local leaders have been most loving and kind as well as inclusive and sensitive as we've counseled together. My loving stake president even reached out to me personally Saturday morning because he knew this would cause me great concern (like his counselor, he too had read my <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/dear-elder-christofferson.html" target="_blank">open letter to Elder Christofferson</a> and we'd previously spoken in person about some of my concerns.) The thing is I haven't been able to respond--I'm too stunned. I think <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/11/why-i-love-lds-church-enough-to-both_51.html" target="_blank">I'm going to need time to step back and take a sabbatical</a>. In the meantime I simply wish to restate unequivocally my conviction that <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-truth-all-families-deserve-to-be.html">ALL families, regardless of the sexuality of the parents, deserve to be strengthened</a>. Are we collectively too stubborn to see the <a href="http://janariess.religionnews.com/2015/11/10/mormon-boy-denied-priesthood-ordination-because-his-mom-is-living-with-a-woman/">harm the Church is now doing to real families and children</a>? Even more sad than <a href="https://divinity.uchicago.edu/sightings/rifts-mormon-family-what-just-happened" target="_blank">the handbook changes</a> is to see so many loved ones try and defend it or pass the blame to God.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKWDyIoh1f_K4nIXCcdSGufPMo44aJDqAPbNIrzCbVKQTiUxYVrfanbz_ytiXuR-jfigZSZWRR4l3G9OaehXjgREoPb5yMlbaheY1GBHWZ26sHOCZl4wBUmS7Ip156Qx1g8nBNqqdCXHtF/s1600/IMG_7605.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKWDyIoh1f_K4nIXCcdSGufPMo44aJDqAPbNIrzCbVKQTiUxYVrfanbz_ytiXuR-jfigZSZWRR4l3G9OaehXjgREoPb5yMlbaheY1GBHWZ26sHOCZl4wBUmS7Ip156Qx1g8nBNqqdCXHtF/s320/IMG_7605.jpg" width="255" /></a></div>
</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div>
I thought we were learning to be better. I'm afraid I was wrong. This much is now clear: a significant number of Mormons--including Mormon leaders--have failed to learn some critical lessons from our collective past. One couple, <a href="http://www.nomorestrangers.org/our-leaders-need-to-hear-your-concerns-about-policies-toward-lgbt-mormons/" target="_blank">in writing to their stake president</a>, wondered about how some of the saddest episodes of our past may have played out differently if only someone had spoken truth and reason to power: </div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Perhaps if someone in the Parowan and Cedar City stakes had had the courage to voice their opinion to their stake presidents in those fateful secret meetings back in 1857, the Mountain Meadows Massacre could have been avoided. Or perhaps if others in the Willie and Martin handcart companies had joined their voices with Levi Savage who warned against the late travel (and was severely chastised for not having faith in his leaders), the resulting suffering and death could have been prevented. Perhaps if church leaders in Brigham Young’s day had stood up to the policy change he instituted that denied blacks the priesthood and temple blessings (<a href="https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng" target="_blank">and which the church now acknowledges was based on racist cultural attitudes of that age</a>), our church could have avoided causing untold emotional and spiritual injury to thousands of black people – as well as to the white members who perpetuated harmful racist attitudes (even to this day) because of the false folk doctrines they were taught in an attempt to justify an increasingly unjustifiable policy.</blockquote>
<div>
I sometimes wonder who, if anyone, has the ear of the First Presidency. I wonder if they're simply surrounded by "yes men" or if any have expressed to them concern about these handbook changes. I'm particularly concerned that they're not <a href="https://byuusga.wordpress.com/2015/11/10/dear-straight-mormons/" target="_blank">listening to our LGBT brothers and sisters</a>. Most people don't get the chance nowadays to have the ear of the First Presidency directly. The distance can give the impression that the First Presidency doesn't need the collective wisdom of the rank and file church membership--apparently we are to presume inspiration despite a lacunae of any compelling evidence. <br />
<br />
Moreover, despite <a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/10/come-join-with-us?lang=eng" target="_blank">President Uchtdorf's frank admission that there have been times when church leaders have made mistakes</a>, too often we've been too stubborn to learn from those mistakes to be better in the present. Apparently leaders are also <a href="http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/2122123-155/no-apology-really-mormons-question-apostle">too stubborn to apologize</a> for past wrongs. Of all the <a href="http://blogs.disney.com/oh-my-disney/2015/01/25/10-wise-rafiki-quotes-you-need-to-read/">wisdom in </a><a href="http://blogs.disney.com/oh-my-disney/2015/01/25/10-wise-rafiki-quotes-you-need-to-read/">The Lion King</a>, this may be the ultimate: “The past can hurt. But the way I see it, you can either run from it, or learn from it.”</div>
</div>
<div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUwYY5WvVF4hDmEBTp-jfF1kWcc1SAKDVYuXhH92TKRrzASssdVMUStjiFSsjL3ThEC5bz7Kfq_P2dqaq2eWwa0kAkhEd0t0lhqy8aUjpX_KJFybSke1nb3qUWYIGVzBTHjpHSyw-gkCZt/s640/blogger-image-1660899215.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="422" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUwYY5WvVF4hDmEBTp-jfF1kWcc1SAKDVYuXhH92TKRrzASssdVMUStjiFSsjL3ThEC5bz7Kfq_P2dqaq2eWwa0kAkhEd0t0lhqy8aUjpX_KJFybSke1nb3qUWYIGVzBTHjpHSyw-gkCZt/s640/blogger-image-1660899215.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The Mormon Past Can Hurt (the Present too), But We Must Learn From It.<br />
<br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
It is clear that many Mormons today still have much to learn from our past. I particularly have in mind <a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/topics/thoughts-on-race-in-mormon-history/the-stewart-udall-sequence/" target="_blank">The Stewart Udall Sequence</a>--"<a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/topics/thoughts-on-race-in-mormon-history/the-stewart-udall-sequence/" target="_blank">a remarkable tale of conscientious dissent</a>", which is filled with all kinds of customized lessons Latter-day Saints ought to be learning from today. Stewart Udall wasn't the only dissenting Mormon voice shamed for correctly following his conscience over the "authority" of church leaders. Readers of my blog may recall <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/useful-or-not-i-value-truth-over.html" target="_blank">I once shared how brother Lowry Nelson had the ear of the First Presidency but they refused to allow themselves to question whether it was perhaps Nelson who was right while <i>they</i> were wrong</a>. In fact history is filled with other Mormon voices who<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/05/decalogue-for-dissenters.html" target="_blank"> followed their conscience to dissent</a> and <a href="http://zelphontheshelf.com/history-vindicates-the-dissidents/" target="_blank">have since been vindicated by history</a>. But as a member of President John F. Kennedy's cabinet (Secretary of the Interior), Stewart Udall was likely the most prominent. I can't help but think about today's parallels and how Mormons who fail to remember the past are indeed condemned to repeat it.<br />
<br />
It's already happening. <span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">On the one hand, there have been <a href="http://zelphontheshelf.com/mormons-who-really-nailed-the-whole-be-like-jesus-thing/" target="_blank">many Latter-day Saints who have responded with compassion and grace</a> in the face of <a href="http://religiondispatches.org/lds-church-labels-same-sex-spouses-apostates-bars-children-from-baptism/" target="_blank">this weeks news</a>. By far my favorite story comes from <a href="https://buddhainthebeehive.wordpress.com/2015/11/08/to-the-wounded-and-the-weary/" target="_blank">my friend Lon Young, who exemplified what it means to "mourn with those that mourn"</a>. On the other hand, this week I've <a href="http://www.wheatandtares.org/19492/pull-your-heads-out-nutters/" target="_blank">heard/seen "Latter-day Saints" shame fellow Latter-day Saints for placing greater loyalty to following their own conscience over following LDS authorities.</a> </span><span face=""helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif">Though the nature of the issue is different, the behavior being exhibited and arguments being made today are almost exactly the same as those you can read in the saga of Stewart Udall (particularly parts 4 & 5), so without further ado, </span>I present <i><a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/topics/thoughts-on-race-in-mormon-history/the-stewart-udall-sequence/">The Stewart Udall Sequence</a>: <a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/topics/thoughts-on-race-in-mormon-history/the-stewart-udall-sequence/">a remarkable tale of conscientious dissent</a></i>, written by a local friend of mine, Jonathan Streeter, here in San Antonio:</div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<img alt="" height="320" src="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Udall-Sequence-Header.jpg" width="640" /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="et_pb_main_blurb_image" style="background: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #191f2d; font-family: "Open Sans",Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.8px; margin: 0px 0px 30px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: left; vertical-align: baseline;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/stewart-udall-sequence-i-the-conscience-of-a-jack-mormon/" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #005393; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="" class="et-waypoint et_pb_animation_off et-animated" height="200" src="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Steward-Udall-Sequence-part-1-header.jpg" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; height: auto; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; opacity: 1; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="400" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="et_pb_blurb_container" style="background: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #191f2d; font-family: "Open Sans",Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.8px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;">
<h4 style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: "Crete Round",Georgia,"Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 18px; font-weight: 500; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 5px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/stewart-udall-sequence-i-the-conscience-of-a-jack-mormon/" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Part I: The Conscience of a Jack Mormon</a></h4>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
Meet Stewart Udall and discover how he let his conscience guide his life. His deliberate decision to distance himself from the church is articulated in a note he wrote at the time. Those principles can be seen in his remarkable record of compassion.</div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="et_pb_main_blurb_image" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 23.8px; margin: 0px 0px 30px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: left; vertical-align: baseline;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/stewart-udall-sequence-ii-appeal-to-the-brethren-orthodoxy-and-antipathy/" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #005393; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="" class="et-waypoint et_pb_animation_off et-animated" height="200" src="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Udall-Part-2-Header.jpg" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; height: auto; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; opacity: 1; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="400" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="et_pb_blurb_container" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 23.8px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<h4 style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: "Crete Round",Georgia,"Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 18px; font-weight: 500; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 5px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/stewart-udall-sequence-ii-appeal-to-the-brethren-orthodoxy-and-antipathy/" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Part II: Orthodoxy and Antipathy</a></h4>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
When Secretary of Interior Stewart Udall took office, he received criticism about racist Mormon teachings. His exchange with the First Presidency reveals much about the perspective of Church leaders at the time.</div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="et_pb_main_blurb_image" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 23.8px; margin: 0px 0px 30px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: left; vertical-align: baseline;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/stewart-udall-sequence-iii-the-letter/" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #005393; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="" class="et-waypoint et_pb_animation_off et-animated" height="200" src="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Udall-Part-3-Header.jpg" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; height: auto; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; opacity: 1; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="400" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="et_pb_blurb_container" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 23.8px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<h4 style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: "Crete Round",Georgia,"Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 18px; font-weight: 500; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 5px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/stewart-udall-sequence-iii-the-letter/" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Part III: The Letter</a></h4>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
After seeing no change in church policy or teachings for years, Secretary of the Interior Stewart Udall writes an open letter condemning the priesthood ban and racist teachings. It did not go unnoticed.</div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="et_pb_main_blurb_image" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 23.8px; margin: 0px 0px 30px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: left; vertical-align: baseline;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/stewart-udall-sequence-iv-whos-on-the-lords-side-who/" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #005393; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="" class="et-waypoint et_pb_animation_off et-animated" height="200" src="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Udall-Part-4-Header.jpg" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; height: auto; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; opacity: 1; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="400" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="et_pb_blurb_container" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 23.8px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<h4 style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: "Crete Round",Georgia,"Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 18px; font-weight: 500; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 5px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/stewart-udall-sequence-iv-whos-on-the-lords-side-who/" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Part IV: Who's On The Lord's Side Who?</a></h4>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span face=""open sans" , "arial" , sans-serif" style="color: #191f2d;"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 23.8px;">After writing his letter, Stewart Udall received numerous letters from faithful Latter-day Saints. What does the content of those letters tell us about the heart of Mormonism regarding race at that time? (<b>Spoiler alert: We're seeing today some of the same messages of chastisement: "Don't criticize the leadership," "Don't embarrass the Church," "Get out of the Church," "You're too prideful," etc. from both members and leaders</b>.)</span></span></div>
</div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="et_pb_main_blurb_image" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 23.8px; margin: 0px 0px 30px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: left; vertical-align: baseline;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/stewart-udall-sequence-v-the-apostles-and-the-primitive-church/" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #005393; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="" class="et-waypoint et_pb_animation_off et-animated" height="200" src="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Part-5-Header.jpg" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; height: auto; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; opacity: 1; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="400" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="et_pb_blurb_container" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 23.8px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<h4 style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: "Crete Round",Georgia,"Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 18px; font-weight: 500; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 5px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/stewart-udall-sequence-v-the-apostles-and-the-primitive-church/" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Part V: The Apostles and the Primitive Church</a></h4>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
In addition to letters from other members, Stewart received letters from two Apostles. Would they echo the sentiments of the many members who castigated the outspoken Udall or take a different tone?</div>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="et_pb_main_blurb_image" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 23.8px; margin: 0px 0px 30px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: left; vertical-align: baseline;">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/stewart-udall-sequence-vi-by-their-fruits-ye-shall-know/" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #005393; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="" class="et-waypoint et_pb_animation_off et-animated" height="200" src="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Udall-Part-6-header.jpg" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; height: auto; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; opacity: 1; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="400" /></a></div>
</div>
<div class="et_pb_blurb_container" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; line-height: 23.8px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<h4 style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-family: "Crete Round",Georgia,"Times New Roman",serif; font-size: 18px; font-weight: 500; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 5px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/stewart-udall-sequence-vi-by-their-fruits-ye-shall-know/" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Part VI: By Their Fruits Ye Shall Know</a></h4>
<div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-image: none; border: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
The exchange between Udall and those who wrote him reveal the fruit that Mormonism bore in race relations. By examining 4 remarkable individuals at key points in the history of segregation, we may compare fruit and discover the lesson of Stewart Udall.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com17tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-59750207526139130622015-10-26T13:48:00.003-05:002015-12-02T14:28:24.219-06:00On LDS Historical Honesty/DishonestyLast week <a href="http://www.withoutend.org/stop-weve-lied-to-church/" target="_blank">Brian Whitney wrote a post</a> which did a fine job of telling the hi<i>story</i> behind the telling of LDS history. It's well worth the read. The original title distracted from the solid content, suggesting it was imperative to take a stand on whether or not we've been lied to by the Church. Wisely, the title was changed to: "<a href="http://www.withoutend.org/stop-weve-lied-to-church/" target="_blank">History vs Heritage: Maybe We Should Stop Saying That We’ve Been Lied to by the Church</a>". (I personally would have titled it something like "<i>History vs Heritage: the Hi</i>story<i> behind LDS History</i>," because I think it solidly explains how church leaders who preferred the "heritage approach" prevailed over over those who preferred a "historical approach" and how we now find ourselves paying the price during the internet age, even as the Church has shifted toward the historical approach.<br />
<br />
The debate of whether or not we've been "lied to" really was another issue altogether, and naturally much more controversial. Nevertheless, much of the discussion has steered in that direction. So be it. I believe in open dialogue and <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/i-will-not-seek-to-compel-any-man-to.html" target="_blank">the value of letting thoughtful opinions be heard</a>. We mustn't shy away from hard conversations just because they're hard, nor assume that disagreement equates to contention. Ralph Waldo Emmerson spoke a profound truth when he said: <i>“Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.” </i>Likewise, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/10/a-hugh-b-brown-benediction.html" target="_blank">Hugh B. Brown</a> spoke a profound truth when he said we should "respect the opinions of others, but we should also be unafraid to dissent–if we are informed. <b>Thoughts and expressions compete in the marketplace of thought, and in that competition truth emerges triumphant</b>. Only error fears freedom of expression."<br />
<br />
While many of the loudest Mormon or Ex-Mormon voices tend to gravitate to either extreme poles of complete adulation of church leaders or complete disaffection with church leaders, I find it far more wise (and compassionate) to strive to exist between either extreme by looking for both positive things to say but also expressing valid and constructive criticism. <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/10/the-general-conference-buffet-both-good.html" target="_blank">Emily Grover recently shared a great F. Scott Fitzgerald quote</a>: “<i>The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function</i>.” <i>That, </i>I believe<i>, </i>is what most of us middle-way Mormons strive for. <br />
<br />
Whether middle-way Mormons attend church because the church is "true" <i>for them,</i> or whether they attend church despite the fact they no longer believe in such a thing as a "one and only true church," they tend to have an <a href="http://athoughtfulfaith.org/096-hard-to-stay-harder-to-leave/" target="_blank">‘eye’s and hearts wide open approach’</a> to the Mormon community. We <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/11/what-sustaining-our-leaders-really-means.html" target="_blank">sustain and show compassion for our leaders</a> not because we believe they're always wise and inspired, but rather because <b>they deserve love and support even if we believe they're wrong and more fallible than they themselves realize</b>. The following guest post comes from such a middle-way Mormon, writing in response to <a href="http://www.withoutend.org/stop-weve-lied-to-church/" target="_blank">Brian Whitney's "Heritage vs History" post</a>. It too is a valuable read. The author, who expresses both appreciation and <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/05/decalogue-for-dissenters.html" target="_blank">dissent</a>, requested for his name to be withheld:<br />
<div>
<div>
<blockquote>
First off, I would like to say how thoroughly impressed I was with the post. It was well laid out, very thoughtful and it included a lot of historical context, which is helpful in understanding how we find ourselves in this position. The title to the article was sensational, but the content was very sincere and well put together. As I read it, I felt that I gained insight to Brian’s perspective. I agree the issue is complex, however I disagree with Brian’s opinion. I do agree with his assertion that the current leadership were raised on black and white thinking, and it is likely that they believed suppression of the truth was helpful in keeping the faithful, faithful. What I loved most about the article was that it spoke to me as if I was an adult, capable of understanding complex topics. As I read it I couldn’t help but think, why wasn’t this written by the brethren? I respect Brian’s opinion, for those of you who care I want to share my opinion of why I disagree with him. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
I will start with <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics/essays?lang=eng" target="_blank">the essays</a>. To me the way the church has handled <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics/essays?lang=eng" target="_blank">these essays</a> is dishonest. It’s been nearly three years since they started silently placing them on the internet, unsigned and anonymous. It’s unsettling because it goes entirely against how the church does everything else. This organization is masterful at getting information to members, and the world, that they want to be heard. Have you heard about “Meet the Mormons”, what about the “Family Proclamation”, or the “Church’s stance on gay marriage”? The fact that the majority of members still don’t even know they exist, and those that do, haven’t read them, boggles my mind. I have several friends who are actually afraid to read them. I get it, it’s a red pill, blue pill type of thing, and lots of people opt for the blue pill.<br />
<br />
I’ve been in the faith crisis coming up on a year now. That means I have gone through two conferences in my current unbelieving state. Instead of hearing talks addressing the hard issues, and genuine logical responses to these hard issues, I have heard attacks on doubters, and Elder Uchtdorf telling me to stay off the internet. The pompous way they stand there with their brows furrowed, shoulders shrugged, arms raised, shaking their heads at how one could be so stupid to allow Satan to lead them into doubt, all while never acknowledging these essays exist, speaks volumes to me about their character. I see them use fear as their main weapon of choice. The fear of losing friends and family, is real, it is powerful. I will acknowledge that there have been positive messages in these conferences, but these are the talks that focus on universal kindness. Something that the LDS church does not have a patent on. A main theme [among middle-way Mormons] is to take the messages that resonate with you and leave the others behind. This is something I struggle with, the condescending tone of the brethren regarding doubt, renders all of their other words useless and hollow to me. I only wish they could speak to me as an adult, like Brian did in his article.<br />
<br />
My second point of focus is on <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2011/09/prophetic-expectations.html" target="_blank">the role of a prophet</a>. As a young missionary I read the book “Our Search for Happiness” by M Russell Ballard. I loved the book. Two stories from the book resonated with me. Elder Ballard was asked the question as a mission president, “what separates your church from the others?” Elder Ballard replied, roughly “If Moses were coming to town and was going to speak, would you be interested in what he had to say? Well we have a modern prophet just like Moses that speaks for God today.” That was powerful for me at the time, it made sense. Of course if Moses was in town we would all want to hear what he had to say. Of course we had a prophet just like Moses on earth today.<br />
<br />
He also tells the incredible experience of his grandfather’s (it could be his father, I honestly can’t remember now) meeting the savior. He called it a sacred experience, but one he felt was appropriate to share in this book. I remember reading this account and hoping that one day I could have that experience. It also followed logically that if Elder Ballard’s grandfather had seen the savior, then of course all of the brethren and the prophet had seen him. This book was in the missionary library. All good missionaries were supposed to read it. I believe this story was placed in the book to lead us all to the conclusion that the brethren speak with God. We all want to believe that this church is being led by something more than just feelings. We all want to believe that the prophet is receiving direct face to face counsel with the Lord just like Moses, and Joseph Smith. Stories like this, conference addresses where the brethren refer to each other as the Lords anointed, and even the word prophet, denotes a communication with God that is more than just feelings. The brethren are implying to everyone that they talk with God. The company line now, is that these experiences are just too sacred to share. I believe they have taken this stance so they can feel better about not lying. If these men were honest they would tell us if they had actually seen the Savior or not. When you begin to think more critically, it becomes very difficult to accept 150 years of racist and sexist policies when it was the savior in charge all the time.<br />
<br />
Small point on this one, apologists love to cite Russell Nelson’s 1992 talk to mission presidents where he mentions the stone in the hat. Somehow they think this example shows that the church has always been open and honest about its past, to me, this does exactly the opposite. How do you explain Russell Nelson not correcting this image being portrayed incorrectly in literally every instance where the church portrayed it? Blaming the artists is dishonest to my intelligence.<br />
<br />
Lastly I would cite the movie “Joseph Smith Prophet of the Restoration”. Apologists love to cite <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics/essays?lang=eng" target="_blank">the essays</a> and the <a href="http://josephsmithpapers.org/" target="_blank">Joseph Smith Papers</a> project as proof of the new openness of the church. This movie was first made in 2006 and then redone in 2011, long after the Joseph Smith Papers Project was well underway. If you haven’t watched this movie I highly recommend it. If after watching it you can’t see the dishonesty in it, we will have to simply agree to disagree.<br />
<br />
I realize that all of this is just my opinion so take it for what it’s worth, but I believe the church has, and is, currently being dishonest with me. I know most of these men probably really believe what they are saying. However, these men lived through the 60’s & 70’s with the Tanners, (I’ve met Sandra Tanner, lovely woman) the 80’s with Mark Hoffman, the 90’s with the September Six. They know the issues. If they had good answers we would have heard them by now. The truth, in my opinion, is that they have no good answers, so they assassinate the character of those who dare speak the truth, and belittle the intelligence of those who dare to doubt.</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-48256318651513256382015-10-19T16:33:00.000-05:002015-12-02T14:29:56.526-06:00The General Conference Buffet: Both Good AND Bad<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUqTkF5WbZMQJ23H9s5GLvaJ1PkyN2AxEMDI1skDS4Wih7li0eZ31_VCpXkLyNZWXsyoxvagTBGfEr5fHeQhcDqmeA72X0-kd3O0atp3SSlLuV4dbqSIPlYDzXp4H9cR-wD0RlCggAOYAG/s1600/we+ALL+pick+and+choose.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUqTkF5WbZMQJ23H9s5GLvaJ1PkyN2AxEMDI1skDS4Wih7li0eZ31_VCpXkLyNZWXsyoxvagTBGfEr5fHeQhcDqmeA72X0-kd3O0atp3SSlLuV4dbqSIPlYDzXp4H9cR-wD0RlCggAOYAG/s1600/we+ALL+pick+and+choose.jpeg" /></a></div>
I really tried--<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/10/lds-general-conference-is-greatexcept.html" target="_blank">God knows I tried</a>--to not let my skeptical side taint my desire to simply focus on the good and the positive. But implicit in <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/10/lds-general-conference-is-greatexcept.html" target="_blank">my last post where I referred to General Conference as a "buffet"</a> is the fact that <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/peculiarpeople/2013/11/in-praise-of-cafeteria-mormonism/" target="_blank">we <i>all</i> pick and choose</a> from multiple offerings what we individually find most appetizing. And sometimes we overdo it and get sick.<br />
<br />
This <a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/sessions/2015/10?lang=eng" target="_blank">General Conference</a> started great for me. The music and President Uchtdorf's opening message to <a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/10/it-works-wonderfully?lang=eng" target="_blank">simplify</a> was spot on. It was refreshing to have him remind the Church to "focus on 'the simplicity that is in Christ' and allow His grace to lift and carry us" rather than get bogged down by the behemoth of the institutional church. Not as refreshing was the implied <a href="http://zelphontheshelf.com/why-is-everyone-so-afraid-of-the-internet/" target="_blank">fear of the internet</a>, especially when the faith crisis of many a church member begins not from being <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Bamboozled-CES-Letter-Michael-Ash-ebook/dp/B015HTU8GE" target="_blank">bamboozled by the CES Letter</a> but because they feel bamboozled by the Church itself after encountering <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics/essays?lang=eng" target="_blank">the Church's own online historical essays</a>. Many awaken to the realization that they hadn't been given the whole story until the internet forced the Church to become more transparent. Case in point: art commissioned by the church on the left versus art actually closer to the <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-translation?lang=eng" target="_blank">real history now acknowledged by the church</a> on the right:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgF7aIwFFZD8d4ULJ8HmDxdpRGmbpbEpncZkShD9T6LThYO3lTCicKlK-M0hS4sbog_zu5IiV7mi88PjhADTwPdpPRqOMrTYSH5ns9Qc4TkCHIfsA5_4UTbWEXmHyxLWLwKqKEtDy_DqAyx/s1600/Art+depicting+translation.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="452" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgF7aIwFFZD8d4ULJ8HmDxdpRGmbpbEpncZkShD9T6LThYO3lTCicKlK-M0hS4sbog_zu5IiV7mi88PjhADTwPdpPRqOMrTYSH5ns9Qc4TkCHIfsA5_4UTbWEXmHyxLWLwKqKEtDy_DqAyx/s640/Art+depicting+translation.JPG" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
It's not that there was some vast conspiracy, but there was deception leading to really bad history. The folks in charge who favored a <a href="http://www.withoutend.org/stop-weve-lied-to-church/" target="_blank">"heritage" approach rather than "historical"</a> approach won out, and then the internet age happened and we're paying the consequences now. (I would like to believe those leaders would’ve changed their minds if they could have actually looked into the future of the internet age and see what consequences we’re paying collectively as a church by going with that approach. But of course that would have taken the actual gift of seer-ship. <a href="http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2015/08/how-we-know-thomas-monson-is-prophet.html" target="_blank">Today we sustain them to be the guys to seek such gifts, but typically we don't enjoy the actual fruits of those gifts.)</a><br />
<br />
I was, however, delighted that in revisiting the Old Ship Zion analogy I actually sensed progress from Elder Ballard. I felt like he had actually read or heard feedback about my post "<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/12/on-being-seasick-while-staying-in-boat.html" target="_blank">On Being Seasick While Staying In The Boat</a>" after his last conference talk. In addition, <a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/10/god-is-at-the-helm?lang=eng" target="_blank">version 2.0</a> was arguably an unprecedented acknowledgement of apostolic fallibility. I saw this as a very positive sign for the <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-churchs-cardinal-sin-of-blasphemy_28.html" target="_blank">Mormon culture still desperately in need of repentance for its idolatry of infallible leadership</a>.<br />
<br />
However, soon after the afternoon session commenced, I felt embarrassed--even mad--that I had allowed myself to get my hopes up with such <a href="http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/scholars-predicting-historical-mormon-leadership-decision/article_e47b688c-ea61-589d-8317-32a98807d9a6.html" target="_blank">a historic opportunity</a> to call in some diversity among the three open positions among the Twelve, only to be stunned as three white men from Utah were called. Again. I confess my initial reaction was a big letdown. I even confess I was too stunned to enjoy much of the rest of the session. The good news is, like <a href="http://janariess.religionnews.com/2015/10/05/naming-of-3-new-mormon-apostles-raises-questions-about-race-international-diversity/" target="_blank">Jana</a> and <a href="http://www.feministmormonhousewives.org/2015/10/the-new-apostles-soul-mates-maybe-not/" target="_blank">Kalani</a> and others, I've already found lots of good about them and their commitment to compassion--especially <a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/10/through-gods-eyes?lang=eng" target="_blank">Elder Renlund</a> and <a href="http://www.mormonwomen.com/2010/05/12/just-call-me-ruth/" target="_blank">his wife</a>--and there's no question that I'll sustain all of them, keeping in mind <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/11/what-sustaining-our-leaders-really-means.html" target="_blank">what sustaining really means</a>. Nevertheless, despite great international growth, this remains a predominantly white Utah church led by white Utah men. This is particularly jarring in light of our <a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/topics/thoughts-on-race-in-mormon-history/the-stewart-udall-sequence/" target="_blank">indefensible and embarrassing racial history</a>.<br />
<br />
Elder Anderson may be Joseph Smith's biggest cheerleader these days. Last conference he called Joseph Smith "<a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/10/joseph-smith?lang=eng" target="_blank">a holy man, a righteous man</a>" even though Joseph Smith himself is on record saying "<a href="http://www.boap.org/LDS/Parallel/1843/21May43.html" target="_blank">I don't want you to think I am very righteous, for I am not very righteous</a>." This conference he recommended we "give Joseph a break" at which point I began to wonder if Elder Anderson is capable of demonstrating any sympathy for those of us who no longer hold to a white-washed and correlated <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2008/01/my-paradigm-shift.html" target="_blank">paradigm of the prophet</a>. History and truth require more than revisionist cheerleading or the <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-puzzle-of-polygamy_23.html" target="_blank">dismissal of actual facts</a>.<br />
<br />
Russell M. Nelson's <a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/10/a-plea-to-my-sisters?lang=eng" target="_blank">plea for women's voices to be heard</a> was significant, though many have pointed out the irony that such few women are asked to speak in General Conference. But I love that he explicitly told women over the pulpit as President of the Quorum of the Twelve: "We need your strength, your conversion, your conviction, your ability to lead, your wisdom, and your voices." Of course this comes a little too late for <a href="http://ordainwomen.org/" target="_blank">Ordain Women</a> founder Kate Kelly who was excommunicated for trying to do just that, but it was a great message--and <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2010/12/womens-place_10.html" target="_blank">much welcomed by this male Mormon feminist</a> (yours truly) even if <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/09/some-thoughts-on-constitution-day.html" target="_blank">I personally am ready for them to go further.</a><br />
<br />
All in all, as Conference came to a close, I found myself at a loss for words. I struggled to articulate how I could feel both inspired but also sickened by the very same conference--sometimes by the very same talk. Thankfully, I no longer need to struggle to find the right words because Emily Grover has done it for me--quite beautifully I might add--with this thoughtful post: "<a href="http://bycommonconsent.com/2015/10/12/recovering-my-sea-legs-on-the-old-ship-zion/" target="_blank">Recovering My Sea Legs on the Old Ship Zion</a>." An excerpt:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
My Facebook feed is glutted with polarized responses to the recent General Conference: on the one hand, conference memes are ubiquitous to the point of becoming trite and status updates affect unparalleled enthusiasm for every conference talk; on the other, status updates bicker and criticize, nit-picking at all perceived weaknesses in the talks and the selected speakers. Despite how my feed implies that there are but two poles—unquestioning acceptance or critical outrage—I find myself agreeing with and being repulsed by both corners. I feel like I can’t publicly express gratitude for Elder Nelson’s or Elder Holland’s talks on women, because by doing so I might be seen as ignoring the fact that only 5 of the 39 speakers in this last conference were female (and 3 of those 5 spoke in the Women’s General Broadcast). I want to celebrate Elder Nelson’s call for women to “speak up and speak out,” but in the same breath I also want to argue that this message would have been more convincing had more women actually been invited to speak up and out during this conference. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote that “<i>The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function</i>.” I use this quotation to teach critical thinking to college freshmen, but it seems suitable to my testimony these days, too. <b>Why shouldn’t I let myself see through multiple perspectives at once? Why shouldn’t I be bothered by the lack of a woman’s presence in baby blessing circles while still being able to appreciate the love and beauty already inherent in the current practice? Why shouldn’t I be disappointed that the three new apostles called are all white men born in Utah while still being able to love and sustain these good men in their overwhelmingly selfless and life-changing callings? Why shouldn’t I be inspired, uplifted, and elevated by the same conference talks that also bother me?</b></blockquote>
<div>
I absolutely concur with that. And I also just want to add an "amen" to her conclusion:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
What will help many members desirous of staying in the boat in spite of their seasickness is if there is <b>more room for discourse within the mainstream conversations of the church that would allow for questions, concerns, discomfort, pain, and frustrations</b>. I think <b>many members trying to hold on will find their legs miraculously strengthened beneath them just by being listened to and understood, by having their questions and concerns validated</b>. In return, it would be good for those of us yearning for changes in the church to <b>remove those filters that keep us from perceiving what is still already light and good and true before us</b>. Our collective efforts could carve a larger space more conducive for minds that, like Fitzgerald’s, can work amid dissonance: a space that would encompass the fruitful, compromising middle grounds between the poles of dogmatic orthodoxy and full-on dissent. I would love to take my journey on a boat like that.</blockquote>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-90215453396829049342015-10-01T21:11:00.002-05:002015-12-02T15:10:44.071-06:00LDS General Conference Is Great...Except For The Bad Parts<div class="p1">
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirbU9MqdFvHSnUMq4dSrxgIb7b_3LNpUkyb7KlkqsfE4x5K4hU7awNhqyV3NS2CoReD2sNXRUp7IFTZa4rZtV2In0CYsyFu_e0NDw2F-Vaj0UeLVjinLUEM_zQ0Oj16a7tqrmgaNMOMHIy/s640/blogger-image--1142136680.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirbU9MqdFvHSnUMq4dSrxgIb7b_3LNpUkyb7KlkqsfE4x5K4hU7awNhqyV3NS2CoReD2sNXRUp7IFTZa4rZtV2In0CYsyFu_e0NDw2F-Vaj0UeLVjinLUEM_zQ0Oj16a7tqrmgaNMOMHIy/s400/blogger-image--1142136680.jpg" width="306" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="font-size: 12.8px;">A metaphor for the Church itself?</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
</div>
<br />
Most Mormons view General Conference as quite a treat--I generally do. It's a special treat to stay home and watch conference in my pajamas on my comfortable leather couch. It's also a treat to spend uninterrupted hours with my family while seeking goodness, truth, and inspiration. For me personally, that goodness and inspiration comes most often in the form of the music we hear in General Conference. My experience has been that General Conference music is routinely exceptional--sometimes even <i>supernal </i>(a word sometimes used in conjunction with General Conference.) And from time to time there are a few talks that even reach that point for me. For example, these four from our last General Conference:<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/the-music-of-the-gospel?lang=eng" target="_blank"><i>The Music of the Gospel</i></a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/on-being-genuine?lang=eng" target="_blank"><i>On Being Genuine</i></a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/returning-to-faith?lang=eng" target="_blank"><i>Returning to Faith</i></a></li>
<li><a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/the-gift-of-grace?lang=eng" target="_blank"><i>The Gift of Grace</i></a></li>
</ul>
Of the latter I could hardly wait to blog about how it<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/grace-like-oasis-in-desert.html" target="_blank"> was itself a grace to me, like an oasis in the desert</a>. I'm well aware, however, that since we all bring different background knowledge, experience, and even different lenses with us to General Conference, a "great" message to one can fall flat for another. This was brought home to me recently when my brother shared a talk he liked from that same conference in our family group text--<a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/10/which-way-do-you-face?lang=eng" target="_blank"><i>Which Way Do You Face?</i></a>. I didn't want to be a Debbie Downer, but my first instinct was to cringe and think of the Mormonad above. I decided, in the interest of fairness, I should re-read the talk to give it a second chance. There was, indeed, more relatively good stuff than I had remembered. My memory had only held onto the parts that had caused me concern. More on this in a minute.<br />
<br />
First a disclaimer. I know most people aren't accustomed to watching General Conference like a film critic watches a movie, but it's a natural occupational hazard for those of us who've<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/05/where-truth-flies-you-follow-if-you-are.html" target="_blank"> undergone a faith transition/transformation</a>. I like the term "transformation" because I think of the metaphor of the caterpillar in its cocoon. The transformation can initially feel dark and lonely but like a butterfly, my personal faith came out on the other end more nuanced, colorful, and even beautiful. I admit it can be frustrating at times still when I encounter those who think I should act more like a caterpillar than the butterfly that's since taken flight.<br />
<br />
I still use both my "<a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/8.2?lang=eng" target="_blank">mind and heart</a>" in order to discern inspiration amongst the hours we spend in the buffet of messages known as General Conference. It's just that I can't quite bring myself to share in the same joy expressed by others who view everything in General Conference as "modern day revelation." My standard for "revelation" is much higher than that, and I would argue that Joseph Smith set the bar pretty high by publishing his revelations for all the world to see. Of course, one could claim that the LDS Church publishes the Ensign magazine for all the world to see, but what<i> I</i> clearly see is a <i>huge</i> difference between the revelations published in the Standard Works and what's published in the Ensign. Considering how little we Latter-day Saints have added to our "open" cannon since Joseph's day (at least the Brighamite branch of the Restoration movement), <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-prophet-is-not-always-prophet-only.html" target="_blank">perhaps the "revelation" bar is <i>too</i> high for today's "prophets, seers, and revelators."</a><br />
<br />
That's not to say that I can't enjoy goodness and inspiration in General Conference. It's just harder when I can't automatically take it all in as equally inspired. <b>There's a lot of "good" in my church sundae, to be sure. But there's some <a href="http://www.wheatandtares.org/17936/does-the-church-need-an-intervention/" target="_blank">very conspicuous "bad" that I cannot simply ignore</a>. </b><br />
<br />
As <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2011/01/let-them-worship-how-where-or-what-they.html" target="_blank">I follow the dictates of my conscience</a>, I choose to magnify my individual responsibility to discern if what I'm hearing over the pulpit at any given time actually represents the mind and will of God. <b>It's not an easy job, and naturally it's a subjective process, but all religion is subjective--<i>all of it.</i> And religion isn't supposed to be easy. It's supposed to <i>challenge</i> us, <i>change</i> us, and <i>transform</i> us into more compassionate beings--not passive sheep.</b><br />
<div>
<br />
Neither am I passive while watching General Conference. <b>Sometimes there are sermons meant to challenge us, and sometimes there are sermons that ought to be challenged</b>. And as I read over the sermon my brother had recommended I found things that indeed resonated with me and that I generally found inspiring. This quote, for example, was great and still resonates with me: <i>"Trying to please others before pleasing God is inverting the first and second great commandments."</i> That's great advice to put God first over other men/women, and I include in that even institutions such as the LDS Church.<br />
<br />
But I also found some things that caused me concern. The first cringe moment came in the form of a quote by the late Boyd K. Packer: “<i>A Seventy does not represent the people to the prophet but the prophet to the people. Never forget which way you face</i>!” This viewpoint is one of a top-down-only hierarchy--a viewpoint which happens to be one of the things I least like about the current institutional church. That top-down-only attitude completely misses an opportunity to have good counsel between everybody else not already in the leadership-hierarchy flow chart. It also contradicts the way things are supposed to work at the local level in terms of ward and stake councils.<br />
<div>
<div class="p2">
<br />
But I had stronger reservations with this part: <i>"Thinking one can please God and at the same time condone the disobedience of men isn’t neutrality but duplicity, or being two-faced or trying to “serve two masters” (Matthew 6:24; 3 Nephi 13:24). </i><b>The </b><a href="http://rationalfaiths.com/putting-stones/" target="_blank"><b>obsession with making clear what you condemn or condone in others gets in the way of true compassion</b>, and I believe that can be sin in and of itself</a>. I don't accept the false dichotomy that you're either "for us or against us", the conflation of prophets with God (implied throughout), and also the preoccupation with righteousness and purity. <br />
<br />
While Mormons traditionally place much emphasis on righteousness and purity, Jesus himself was historically subversive to the righteousness/purity system of the contemporary religious establishment. I saw this very clearly while reading Marcus Borg's <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Meeting-Jesus-Again-First-Time/dp/0060609176" target="_blank"><i>Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time: The Historical Jesus and the Heart of Contemporary Faith</i></a>. "<b>Compassion, not holiness, is the dominant quality of God, and is therefore to be the ethos of the community that mirrors God</b>" (Borg, p. 54.) In other words, "<b>an interpretation of scripture faithful to Jesus and the early Christian movement sees the Bible through the lens of compassion, not purity.</b>" Borg uses a specific example on page 59:</div>
<div class="p1">
<div class="p1">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="s1">I am convinced that much of the strongly negative attitude toward homosexuality on the part of some Christians has arisen because, in addition to whatever nonreligious homophobic reasons may be involved, homosexuality is seen (often unconsciously) as a purity issue. For these Christians, there's something "dirty" about it, boundaries are being crossed, things are being put together that do not belong together, and so forth. Indeed, homosexuality was a purity issue in ancient Judaism. The prohibition against it is found in the purity laws of the book of Leviticus.</span> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="s1">It seems to me that the shattering of purity boundaries by both Jesus and Paul should also apply to the purity code's perception of homosexuality. Homosexual behavior should therefore be evaluated by the same criteria as heterosexual behavior. It also seems to me that <a href="http://biblehub.com/galatians/3-28.htm" target="_blank">the passage [Galatians 3:28] in which Paul negates the other central polarities of his world</a> also means, "In Christ, there is neither straight nor gay." Granted, Paul didn't say that, but the logic of "life in the spirit" and the ethos of compassion imply it.</span></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"></span></div>
When I watch General Conference now, I can't help but take issue with various "purity" interpretations. For example, from the same talk my brother sent: <i>"Lowering the Lord’s standards to the level of a society’s inappropriate behavior is—apostasy." </i><br />
<br />
<b>Let me be clear: I have no problem accepting that the Lord has standards that are unchanging and wise. However, our human <i>understanding</i> of the Lord's standards is imperfect and is always filtered through a human brain</b>. History teaches that we've been wrong about His will before. And history doesn't hide the fact that <b>sometimes regular Mormons have greater insight into truth than those sustained as "prophets, seers, and revelators." [See <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/useful-or-not-i-value-truth-over.html" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/topics/thoughts-on-race-in-mormon-history/the-stewart-udall-sequence/" target="_blank">especially here</a>, for example.]</b> Our <i>understanding</i> of the Lord's will and His standards constantly evolve and change as we receive greater light and knowledge. And hopefully our <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOZgVBDlCE0&sns=em" target="_blank">moral conscience continues to evolve</a>.<br />
<br />
Elder Robbins also makes his own definition of apostasy, and my personal concern is that his statement of what constitutes "apostasy" will be used as ammunition to expel <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/05/decalogue-for-dissenters.html" target="_blank">dissenters</a> like me from the body of Christ, not to mention if it even aligns with <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/06/if-you-could-ask-first-presidency_3.html" target="_blank">the explanation of apostasy given recently by the First Presidency of the Church</a>.<br />
<br />
Last point of concern: "<i>When others demand approval in defiance of God’s commandments, may we always remember whose disciples we are.</i>"<br />
<br />
The problem for me isn't forgetting that I'm first and foremost a disciple of Christ/God; <b>the problem is that "God's commandments" have always been interpreted and declared by imperfect human filters, and fallible men often misinterpret/mistake the Divine will</b>. I remember like it was yesterday a General Conference five years ago where I surprised myself by reflexively shouting "That's not right!" as soon as President Packer shared a personal opinion about how homosexuality fit into God's plan. His talk was edited by the time it came out in the print version a few days later.<br />
<br />
It's my opinion (and I'm entitled to my own opinion) that just as the Church now "<a href="https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng" target="_blank">disavows the theories advanced in the past</a>" (such as that interracial marriage was a sin, which was declared to be <a href="http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/topics/thoughts-on-race-in-mormon-history/the-stewart-udall-sequence/" target="_blank">"doctrine" according to some general authorities</a> in the not too distant past), I personally believe there will come a day when the future Church disavows current teachings that being a happily married gay person was a "sin." Of all people, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/polygamy-was-not-is-not-and-never-will.html" target="_blank">Mormons with a messy polygamous past</a> probably shouldn't be painting with such a broad brush as though we've figured out the full picture clearly.<br />
<br />
I <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/11/what-sustaining-our-leaders-really-means.html" target="_blank">love the Brethren</a>, but I disagree that there are no acceptable ways to act on one's homosexuality without it being inherently sinful. My love for the Brethren is not conditional based on whether I agree or disagree with them about homosexuality. <b>I think Mormons who believe that the Church's current stance is "right" deserve for me to show them true love and compassion, regardless of the fact that I disagree with the Church's current stance.</b> It's easier to love people who think like you. But that's why I personally think I need the Church in my life, not because I always think alike, but because I need to learn to love people who are radically different than me.<br />
<br />
Of course, ultimately we're all more alike than we are different, whether in or out of the Church. <b>People historically have killed each other over believing the "right" dogma or over behavior deemed "inappropriate" in God's eyes. That's a shame. I believe we mustn't let dogma get in the way of love. Compassion must always come first</b>. Love can be the bridge between people who disagree on dogma (and is preferable than killing, shaming, or even excommunicating people over differences in belief.)<br />
<br />
In the mean time, drawing these artificial lines in the sand causes real pain and harm. <b>I believe it to be imperative that we be more focused on inclusiveness and compassion over righteousness and exclusivity.</b> Our differences in belief don't need to matter when we focus on loving each other through Christ's compassionate lens. <b>I hope we can all agree that Christ's main message is one of love and compassion rather than judging others according to our church's current standard of "sin."</b><br />
<br />
<b>Because I believe, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/05/a-liahona-latter-day-saint.html" target="_blank">with Richard Poll</a>, "that everyone, including Paul and other prophets, sees eternity 'through a glass darkly' (<a href="http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/13-12.htm">l Cor. 13:12</a>), prophetic infallibility, scriptural inerrancy and unquestioning obedience are not elements of my faith." And that's why I approach General Conference the way I do.</b> If one were to just assume that what we're hearing in General Conference <i>automatically</i> represents the mind and will of God, one is primed to be led astray. Despite frequent assurances that Mormon prophets can't lead us <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2010/12/on-church-and-being-lead-astray.html" target="_blank">astray</a>, history proves that myth wrong. The scriptures themselves prove <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2013/05/terryl-givens-on-prophetic-mantle-myth.html" target="_blank">the myth of infallibility wrong</a>, yet in spite of common sense, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-churchs-cardinal-sin-of-blasphemy_28.html" target="_blank">many Mormons continue to imply infallibility without even realizing it--with very striking consequences</a>. <b>Our shared fallibility makes embracing compassion and grace all the more important. </b><br />
<br />
So yes, church really is great, <a href="http://www.wheatandtares.org/17936/does-the-church-need-an-intervention/" target="_blank">except for the bad parts</a>. We can't expect perfection when <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-church-is-made-up-entirely-of-human.html" target="_blank">the church is made up entirely of human beings</a>. We need to be supportive of each other, especially in our weakness. <span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Last spring I participated in </span>a <span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">podcast interview </span>about my current faith and some of the difficulties I face within the institutional church. (If you're interested in listening, my segment's in part one of episode <a href="http://athoughtfulfaith.org/096-hard-to-stay-harder-to-leave/" target="_blank">096: <i>Hard to Stay – Harder to Leave</i></a> and begins at the 29:10 minute mark.) A friend of mine who found the "A Thoughtful Faith" podcast valuable transcribed a quote of mine. I thought I'd include it here for any who may question why I remain in the LDS Church feeling the way I do:</div>
<div class="p1">
<div class="p2">
<div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: -webkit-letterpress;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
There is something to be said of community. <b>I want to stay in the church because it is a support community of people trying to seek Christ. Not because it’s perfect, because it’s not. And not because it has all the truth, because it doesn’t. But because it can be a good support network to people who are trying to love each other and follow Christ. As long as that’s the case, it’s great. </b></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="s1" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">But when it starts to get an unhealthy over-emphasis on "<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2010/04/follow.html" target="_blank">follow the prophet, follow the prophet</a>" and all this other business like <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-doctrine-of-separate-but-equal.html" target="_blank">gender inequality</a> (that frustrates me and I wish we'd change quicker), then that makes it harder to stay. Especially <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/dear-elder-christofferson.html" target="_blank">I have hope on the LGBT issue</a> that the church will one day wake up and realize: "Hey, <b>the gospel includes everybody, the gospel is for everybody. Our church though--our policies--are keeping people away.</b> And we're going to continue to lose people and the church might just hollow out unless it adapts. But history gives me hope that it will adapt. It's just sometimes slow to adapt." [e</span>nds at <a href="http://athoughtfulfaith.org/096-hard-to-stay-harder-to-leave/" target="_blank">52:48</a>] </blockquote>
<b>Unapologetically I embrace whatever is good and I reject whatever causes harm. <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/mormonism-sausage-makers-religion.html" target="_blank">Mormonism is a sausage makers religion</a> and we each choose for ourselves what speaks to our conscience and what violates our conscience.</b> Whether in this church, another church, or no church at all--the bottom line is all the same. <b>The bottom line is learning to love everyone (even those radically different than ourselves) and serve and do some good</b>. I find that in this church. <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/12/on-being-seasick-while-staying-in-boat.html" target="_blank">It may not always be comfortable</a>, but I'm still onboard.<br />
<br />
Brigham Young once famously said of a great valley with a few bad parts: "<i>This is the right place. Drive on.</i>” That pretty much sums up how I currently feel about my membership in the institutional church. I particularly love how <a href="http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2014-fairmormon-conference/womans-church" target="_blank">Sharon Eubank put it last year</a>:</div>
</div>
<div class="p1">
<div class="p2">
<div class="p1">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>The right place doesn’t mean there is not going to be blinding salt flats and black crickets and all kinds of naysayers and killing frosts and all of those things. But it is still the right place. And I also think we ought to be probably driving on. Rolling up our sleeves and doing the thing that our doctrine allows us to do which is to say: Everybody is valuable. Everybody has unique individual gifts. The Lord’s plan allows for everybody to use their gifts. I can be respectful. I have responsibility to do it and I’m going to roll up my sleeves and go to work.</b></blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-33219705220147773122015-09-18T20:07:00.001-05:002015-12-02T14:32:47.019-06:00What I Wish We'd Hear In General Conference<div>
<i><a href="http://johnpavlovitz.com/2015/09/18/i-want-to-do-love-right/" target="_blank">This</a></i> is the testimony that rings most true to me now:</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>"My agenda now is fairly simple: I want my presence on the planet to result in less pain, less inequality, less poverty, less suffering, less damage for those sharing it with me. I want the sum total of my efforts to yield more compassion, more decency, more laughter, more justice, and more goodness than before I showed up. That’s it.</b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b>In other words: I just want to do Love right.</b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b>...And let’s not kid ourselves, most people know when they’re really being loved and when they been handed a lousy imitation with the same name—especially when it comes to religious people. I’ve come to believe that if someone’s color, gender, religion, ethnicity, or sexual orientation keeps you from fully loving them, you’re probably doing Love wrong."</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
-<a href="http://johnpavlovitz.com/2015/09/18/i-want-to-do-love-right/" target="_blank">-John Pavlovitz</a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjPsiF1eGR_n8sqs4ysh-nJnHk-FRCOXlpfKloz2-CroZLu5-ui0CILty2ol6mZc5JKvI0ina1dui82RqSyiIZUMah7yPmtYsBZcejcDUzJ-tPRcjKVVOSczJlmqsRnrtVqixJ29DNatlr/s640/blogger-image--1925536326.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjPsiF1eGR_n8sqs4ysh-nJnHk-FRCOXlpfKloz2-CroZLu5-ui0CILty2ol6mZc5JKvI0ina1dui82RqSyiIZUMah7yPmtYsBZcejcDUzJ-tPRcjKVVOSczJlmqsRnrtVqixJ29DNatlr/s640/blogger-image--1925536326.jpg" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-20401912222114587512015-09-17T20:15:00.001-05:002015-12-02T15:09:14.704-06:00Some thoughts on Constitution dayI'm still inspired by the three most important words that begin a masterful <a href="http://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/preamble/preamble" target="_blank">preamble</a>: "We the People."<br />
<br />
<div>
I'm likewise inspired by efforts to continually <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/04/on-race-and-racism.html" target="_blank">close the gap</a> between our ideals and our often painful reality. <br />
<br />
Suffice it to say I love our Constitution a whole lot more with the addition of the <a href="http://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution#" target="_blank">13th, 14th, 15th, and 19th amendments</a> than as it appeared on September 17, 1787.<br />
<br />
Similarly, I'm also <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/05/where-truth-flies-you-follow-if-you-are.html" target="_blank">inspired by much of what Mormonism has to offer</a>. Likewise, I'm also inspired by efforts to <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-doctrine-of-separate-but-equal.html" target="_blank">close the gap between our ideals and our reality</a>. Suffice it to say I love the LDS Church much better <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-puzzle-of-polygamy_23.html" target="_blank">post-polygamy</a> and <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/useful-or-not-i-value-truth-over.html" target="_blank">post-1978</a>, and I'll love it more in the sure future <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2010/12/womens-place_10.html" target="_blank">when my dream becomes a reality</a> and the scripture that says "<a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/26.33" target="_blank">all are alike unto God</a>"--both "<a href="http://whatwomenknow.org/all_are_alike/" target="_blank">male and female</a>"--is finally understood to mean that <i>all</i> can serve God in whatever capacity best suits their talents, gifts, and abilities, regardless of sex/gender.</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-58313280906448956442015-09-16T12:26:00.001-05:002015-12-02T14:37:38.679-06:00Musings of an Independent Mormon-Christian-Agnostic-Theist<i>A hodgepodge of thoughts about scripture, faith, and my conception of God (sparked by a question on my blog about accepting/rejecting scripture):</i><br />
<br />
I know there are some Christians who take every word in the Bible as though it literally is God speaking. I'm not that literal. Sometimes scripture can challenge us, and sometimes we must challenge scripture.<br />
<br />
“The word of God” has always been communicated and mediated through human filters. It naturally follows from that realization that some of the words we've canonized are not God’s words at all, but rather the words of men speaking in their weakness and cultural contexts--as well as their biases.<br />
<br />
The Bible says all kinds of horrible things that men attribute to God. Just look at the Old Testament. How comfortable are you <i>really</i> with the god of the Old Testament? (Especially compared to the god of the New Testament.) On a good day the god of the Old Testament is indifferent. On a bad day he is angry and on a really bad day he is genocidal. Though you have to search it out, you can find the loving God in the OT ("my hand is outstretched still") but it's a matter of discerning for yourself which scripture is most inspired and the more accurate depiction of God.<br />
<div>
<br />
Leviticus says divorce is an abomination, eating shrimp and shellfish is an abomination and the punishment for them is stoning. It also says <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/search/label/Homosexuality" target="_blank">homosexuality</a> is an abomination. Yet we mortals pick and choose which scriptures we want to emphasize, accept (either literally or metaphorically) or use to beat others up with.<br />
<br />
I can’t accept all scripture as equally inspired. Much of it rings true and resonates with my conscience and inspires me to love God and my fellow man more and better. <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/i-will-not-seek-to-compel-any-man-to.html">Some of it sets off alarm bells</a>, which helps me recognize through Spirit what is good and true and whether it represents God. I believe each individual has the responsibility to discern for themselves, through the Spirit, truth from error--even in the scriptures. And even then, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/mormonism-sausage-makers-religion.html" target="_blank">that's a subjective (and often messy) process</a>.<br />
<br />
Honestly, most of the time it's not even that I choose to accept or reject individual scriptures; rather, it's about the lens I (or we) use to interpret scripture. Various Christian denominations have long disagreed about interpretation of scripture--even among themselves. <b>I'm in the camp that believes the most important lens Jesus showed we must ultimately use to look at scripture is the lens of compassion (and the primary commandments to love God and love our neighbor as ourselves.)</b> If what we read insults our conscience (genocide, rape, or any other gory details that men did, supposedly in the name of God) then that is a good sign it doesn't likely reflect the compassionate God worthy of our worship.<br />
<br />
Some people think in black and white terms that you either accept all scripture as inerrant or it cannot be trusted at all. I say that's ridiculous. There is no such thing as an inerrant or infallible standard to discern the mind and will of God. It doesn't exist. So faith--<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/07/on-authentic-truth-and-authentic-faith.html" target="_blank">authentic faith</a>--is filled with all kinds of uncertainty. Uncertainty makes some people really uncomfortable so they come up with all kinds of crazy apologetic arguments with which they cloth themselves to comfort themselves. As for me, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/05/where-truth-flies-you-follow-if-you-are.html" target="_blank">I've learned to be comfortable with uncertainty and ambiguity and lean into that vulnerability rather than run from it.</a> <b>When all is said and done, it actually makes me more humble and compassionate to realize we're all in the same boat trying our best to follow our God-given moral compass. We're no better than anyone else; we're all in need of the same grace.</b><br />
<br />
While some Mormons might take comfort in thinking this proves the need for prophets, the thing I've come to see is that <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-prophet-is-not-always-prophet-only.html" target="_blank">prophets are just as fallible as anyone else</a>. (And <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/useful-or-not-i-value-truth-over.html">I can name some specific examples</a> of times when instead of clearing things up, they muddied the waters even more. Hence why I put more faith and trust in individually going directly to the Source.)<br />
<br />
History has led me to <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2011/09/prophetic-expectations.html">lower my expectations of prophet-leaders</a>, since they've arguably been wrong and misled on as many big issues as they've been right. Regardless of one's beliefs or expectations of prophets (whether very modest or completely unrealistic), one cannot escape the individual work of discerning/confirming for yourself that what you're reading/hearing actually represents the Divine will or not. One must never go on autopilot and outsource that responsibility at any time to any other individual. When all is said and done, I still like what <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/06/the-beauty-of-owning-our-own-post.html">Brent Beal wrote</a>: </div>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I suspect that what we do with our individual autonomy will matter more to God than how well we follow directions. <b>For me it comes down to whether or not I believe God wants us to paint by the numbers or to paint our own pictures?</b> As parents, what do we value more from our four-year-olds? A paint-by-the-numbers portrait identical to what’s on the box, or a free-spirited 'Look, Mom, this is you and Dad in a rocket ship with a cow!' masterpiece?</blockquote>
</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-2153929124569543082015-08-23T10:55:00.001-05:002015-12-02T14:38:30.280-06:00Brené Brown on Faith"Faith minus vulnerability and mystery equals extremism. If you've got all the answers, then don't call what you do 'faith'."<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: start;"><tbody>
<tr><td><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgGhviy6T51Cp0ur3y7A6SNWyI7eZ4ZBYJDEWDlywFYFN4Y14ZE_lbEoJz_3LMQnJsvYrlU7mW6BzdZlA28RuhAH18PWWFi2VfeMYNb9tDjlrI77NA3QahC5yJ4rig-kvaj0MCNDT6Jhyphenhyphenn/s640/blogger-image--1231835850.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); font-size: 17px; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgGhviy6T51Cp0ur3y7A6SNWyI7eZ4ZBYJDEWDlywFYFN4Y14ZE_lbEoJz_3LMQnJsvYrlU7mW6BzdZlA28RuhAH18PWWFi2VfeMYNb9tDjlrI77NA3QahC5yJ4rig-kvaj0MCNDT6Jhyphenhyphenn/s400/blogger-image--1231835850.jpg" width="285" /></span></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-31868247890765919202015-08-11T13:47:00.000-05:002015-12-02T14:43:29.234-06:00Fabulous Insights From A Gay MormonThe ever insightful Mitch Mayne gave a truly fabulous <a href="http://www.wheatandtares.org/18582/an-interview-with-mitch-mayne/">interview at Wheat and Tares</a>. Some highlights:<br />
<br />
*Just because my fellows are hurling angry, hostile words my way doesn’t mean I’m exempt from my Savior’s commandment to love others as myself. I don’t get to practice this commandment only when it’s convenient for me. In fact, I think the true test of my capacity to offer unconditional love to my fellows is if I can do it when it’s most inconvenient.<br />
<br />
<br />
*Abandon the “love the sinner, hate the sin” philosophy. And not just for LGBT individuals who cross your path—with everyone. I don’t think we as humans ever do a really good job of separating actions from personalities. Meaning, we aren’t particularly successful at “hating” parts of people—invariably, we end up just not liking them based on the parts we don’t care for. More important, “love the sinner, hate the sin” puts us in the judgement seat—that’s not our job. In fact, our Savior was pretty adamant about not judging others.<br />
<div>
<br />
A much better philosophy would be something like, “love the sinner, because you’re one too.” Then remember we do a lot better as disciples of our Savior when we focus a little more on our own salvation, and a little bit less on everyone else’s sins.<br />
<br />
<br />
*Supporting our Mormon LGBT children doesn’t require we change or abandon our doctrine. It simply requires that we live it.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhR1oY6feRWeQrOMeUvXUH3pcTs_0qOHEB5tyHDwPVg8tz4ECeRJ3VQUP-G-Tis4zRpL6iUgrig8r_w_Zmubvdof88aifMq_hE4NwHb5gcXvcwF_1PR7o-YR65ABhaN3E0ehkKUf_NrI13F/s640/blogger-image-983008964.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="385" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhR1oY6feRWeQrOMeUvXUH3pcTs_0qOHEB5tyHDwPVg8tz4ECeRJ3VQUP-G-Tis4zRpL6iUgrig8r_w_Zmubvdof88aifMq_hE4NwHb5gcXvcwF_1PR7o-YR65ABhaN3E0ehkKUf_NrI13F/s400/blogger-image-983008964.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-72122219795085203712015-07-20T23:44:00.000-05:002015-12-02T14:41:56.754-06:00On Authentic Truth and Authentic Faith<div>
<span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;"><i></i></span><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;"><i><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIu-bQ0AVbQjG6G2441kNxA0yTG2Bh_mddzIFJr6-BoTQM0yaUOw-1I6s5I_E09GEWhkVJT7H91nXkA9TJ7aNdZueRDfaIEmAdqGWGMgPfP61YG835zzpQHn2uAtb9MBlKMXZru7LUCZhm/s640/blogger-image--1241394757.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="259" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgIu-bQ0AVbQjG6G2441kNxA0yTG2Bh_mddzIFJr6-BoTQM0yaUOw-1I6s5I_E09GEWhkVJT7H91nXkA9TJ7aNdZueRDfaIEmAdqGWGMgPfP61YG835zzpQHn2uAtb9MBlKMXZru7LUCZhm/s320/blogger-image--1241394757.jpg" width="320" /></a></i></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;"><i><br /></i></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;"><i>In 2001, Todd Compton <a href="http://toddmcompton.com/rev.html" target="_blank">wrote the following</a> response to negative reviews about his book "In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith." I find his insights extremely relevant and endorse his comments, excerpted below:</i></span></div>
<div>
<blockquote>
I believe that all truth is faith-promoting, if we're talking about authentic faith. No authentic truth damages authentic faith. Truth, even difficult truths, will only deepen and give breadth of vision to authentic faith. Only brittle, oversimplified faith will break easily when confronted with difficult truths. When we face difficult truths, we should not sensationalize them, but we should deal with them straightforwardly and honestly, using historical context and sympathetic insight to put them into perspective. Sometimes, when we have had oversimplified faith, we will need to deepen and broaden our faith to include tragedy and contradiction and human limitation, but that is not a matter of giving up our faith -- it is a matter of developing our faith. I realize that this can be a painful process at times, but it is a process that gives our faith more solidity and more breadth. The eye of faith sees greater depth, perspectives, and gradations of color; the heart of faith responds more to the tragedies of our bygone brothers and sisters, who become more real and more sympathetic to us.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
I believe that the gospel includes all truth, and all truth is part of the gospel.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
I believe that the gospel is afraid of no truth. All truths, both the brightness of love and the shadows of tragedy, contribute to the infinite beauty of the gospel.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
The gospel includes heights and depths. It includes shining, dazzling light, and darkest shadow -- and everything in between, all shades of gray. It includes knowledge of God, but it also includes knowledge of Satan. It includes knowledge of great and good men and women, and of deeply flawed men and women. It also includes men and women who have great goodness and serious flaws at the same time -- sometimes, seemingly, on alternate days. It includes aspects of reality that are supposedly "secular" -- science, economics, music, history. (See D&C 93:53.)</blockquote>
<blockquote>
... For extreme conservatives, who believe in a view of the gospel in which all church leaders always make the right decision, and for whom church leaders never disagree among themselves, these issues conflict head-on with a fragile, impractical oversimplified gospel; therefore, their only option is to ignore these issues entirely -- both on an individual level (not researching and thinking about these issues in their own minds, hearts and spirits) and on an organizational level. You preserve an absolute silence, not admitting that any of these problem-issues happened. You discourage others from thinking about and researching these issues. And when they do, even if they are trying to deal with the issues within a context of faith, you try to change the playing field by labeling the historians as the problems, rather than grappling with the problem issues themselves.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
However, the gospel is more complex, and more beautiful, and possessing more depth, than extreme conservatives give it credit for. When they create an oversimplified, narrow, sentimentally idealized, shallow view of the gospel, and orient their faith toward that oversimplified view, obviously the primary historical documents, and anyone who reflects those primary documents honestly, will undermine such shallow faith. The fault is not the historian who reflects that complexity of historical reality in line with the documents in the archives and the infinite complexity of true faith. The fault is the extreme conservatives who live by, and demand that others accept, an oversimplified view of the gospel.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
Granted, many church members and leaders accept such oversimplified views of the gospel, and strive to make such views the "official," untouchable version. But to the extent they do, they are doing the church and their faith a disservice, because they are propounding a version of faith that is unworkable.</blockquote>
</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-6203606955006306982015-06-21T17:56:00.001-05:002015-12-02T14:44:00.355-06:00Dear Elder Oaks and Brother TurleyDear Elder Oaks and Brother Turley:<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0WDb1YCywfS9UaUgEZVZRAh6uao6yHshnF8N4o-02NDmJjzTa8QJGh4C5DDZJgZPS-5OC7USH6jx95EkroaLzyYlW1snCNP5WtTMuYtUlBHhdRLGxqIoeLTkSY3KEoTGScsp36Mlot_4h/s640/blogger-image-1998009726.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0WDb1YCywfS9UaUgEZVZRAh6uao6yHshnF8N4o-02NDmJjzTa8QJGh4C5DDZJgZPS-5OC7USH6jx95EkroaLzyYlW1snCNP5WtTMuYtUlBHhdRLGxqIoeLTkSY3KEoTGScsp36Mlot_4h/s640/blogger-image-1998009726.jpg" /></a></div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-11687552226670757732015-06-09T15:38:00.001-05:002015-06-09T17:58:38.392-05:00Advocate For Mormon Intellectuals<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPY49C6Ee0HxXdCeEeLZpgO1tDl2bh3covsNpKvIbXExGgk5b75zINrtctan9d8uDgmdWC28-nMckRLwp2PMSuGyLSD3xd4y0BYYqfj7KGEb__p3K0HDjyYoiar8A5LxMq-ls2qiLSXe_q/s1600/Screen+Shot+2015-06-09+at+3.35.54+PM.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgPY49C6Ee0HxXdCeEeLZpgO1tDl2bh3covsNpKvIbXExGgk5b75zINrtctan9d8uDgmdWC28-nMckRLwp2PMSuGyLSD3xd4y0BYYqfj7KGEb__p3K0HDjyYoiar8A5LxMq-ls2qiLSXe_q/s1600/Screen+Shot+2015-06-09+at+3.35.54+PM.png"></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Dick and Gene Poll</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div>
A month ago <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/05/a-liahona-latter-day-saint.html" target="_blank">I mentioned how I consider Richard "Dick" Poll</a> one of my most significant Mormon mentors, as well as my primary example of what it means to be both committed to history and to faith, particularly as a <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/03/what-church-means-to-people-like-me-aka.html">Liahona Latter-day Saint</a>. Historian Thomas G. Alexander wrote a wonderful tribute to him after he passed, giving a glimpse into Poll's special contributions. Because it is so insightful in and of itself, I wanted to share the full text here. I would love to hear your responses/feedback in the comments below:<br>
<br>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><a href="https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/096-10-13.pdf">IN</a><span style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/096-10-13.pdf" target="_blank"> MEMORIAM</a></span></i></div>
<b></b><br>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><b>RICHARD DOUGLAS POLL: ADVOCATE FOR MORMON INTELLECTUALS</b></b></div>
<i></i><br>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><i>By Thomas G. Alexander</i></i><br>
<i><i><br></i></i></div>
<i>
</i>
<br>
<div>
On 27 APRIL 1994 when Richard D. Poll passed away in his Provo home, the historical profession, the Church, and public philanthropy all lost an an active participant. As John Donne might have said, with the loss of Dick Poll the community lost a part of itself.<br>
<br>
I first met Dick in 1965 when I joined the history faculty at Brigham Young University. During five years of working together, we developed a life-long friendship. He provided a model that helped many of us younger teachers mold our careers. A dedicated and inspiring teacher, he inaugurated the American Heritage course on television, which students affectionately called "The Dick Poll Show."</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<br>
In 1970, Dick and his wife Emogene (Gene) left for Western Illinois University. His friend John Bernhard, who had served as dean of our college, accepted the position of university president, and he enticed Dick away by offering him the job of vice president for administration. In 1975, Dick declined Bernhard's invitation to follow him again, and remained as a history professor at Western Illinois until his retirement in 1983.<br>
<br>
Needless to say, we maintained our contact--you did that with Dick and Gene because they always made you feel at home wherever you met. In 1970-71, Marilyn and I took our family to Carbondale for a sabbatical at Southern Illinois University. Dick and Gene invited us to drive north to Macomb for Thanksgiving. Our oldest children remember that experience with fondness.<br>
<br>
After retirement, Dick and Gene returned to their Provo roots and settled down on Grandview Hill. There he continued his research and community service, and occasionally taught a history class at BYU.<br>
<br>
Dick was utterly devoted to Gene and their three daughters--Marilyn, Nanette, and Jennifer. Last November, when the daughters and their husbands Gary Bell, Teny Allen, and Clayton Crawford honored Dick and Gene with a fiftieth wedding anniversary celebration, no one expected that within six months both Gene and Dick would be gone. Gene passed away early this year, and in a short time Dick followed. </div>
<br>
Born in 1918 during World War I and nurtured during the turbulent 1920s, Dick belonged to that generation of scholars whose youth had been severed by economic depression and violent war. Serving as a missionary during the late 1930s, Dick transferred from Germany to Denmark and finally to Canada as the horror of World War II began to engulf western Europe. Like others of his generation (Gene Campbell, Leonard Arrington, George Ellsworth, Everett Cooley, and Brigham Madsen), Dick served in the armed forces. Like the latter three, he returned from the war to earn a Ph.D. in history at the University of California at Berkeley. A brilliant scholar, Dick held the Thompson fellowship and graduated Phi Beta Kappa.<br>
<br>
As a child of the Progressive Era and a youth of the Depression, <b>battered by conflicts between scholarly secularism and an active faith, Dick sought to integrate his religious and intellectual lives.</b> Throughout his career he sought to understand Mormonism as a personal experience as he probed the relationship of the Latter-day Saints to the larger American society. In his master's thesis at Texas Christian and his Ph.D. dissertation, he investigated the subject that formed the core of his scholarly output, both the thesis and the dissertation examined the nineteenth-century relationship between Mormons and other Americans. Continuing those themes, in the last years of his life, he researched long hours on the Utah War--that misguided but fortunately bloodless conflict between the Mormon people and the American nation.<br>
<br>
Before his death, he had already begun to sketch the outlines of that study in a Dello G. Dayton Memorial Lecture at Weber State University on Thomas L. Kane and in an article in BYU Studies on the massive exodus to Provo, generally called "the move south."<br>
<br>
It is no negative reflection on Dick to observe that he placed his role as public intellectual and teacher before his role as scholar. Dick's service to the university and the community reveals his commitment to teaching and service. At BYU, he labored as associate director and as a teacher and mentor in the honors program. The students named him honors professor of the year in 1969. As a public intellectual, he championed at BYU the somewhat unpopular causes of the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Association of University Professors. Later, after he returned to Provo, he immersed himself in the campaign to save the Brigham Young Academy buildings. At the same time, he committed himself to the Provo Library adult literacy program.<br>
<br><b>
Most important, perhaps, as part of his full career he tried to define a role for the intellectual in the Church</b>. As Richard Hofstadter in his seminal book Anti-intellectualism in American Life pointed out, <b>genuine intellectuals are uncomfortable with certainty. They prefer to turn answers into questions</b>. <b>This attribute distinguishes intellectuals from apologists who seek to reconcile and defend</b>.</div>
<br>
<b>What place, Dick asked, do intellectuals who commit their lives to inquiry and questioning have in the LDS church? For him, the answer was quite clear: Intellectuals must continue to serve, to believe, and to remain faithful, while continuing to question and search.</b> As an intellectual and a committed Church member, Dick served among other callings in the Oak Hills Second Ward bishopric, on a number of high councils, as president of the Macomb Branch, and as a teacher in the high priests group.<br>
<br>
As a service to himself and the community of Mormon intellectuals, he defined a place in the Church for the faithful questioner in a sermon he delivered in the Palo Alto Ward in August 1967, which <i>Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought</i> published in the Winter 1967 issue. <b>For those of us who remain firmly committed both to the Church and to the life of the mind, Dick's "<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/03/what-church-means-to-people-like-me-aka.html" target="_blank">What the Church Means to People Like Me</a>" came as a revelation. He helped us to define ourselves.</b><br>
<br>
His was no mean task. Intellectuals of every generation--Dick's included--have concluded that the soul-wrenching struggle to remain both actively committed to religious faith and to the questioning demanded of true scholars was not worth the cost. Some have taken one of two easy roads out. On the one side, many have chosen to become apologists, deciding that questioning will pay no dividends in the Church. These people decide not to research the hard questions. <b>Committed to authority and central direction, they conform and in doing so ignore or gloss over problems.</b><br>
<br>
On the other side, <b>not a few conclude that commitment to the Church is not worth the struggle and embarrassment.</b> <b>For them, as for the apologists, questioning and commitment to religion becomes ultimately too hard</b>. Certain questions prove too difficult. How do you respond to questions about the Church's previous policy on African-Americans and the priesthood or the practice of polygamy? How do you answer questions about dictation in politics or opposition to the Equal Rights Amendment? What answer do you give when friends quiz you on such matters as public dissent, feminism, or authority? Many intellectuals, uncomfortable about such problems, decide either to slip into inactivity or to sever their connection with the Church.<br>
<br>
Clearly, Dick observed, <b>within the Church those who question and those who do not have difficulty living with each other.</b> This happens, he argued, not on the level of intellectual acceptance, but "at the level of personal communion, of empathy."<br>
<br><b>
Nevertheless, Dick argued, although those who decline to question are uncomfortable around questioners, people who question have a firm place in the Church. </b>He developed this argument by defining two ideal types of committed members. The first he labeled "Iron Rods." These are members for whom "each step of the journey to the tree of life was plainly defined." The second, he called "Liahonas." These are members for whom "the clarity of . . . directions varied with the circumstances of the user." For them there "was no infallible delineator of their course." Where the Iron Rod found answers, the Liahona found questions.<br>
<br><b>
"To the Iron Rod a questioning attitude suggests an imperfect faith; to the Liahona an unquestioning spirit betokens a closed mind."</b> For the Iron Rod, answers to virtually all questions appear in "Scripture, Prophetic Authority, and the Holy Spirit." The Liahona, on the other hand, accepts the concepts "that God lives, that He loves His children, that His knowledge and power are efficacious for salvation, and that He does reveal himself." Nevertheless, the Liahona believes that God's will is mediated by "the arm of flesh." Liahonas find problems in such matters as biblical descriptions of Eve's creation from Adam's rib and in the chronology that places the creation at 4,000 B.C. They are uncomfortable with the selective literalism of the Iron Rods that question the one proposition and testify to the other. As they search Church history, instead of unvarying sweetness and harmony, Liahonas find disagreement among prophets over such matters as the League of Nations, the process of creation, and politics.<br>
<br>
Dick placed himself squarely with the Liahonas. He denied that the Liahona type was simply another name for the faithless, the apostate, or the cultural Mormon. Rather, <b>he argued that faith in the Atonement, salvation, and exaltation were true principles as were agency, freedom, compassion, and love. Moreover, he felt a sense of commitment to the Latter-day Saints as a people</b>, and exercised faith in a set of principles promising a better life here and in the hereafter.<br>
<br>
Undoubtedly if questioned, <b>Dick would say that faithless, apostate, or cultural Mormons</b> are people who have taken the road into inactivity or out of the Church. Although they might identify themselves with the Mormon people, they<b> have little faith in the Atonement, salvation, or revelation</b>. <b>Liahonas, on the other hand, are committed Latter-day Saints who have declined to reject the active life of the mind as a price of active membership.</b><br>
<br>
After Dick's death, in reflecting on the Iron Rod/Liahona model, one of my colleagues, Ted Warner, reminded me of the controversy Dick's article had generated at BYU. The pages of the Daily Universe, the student newspaper, was filled with letters arguing about Dick's proposition. Some Iron Rods condemned the article as the rantings of an apostate. On the other hand, Henry Nicholes--often a glorious thorn in BYU President Ernest Wilkinson's side--argued that Iron Rods and Liahonas probably constituted only two of a large number of types of faithful members within the Church.<br>
<br>
I'm not comfortable labeling myself as either an Iron Rod or a Liahona. Nevertheless, <b>I find in Dick's recognition that the Church offers a place for the faithful, questioning intellectual a modicum of comfort in the otherwise uncomfortable world peopled only sparsely by Mormon intellectuals like myself.<br></b>
<br>
Dick Poll would have found most unperceptive Bill Mulder's suggestion--citing his wife's quip--that the phrase "Mormon intellectual" is an oxymoron. Richard Hofstadter suggested that <b>the hallmark of the intellectual is discomfort with certainties.</b> <b>Dick Poll would have heartily agreed, and he would have added that whether you call Latter-day Saints who search and question "Mormon intellectuals" or "Liahonas," they are faithful subjects in God's Kingdom</b>. If, as I firmly believe, the celestial kingdom has room for all faithful people, Dick Poll will surely find his seat near God's right hand raising questions, for which the loving Father of us all will express his profound gratitude.Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-66909885287659639102015-06-03T15:10:00.002-05:002015-12-16T09:55:37.128-06:00If you could ask the First Presidency a question--any question--what would you ask?<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><span style="font-size: large;"></span></i><br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<i><span style="font-size: large;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkLGMMEbnslaxBbhGKBh6tMDkYk8elCW3E9bUSUWlyXEO57Zl8hRhyphenhyphen9NRHojAI20hNNfPIDOK1-_1e8B9w2qYNFEH2lQn1Z7DQPLsPsiHvWYUWHEMIl27kFsmcGa64F-XJFOjEw5H0_Sx3/s640/blogger-image--999222297.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkLGMMEbnslaxBbhGKBh6tMDkYk8elCW3E9bUSUWlyXEO57Zl8hRhyphenhyphen9NRHojAI20hNNfPIDOK1-_1e8B9w2qYNFEH2lQn1Z7DQPLsPsiHvWYUWHEMIl27kFsmcGa64F-XJFOjEw5H0_Sx3/s640/blogger-image--999222297.jpg" /></a></span></i></div>
<i><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><span style="font-size: large;"><br class="Apple-interchange-newline" />"If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed."</span></i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
-J. Reuben Clark</div>
<br />
I'm genuinely baffled when I see fellow Latter-day Saints dismiss any effort to ask hard questions, especially when those questions are an honest attempt to find out what "the truth" is. In a church that only requires us to believe "truth", why is the default setting to view such attempts that dig deep to find out "the truth" perceived as "negativity" and a threat?<br />
<br />
If one uses a jackhammer to try and separate fact/truth/ideal from the concrete of reality, tradition, and even current teachings <i>assumed</i> to be truth, I think we should be thankful for such work, not marginalize the worker because of the temporary noise.<br />
<br />
Assuming we could ask in that spirit and receive a loving answer (as opposed to being given <a href="http://biblehub.com/matthew/7-9.htm" target="_blank">a stone for bread</a>), <b>I'm wondering what you would ask the First Presidency if you had the opportunity to ask any question you wanted?</b><br />
<br />
I have several questions I'd like answered. For example:<br />
<br />
*<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/07/men-are-ordained-to-serve-in-priesthood.html" target="_blank">Why are only men ordained to the priesthood?</a><br />
*<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-calderwoods-concerns-should-be.html" target="_blank">When will you be reforming the excommunication process?</a><br />
*<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/07/what-exactly-have-we-learned-by.html" target="_blank">Why in the world did you uphold Kate Kelly's excommunication anyway?</a> What was learned, if anything, when <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/07/what-exactly-have-we-learned-by.html" target="_blank">the Church botched that "sad experience"</a>?<br />
<br />
I'm in complete agreement with Lavina Fielding Anderson (<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIMdBiFr3AE&feature=youtu.be" target="_blank">who herself was wrongfully excommunicated</a>), who last summer at Sunstone shared the following:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
One of my personal insights is support for the order the church has established about the relationship between stewardship and revelation. I have no problem with assigning responsibility for church-wide revelation to the men who hold the office of apostle and prophet, but I can’t describe the pain I feel that <b>those who claim the privilege of revelation seem to refuse the responsibility to seek it.</b> Our church claims continuous revelation, yet it punishes those who implore its leaders to seek it. <b>Some of the most horrifying statements and silences to come out of Kate [Kelly’s] excommunication is the denial that there is anything to pray about or any point on which further revelation should be sought. </b></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I feel such longing when I read calls from Steve Veazey (prophet and president of the Community of Christ) for <b>the whole church to join in a discernment process</b>. What if our leaders similarly ask its members to pray earnestly about ordaining women to priesthood? About <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-truth-all-families-deserve-to-be.html" target="_blank">supporting and celebrating our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters who want to marry, have families, and participate in congregational life?</a> What if our leaders really accepted <a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/26.33" target="_blank">Nephi’s assurance</a> and invited us to join with him in the call: Christ "denieth none that come unto Him, black and white, bond and free, male and female...<b><i>all</i></b> are alike unto God.” (<i>From Lavina's remarks at minute <a href="https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/audio-files-from-the-2014-salt-lake-symposium/" target="_blank">10:35-12:16</a> of <a href="https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/audio-files-from-the-2014-salt-lake-symposium/" target="_blank">Session 324: "Life After Church Discipline."</a></i>)</blockquote>
<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Hers is a profound insight and something I too long for. But great is the letdown I feel when I contrast <i>that</i> with the way kangaroo "courts of love" have started popping up in our church like </span>whack-a-mole.<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"> Tonight in Sacramento, California, </span><a href="http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2015/05/conduct-unbecoming-member-of-church.html" target="_blank">Rock Waterman is being charged with "conduct unbecoming a member of the church</a>" and thus an "apostate" who'll likely be excommunicated. Last month <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-calderwoods-concerns-should-be.html" target="_blank">it was the Calderwoods</a>, who perhaps believed too <i>little; </i>today it's Rock Waterman, who believes <i>too much</i>. Joseph Smith once said: <a href="https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-joseph-smith/chapter-22?lang=eng#10-36481_000_026">“I never hear of a man being damned for believing too much; but they are damned for unbelief.”</a> Go figure.<br />
<br />
***<a href="http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2015/06/yerrrrr-out.html" target="_blank">Update 6/4/15: Rock posted the following update to this blog a few hours ago</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A few hours ago I was excommunicated from the church for apostasy.<br />
"What sins am I guilty of?"<br />
"Apostasy."<br />
"No, apostasy is your judgment. What sins have I committed that make up this apostasy?"<br />
"Apostasy <i>is</i> the sin."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
One truth has come home to me with laser clarity: there are two religions operating side by side in the LDS church today, both vying for dominance. The first is the religion founded through Joseph Smith, which emphasizes dependence on Christ. The other religion requires allegiance to Church leaders above all else. If your devotion to Jesus is stronger than your fealty to the Church hierarchy, you are a threat to their system.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It doesn't matter how forcefully you bear testimony of Christ and His gospel; the Brethren-ite religion has but one focus: replace the organic religion with the counterfeit one, all the while convincing followers nothing has changed.</blockquote>
You know what I think is truly "unbecoming"? Modern day witch hunts are unbecoming of the Church of Jesus Christ. Yet they're allowed to take place without much second-guessing, despite the fact we've been reminded the Church has and can make mistakes. One cannot "repent" of the truth, nor from the fact that some people with misguided loyalty/allegiance either don't want to hear the truth or see it as a threat. <b>Our loyalty should be to the truth. Truth is truth, no matter who speaks it. Truth isn't any more "true" whether it's spoken by authorities or academics. We have to be able to discern the truth for ourselves.</b><br />
<br />
<b>Rock Waterman is a "threat" in the same way Dorothy pulling back the curtain was a threat to the Wizard of Oz. The question is do we want to see the truth and see reality as it actually is or as we wish it to be? Truth can defend itself--it's not a fragile thing. If people have faith in the truth there is nothing to fear. But if expectations of faith are placed upon a false narrative <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-churchs-cardinal-sin-of-blasphemy_28.html" target="_blank">or on idols</a>, then image must be preserved at all costs.</b> Despite these unjust, unfair, and unChristlike witch hunts, leadership typically remains silent, unless media attention becomes great. It was a rare and welcome exception when the <a href="https://www.lds.org/prophets-and-apostles/june-first-presidency-statement?lang=eng" target="_blank">First Presidency issued this statement</a> last summer:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Simply asking questions has never constituted apostasy. <b>Apostasy is repeatedly acting in clear, open, and deliberate public opposition to the Church or its faithful leaders, or persisting, after receiving counsel, in teaching false doctrine</b>.</blockquote>
<div>
<b>
I, for one, don't oppose the church or its leaders. In fact, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/11/what-sustaining-our-leaders-really-means.html">I sustain them</a>. But since sustaining them doesn't require that I always agree, I <i>do</i> oppose the harmful messages and teachings that sometimes come out of the church and its faithful leaders. Harmful teachings deserve to be harmed</b>. (If you're not prepared to go down the rabbit hole, don't ask me for specific examples. There are plenty, both in the past and in the present.)<br />
<br />
To be clea<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">r, <b>I <i>don't</i> believe we should ever criticize the leaders themselves. Personal attacks are certainly unbecoming a member of the church</b>. As <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/04/a-timeless-argument.html" target="_blank">L. Jackson Newell wrote</a>: "P</span>ersonal attacks always diminish the dignity of individual and community life and are never appropriate in government, business, or religion. On the other hand, <b>the respectful and constructive criticism of a leader's ideas or judgments is not only acceptable but necessary for healthy organizational life</b>." Thus, I draw an important distinction between the person and the ideas. <b>We <i>should</i> constructively criticize ideas and teachings that are harmful.</b> <a href="http://www.mormondiscussionpodcast.org/2015/05/when-we-get-it-wrong/" target="_blank">I'm with Bill Reel</a> on speaking out against harmful and damaging teachings--<b>especially when lives are at stake or the atonement is denied</b>. (Better to come home dead from your mission than to have committed sexual sin?! What about the atonement?!)<br />
<br />
I dislike false doctrine as much as the next guy. I <i>especially </i>dislike it when it comes from authorities of my church. Thus, <b>I<i> </i>support the church when it corrects its own false doctrines and false teachings, however long it takes.</b> (Example: <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng" target="_blank">Race and the priesthood</a>.) Since the church itself can eventually come around and correct its mistakes (with or <a href="http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/2122123-155/no-apology-really-mormons-question-apostle" target="_blank">without apologies</a>) and receive grace, perhaps we ought to be willing to extend the same hope and grace to individuals to likewise come around eventually and not be so swift to judge them as apostates and excommunicate them.<br />
<br />
In light of the First Presidency's reminder that "simply asking questions has never constituted apostasy," I posed my original question ("If you could ask the First Presidency a question--any question--what would you ask?") to fellow Latter-day Saints online. I quickly received many responses, and you'll see from their questions below that <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/05/when-prophet-speaks-is-thinking-done.html">they are not afraid to think for themselves</a> and question the status quo. It's quite a sampling:<br />
<ul>
<li><i>"If the gospel is truly for everyone, what is the church willing to do to change the culture of Mormonism so that everyone will feel they truly have a place here regardless of color, sexual orientation, political affiliation, gender, marital status, social class, etc.. ?"</i></li>
<li><i>"Why can't we let Jesus be enough? If it's His gospel, why don't teach that more?" </i></li>
<li><i>"Why do we need to constantly add in things to the gospel plan? Isn't the atonement good enough?" </i></li>
<li><i>"Why are you directing people not to follow the Savior's commandment to ASK, SEEK, KNOCK? Regarding female ordination, what are you afraid of?"</i></li>
<li><i>"Why can't we be okay as a church admitting there have been lies, white washing, and deliberate half truths in the name of building a church?"</i></li>
<li><i>"If the Book of Mormon holds the fullness of the gospel, why do we have a very different church now? I am comfortable with modern revelation but we have departed so much from the church described in the Book of Mormon."</i></li>
<li><i>"What do you mean, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/06/the-beauty-of-owning-our-own-post.html">'you KNOW'?</a>"</i></li>
<li><i>"What do you honestly think about <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/polygamy-was-not-is-not-and-never-will.html">polygamy</a>? Why not just <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/i-will-not-seek-to-compel-any-man-to.html">abolish section 132</a>?"</i></li>
<li><i>"Can we have that long awaited two hour block? Pleaseandthankyou."</i></li>
<li><i>"Why do you allow yourselves to be put up on pedestals? (I personally think the deification of members of the church serving in "high callings" is a root problem to a lot of the ill's of the church. A hierarchy invalidates a lot of voices.)"</i></li>
<li><i>"Why is it that in some cases putting leaders on pedestals is actually encouraged or even demanded, and why are general authorities allowed to do it to each other? (The 14 Fundamentals and its inclusion in manuals and reiteration in conference makes top leadership complicit in fostering <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-churchs-cardinal-sin-of-blasphemy_28.html">the idolatrous culture</a>.)"</i></li>
<li><i>"Why have the 15 apparently decided they should not apologize for wrongs done in the past or today?"</i></li>
<li><i>"What are we to do with 2 Nephi 5, Alma 3, Abraham 1, Moses 7, and other scriptures in relation to <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng" target="_blank">the church's statement</a>: 'Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse'?"</i></li>
<li><i>"When is the church going to be <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/10/on-lds-historical-honestydishonesty.html" target="_blank">honest about its history?</a> Why can't we apologize for what happened in the past? Our church clearly hasn't been Christlike in <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-truth-all-families-deserve-to-be.html" target="_blank">how we treat the LGBT community</a>. And <b>why is the church excommunicating people based on belief, not actions that are detrimental to the gospel?"</b></i></li>
</ul>
Of course, last summers clarification that simply asking questions is not apostasy wasn't necessarily a <i>new</i> definition of apostasy, since the following has long been in the handbook:</div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcDZTNL6E5Vra3HY3FiA0Nh-OFZPBPQfIBT9rwq6kcyqnKpGzjRrUKdgiQyD0F7pq_35-22nUr2-PMIeY5q9SLnJR8mBqFREC7PiuC86fB6hcxm1oZXCorYhuoZxqcsb9By_6VrHtrTqpD/s1600/2010+CHI-Chapter-6.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhcDZTNL6E5Vra3HY3FiA0Nh-OFZPBPQfIBT9rwq6kcyqnKpGzjRrUKdgiQyD0F7pq_35-22nUr2-PMIeY5q9SLnJR8mBqFREC7PiuC86fB6hcxm1oZXCorYhuoZxqcsb9By_6VrHtrTqpD/s1600/2010+CHI-Chapter-6.png" /></a></div>
Yet the handbook can raise more questions than it answers: <b>Is excommunication truly warranted in cases where one man judges another as "apostate" for believing too much or too little? How can one repent of something that was never sin to begin with?</b><br />
<br />
I would whole-heartedly support the Church in making progressive changes to this definition and/or process. In light of <a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/a-of-f/1.9?lang=eng" target="_blank">the ninth article of faith</a>, I wish the Church would not be so collectively resistant to change. Recently on <a href="http://radiowest.kuer.org/post/age-and-leadership-lds-church" target="_blank">Radio West</a>, Greg Prince summed it up like this: "We feel very strong about how things are until they change, and then we feel very strong about how they’ve become." And later: "<b>We feel very strongly that we do things the way we do them because we do them that way until we do them differently</b>."<br />
<br />
Should we not hope that Seers could see a better way forward in cases where deep and serious sin has not occurred? Is <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/kiwimormon/2015/05/the-foolishness-of-the-calderwood-excommunications/">excommunication</a> truly the best solution for these kinds of cases? Do we not see <a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/kiwimormon/2015/05/the-foolishness-of-the-calderwood-excommunications/" target="_blank">how foolish it is to continue to use excommunication</a> as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXCzzNoMeNs" target="_blank">the red "ejector" button</a>, rather than exclusively for repentance in serious moral and ethical cases? Moreover, isn't it troubling how "conduct unbecoming of church members" is subjective in the extreme, how there's no impartial jury, and that no women are allowed to be part of the council?<br />
<br />
No amount of faith will change the stubborn fact that <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/holy-hope-for-holy-leadership.html">some members are not as lucky as others in the unfortunate reality of ecclesiastical roulette</a>. Perhaps to create more calm and uniformity the First Presidency could require that they themselves must sign off on these kinds of cases rather than let local leaders fumble around and inflict pain on the worldwide church body.<br />
<br />
Another question: What of those who hold up a mirror on ecclesiastical abuses in the institutional Church? If we don't like what we see, do we punish the messenger for the message? Are we okay with casting out those who speak out publicly while injustice is swept under the rug to save the reputation of the Church? Are we okay with "disciplining" those who follow the dictates of their conscience? Do we really expect all such displays of ecclesiastical "power" to be automatically and divinely ratified? If the Church is concerned about its reputation, <i>shouldn't it </i>allow people of conscience to become whistle-blowers in order to uncover unrighteous dominion? Does it not create an unsafe environment when the default is to squelch public <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/05/decalogue-for-dissenters.html" target="_blank">dissent</a>?<br />
<br />
If our ultimate responsibility is to truth, do we not have the right and the responsibility to respectfully oppose teachings we've individually discerned <i>do not </i>represent the mind and will of God? How much faith do we actually have in J. Reuben Clark's statement: <i style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed"</i>? Does confirming the truth for one's self only apply to sincere investigators before they're baptized or all throughout their lives? Are we expected to turn a blind eye to history and believe <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2013/05/terryl-givens-on-prophetic-mantle-myth.html" target="_blank">the myth of infallibility</a>, that authorities called of God <i>always</i> speak the truth?<br />
<br />
I believe Terryl Givens spoke truth when he said the following:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
We believe that <b>it is always our responsibility to confirm through our own study and prayer and responsiveness to the spirit, whether what we’re hearing, is the mind and will of the Lord or not.</b> I think of Orson Pratt who alone of twelve apostles refused to consent to the false doctrine of Adam-God and only many years later was vindicated for his steadfast integrity. <b>So it may be that in the short term we do find ourselves on the margins or ostracized but I think that our devotion always has to be first and foremost to our conscience, before to any institution</b>. (Mormon Stories Podcast <a href="http://mormonstories.org/fiona-and-terryl-givens-and-the-crucible-of-doubt/" target="_blank">episode 496--part 2: </a><i><a href="http://mormonstories.org/fiona-and-terryl-givens-and-the-crucible-of-doubt/" target="_blank">Fiona and Terryl Givens and “The Crucible of Doubt”</a>--</i>1 hour 33 minute mark.)</blockquote>
If I had a more sure <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/holy-hope-for-holy-leadership.html">hope in church leaders always doing the right thing</a> (ie: if I ignored <a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/121.39" target="_blank">D&C 121:39</a>), then perhaps I wouldn't feel compelled to speak up and voice the concerns of my conscience. But <b>I must place loyalty to conscience over loyalty to any institution, and my conscience tells me something is seriously wrong with the way excommunications for "apostasy" are taking place.</b> As Joseph Smith said:</div>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>I never thought it was right to call up a man and try him because he erred in doctrine</b>, it looks too much like methodism and not like Latter day Saintism. Methodists have creeds which a man must believe or be kicked out of their church. <b>I want the liberty of believing as I please, it feels so good not to be tramelled</b>. (<a href="http://www.boap.org/LDS/Parallel/1843/8Apr43.html" target="_blank">Joseph Smith</a>, WoJS, 183-84.)</blockquote>
Most of us Latter-day Saints live in a state of privilege; because we ourselves don't feel trammelled we may conclude it's not really a problem for anyone else. But to "try" others because one has judged them as having "erred in doctrine" is trammeling. There are better ways to handle differences of belief than having someone in a position of "a little authority, as they suppose", <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXCzzNoMeNs" target="_blank">press the ejector button</a>. The scriptures teach us the "more excellent way" is to<i> love </i>the person and perhaps even <i>seek to understand</i> rather than be so quick to judge. As a matter of fact, judging them prevents us from fulfilling the greater commandment to love them. <a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2010/10/charity-never-faileth?lang=eng" target="_blank">President Thomas S. Monson confirmed this</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Mother Teresa, a Catholic nun who worked among the poor in India most of her life, spoke this profound truth: "<b>If you judge people, you have no time to love them</b>." The Savior has admonished, "This is my commandment, that ye <b>love one another, as I have loved you</b>." I ask: can we love one another, as the Savior has commanded, if we judge each other? And I answer—with Mother Teresa: no, we cannot.</blockquote>
If this is true on an individual level, would not the same hold true on an institutional level? How are we to reconcile this with our current conception of "judges in Israel"? While I don't claim to know how to answer that, a wise stake president once said: "<i>Being a judge in Israel does not exempt me from the commandment to love one another. It binds me to it. To be a judge in Israel is to help [people] come unto Christ and repent of their sins. It has nothing to do with assigning guilt. There is many a time I know of sin and do nothing. My responsibility kicks in when an individual desires to repent.</i>"<br />
<br />
<b>Precisely because no one single mortal can know all the details of ones heart, wouldn't it be better to leave the judgement up to Christ?</b> Last June in her Sunstone presentation, Lavina Fielding Anderson quoted Pope Francis, who just days before had given a homily based on <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mote_and_the_Beam" target="_blank">the parable of the mote and the beam</a> and had renounced those who judge others, calling them hypocrites and even comparing them to Satan. He pointed out the scriptural fact that the title of Satan is “the accuser.”<br />
<br />
<b>He who judges another puts himself in the role of God, the only judge--and is that not a form of blasphemy?</b> Even with an exclusive claim to priesthood authority, if we see no difference between mortal leaders and God himself, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-churchs-cardinal-sin-of-blasphemy_28.html" target="_blank"><i>that</i> is idolatry</a>. A man so certain he knows the will of God can be dangerous.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsa-QqcjMrJ6oFQNXjtFxgMYymeng3zlb6pz0mu5G837_uFjMmzxXtvNtTsEK26ZrXDLJY23a82i2dYDSK0Td0JVoQsaK2peTw-l-IBn4EtFbANOweH3xCXkCmhbBzD7KhZAQHVboNX7UN/s1600/IMG_4276.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="242" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsa-QqcjMrJ6oFQNXjtFxgMYymeng3zlb6pz0mu5G837_uFjMmzxXtvNtTsEK26ZrXDLJY23a82i2dYDSK0Td0JVoQsaK2peTw-l-IBn4EtFbANOweH3xCXkCmhbBzD7KhZAQHVboNX7UN/s320/IMG_4276.JPG" width="320" /></a></div>
That danger <i>should</i> give us pause, cause us to think deeply, and to be very careful, for whichever judgment we dole out will be the judgement we too will receive. What happens to the brother who judges, as Pope Francis said, is that he ends up "a victim of his own lack of mercy." Speaking on mercy, the Pope went on to say that Jesus "never accuses" but actually does the opposite--he defends. “<b>Jesus will judge, yes, at the end of the world, but in the meantime He intercedes and defends</b>."<br />
<br />
God is "the sole judge" and ultimately, said Pope Francis, men who judge “imitate the prince of this world," who waits in the background, ready to accuse. “<b>May the Lord give us the grace to imitate Jesus, the intercessor, advocate, lawyer,” for ourselves and others.</b> We're to imitate Him, not imitate others who judge, for “in the end, it will destroy us." After quoting the Pope, Lavina went on to say:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Meantime, those who judge, who accuse, who bully, who cut off sincere discussion, who silence honest questions, who cast the sufferers out of the community--they claim to speak in the name of God. They may be among those to whom Jesus will say: "Depart from me, I never knew you," or as the Joseph Smith Translation reads "Ye never knew me.” <b>May we cling to Christ, be open to his grace, and have the blessing of being forgiven of our own trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us</b>.</blockquote>
</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com15tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-42404321266117625192015-06-01T15:26:00.000-05:002015-06-01T15:39:09.101-05:00The Beauty Of Owning Our Own Post-Certain Religious Life<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvl78OdjT652ABf7xSY_KR5M53jm9VTc71IPW0HmxUuWHgbO9Ee4UsHWpCSRXEIIX7pdaZmaO-ABd1wo_nIPhrxMYT_QqERj0919jIhZc2CxSiizPiNftivlpcVYb_Y7jaVkKlHnhlah5s/s1600/doubt%2527s+uncomfortable.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="310" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvl78OdjT652ABf7xSY_KR5M53jm9VTc71IPW0HmxUuWHgbO9Ee4UsHWpCSRXEIIX7pdaZmaO-ABd1wo_nIPhrxMYT_QqERj0919jIhZc2CxSiizPiNftivlpcVYb_Y7jaVkKlHnhlah5s/s640/doubt%2527s+uncomfortable.JPG" width="640" /></a></div>
<i><br /></i>
<i><a href="http://www.dovesandserpents.org/wp/2012/04/26-mcs-mormonism-lite/" target="_blank">Brent Beal shared some profound insights</a> about those of us who no longer claim to "know" truth with certainty and yet have rebuilt a life of faith. That transition from certainty to uncertainty is often accompanied from a transition of perceived orthodoxy to heterodoxy as one places higher priority on individual autonomy over simply following directions:</i><br />
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Many of us that have taken the heterodox fork in the road soon realize that we don’t really know anything. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwkh_aliF3E">Our religious experiences aren’t any more valid or profound or “real” than anyone else’s</a>. Our answers to life’s big questions are just that—they are “our” answers and however wondrous those answers may be to us (and however useful), the fact that we have answered life’s big questions in a certain way doesn’t mean that everyone else’s answers are inferior. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
We are not committed to secularism (or liberalism, or feminism, or progressivism) in the same way that orthodox Mormons are committed to “exact” obedience. We just realize that there is a lot we don’t know. If God speaks to humanity through spiritual experiences, then why does he communicate such radically different information to individuals based on their religious context? We don’t know. That’s it, really. We don’t know. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Many of us have gotten to the point of “I don’t know,” stared into the abyss, searched our souls for some reflection of deity, and then seen the same thing: We’ve seen each other. We’ve come away from the experience with the profound realization that we–as in all of humanity—are in this together. We are truly one. Until further notice, therefore, it seems obvious that the one thing we can do—the low-hanging fruit, so to speak—is to be nice to each other. We should treat each other fairly, and with dignity and respect. </b> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Another common line of reasoning among those of us who don’t know much is this. If God created us with individual agency and the capacity for reason, then it makes sense that God expects us to use those capabilities...If forced into this false dichotomy [between “individual autonomy” and a “path of obedience to laws”], <b>I suspect that what we do with our individual autonomy will matter more to God than how well we follow directions. For me it comes down to whether or not I believe God wants us to <a href="http://www.dovesandserpents.org/wp/2011/08/08-mcs-painting-by-the-numbers/">paint by the numbers</a> or to paint our own pictures? As parents, what do we value more from our four-year-olds? A paint-by-the-numbers portrait identical to what’s on the box, or a free-spirited “Look, Mom, this is you and Dad in a rocket ship with a cow!” masterpiece?</b> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The path of “I don’t know” is difficult. Taking responsibility for one’s own spiritual life is difficult. Being nice to people is difficult. It’s not easy—not nearly as easy as the “exact obedience” path can be at times. But there’s a reason why most adults have abandoned paint-by-the-numbers projects.</blockquote>
</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-37592867841836964362015-05-21T13:44:00.004-05:002015-05-22T09:23:11.690-05:00The Calderwood's Concerns Should Be The Church's Collective Concerns<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><br /></i>
<i>"When religious people are publicly intimidated, retaliated against, forced from employment or made to suffer personal loss because they have raised their voice in the public square, donated to a cause or participated in an election, our democracy is the loser."</i> -Elder Dallin H. Oaks<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
I fully agree with the above statement by Elder Oaks. Likewise, our Church is the loser when church leaders retaliate and force out church members who <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/01/how-in-world-in-21st-century-is-church.html" target="_blank">voice concerns in public</a>. Despite my <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/holy-hope-for-holy-leadership.html" target="_blank">holy hope for holy leadership</a>, it would be <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-churchs-cardinal-sin-of-blasphemy_28.html" target="_blank">an egregious error</a> to assume that even good, but fallible LDS leaders, cannot get things "wrong." Too often, despite the great inclusivity of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Church excludes people and sends the sad message: "<a href="http://rationalfaiths.com/you-belong/" target="_blank">You do not belong here</a>." I believe the Church should be strong enough to allow <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/05/decalogue-for-dissenters.html" target="_blank">healthy public dissent</a>. Make no mistake, there is an unjust wrong being done to my friends Marisa Pond Calderwood and Carson Calderwood.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxsyGUK1PgxVW7_DMOOuTEuk_mkurAMez9maeckQ-eDazef36iEEzKFZr7BUFP15uz957jSGoKJ7lhKghmBE1xXRrZbloczB-jSoI7lqRqsYG42CzbJ7yv-EiZUHKqcyBF4Gm_NBJhkKu3/s1600/Carson+and+Marisa.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgxsyGUK1PgxVW7_DMOOuTEuk_mkurAMez9maeckQ-eDazef36iEEzKFZr7BUFP15uz957jSGoKJ7lhKghmBE1xXRrZbloczB-jSoI7lqRqsYG42CzbJ7yv-EiZUHKqcyBF4Gm_NBJhkKu3/s200/Carson+and+Marisa.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
With permission, here are their own words:</div>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote>
This Thursday, May 21st, we will be tried for apostasy in the Mormon church. We have been accused of apostasy because we have publicly discussed difficult, yet true issues about the church's history and changes in doctrine, which have caused us to not believe this is God's one true church. Although we are in a spiritual and emotional place that allows us to deal with excommunication, many people are not because of fear of rejection by family, friends and community. We are choosing to go to the disciplinary council instead of quietly resigning so that we can be a voice for them and point out the problems in excommunicating people for open public discourse and disbelief.<br />
<br />
We've seen the cognitive dissonance in ourselves and others when facts that used to be considered anti-Mormon lies are now admitted by the church to be true. It was so painful for us that we want to have these conversations to help mitigate some of the heart ache for those who are suffering like we did. Also, other members look down on those having doubts as less faithful. We want to be vocal so that those who make these judgments can see that the issues are real and legitimate without easy answers. Furthermore, it's better to love and include rather than shame and ostracize. Although individuals are having these traumatic faith crises, the real problem is that the church is going through a truth crisis.<br />
<br />
We believe that “the truth will set [us] free” and that “the truth has nothing to fear.” This search for truth isn't fully allowed or practiced in today's church. We understand the desire to keep many of the difficult issues out of the public sphere, but the church simply cannot expect that it's going to work any longer to maintain a whitewashed narrative and keep doubters quiet in the age of information and social media. Mormons believe that before we came to earth, we rejected Satan's plan and instead chose agency. In the church today, we have to allow members to know the complete history, to talk about it openly, and ultimately to decide for themselves what they believe is true.<br />
<br />
Although our stake president understands and admires our motives, he feels that this is not how the Brethren want it to be done. From the little they have spoken on the issue, they appear to want members to work on these issues in private and not discuss them in public with others. He believes if God wanted it differently, He would change it from the top down. We disagree because almost all of the major policies and programs in the church started at the grassroots level. Some general authorities have even called for members to create initiatives like ours instead of waiting for the Brethren to tell them what to do (Elder Clayton Christensen, 2009 Boston LDS Education Conference). </blockquote>
<blockquote>
During talks with our Stake President, who is a genuinely loving and caring man, he told us that he has not received any counsel from anyone above him on what to do with us. We've heard through mutual friends that he feels isolated and alone. He said this has been one of the most difficult things he's done as a Stake President. The general authorities are leaving Stake Presidents out to dry by not giving more correct guidelines on how to deal with members talking about difficult church subjects and doubts in public. They are also throwing truth-seeking members under the bus by not helping them deal with these issues in a different way. Finally, and most devastatingly, they are exacerbating emotional trauma by not speaking out more against the shaming of doubt and villainizing of doubters, or changing policies to actively include and accept everyone along their faith journey. Hopefully the church will see that good people who are doing the difficult work of dealing with this truth crisis and helping to alleviate the pain are worthy of praise instead of excommunication. Hopefully the general authorities will be more clear on these issues and how to deal with them in a healthy, public way that encourages love and understanding.</blockquote>
<br />
***Update to include the result from last night (and <a href="http://conservativecakeliberalicing.blogspot.com/2015/05/Iamanapostate.html" target="_blank">Carson's blog update here</a>):<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYzxvq7TmQhyphenhyphenuhl_Kd2Cy1tqehgGOjDod8xmhWZxJJzJkQ1S78lUe5kM4TWYGA0raq2RCtihwNXHlQd4oMFP8qXCQXVvGCnGr1NpaVpNI_m1tSeeAljbPIlLwccPNZeAhWpnpQaV_4ZjGS/s1600/Calderwood+result.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYzxvq7TmQhyphenhyphenuhl_Kd2Cy1tqehgGOjDod8xmhWZxJJzJkQ1S78lUe5kM4TWYGA0raq2RCtihwNXHlQd4oMFP8qXCQXVvGCnGr1NpaVpNI_m1tSeeAljbPIlLwccPNZeAhWpnpQaV_4ZjGS/s640/Calderwood+result.PNG" width="360" /></a></div>
</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com60tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-3259651629126964932015-05-16T12:56:00.000-05:002015-09-03T20:58:28.560-05:00The Truth: ALL Families Deserve To Be Strengthened<div>
The <a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/a-of-f/1.13" target="_blank">thirteenth Article of Faith</a> states "we believe in doing good to all [mankind]." I've wondered lately how many Mormons <i>really</i> believe that. I can speak only for my own beliefs, but I believe in doing good to all--men, women, children, regardless of race, creed, or sexual orientation. I believe Mormons should likewise believe in doing good to families--<i><b>all </b></i>families.<br>
<br>
As a matter of fact, four years ago on this blog I posted "<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2011/05/all-families-are-valuable.html">ALL Families Are Valuable</a>" to spread the hope that the "value of the traditional family" would be replaced with "the value of all families." Yet four years later we continue to idolize the "traditional" family while causing great pain and unnecessary harm to many other families and individuals. The Church that prides itself on families <i>still</i> has not collectively recognized the value of <i>all</i> families. And <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/12/on-being-seasick-while-staying-in-boat.html" target="_blank">it makes me sick</a>. Latter-day Saints continue to teach fear-based <a href="http://ldsmag.com/how-will-children-know-the-truth-about-marriage-if-we-dont-teach-them/" target="_blank">philosophies of men/women mingled with scripture</a> as "truth", but <b>here's the real truth: ALL families deserve to be strengthened</b>.<br>
<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpIoD7_ioa1EKgH1WHKCOP7OyjVG0gAXFvJk5HRXJBpBnHWZYqCZ3cAJGDFSjbIpeJjMXhA_b2QwTOHZlPolB7FY5RcwOZtHyWoA4XmJglS0jtez9a7mqmBJmRnWqgdtQbtpLN3yQl9WnD/s640/blogger-image--1470474051.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpIoD7_ioa1EKgH1WHKCOP7OyjVG0gAXFvJk5HRXJBpBnHWZYqCZ3cAJGDFSjbIpeJjMXhA_b2QwTOHZlPolB7FY5RcwOZtHyWoA4XmJglS0jtez9a7mqmBJmRnWqgdtQbtpLN3yQl9WnD/s640/blogger-image--1470474051.jpg"></a></div>
<br>
The truth is that families come in all shapes and sizes. Some families consist of a mom and a dad, two dads, two moms, single parents, and some families have no children at all. <b>I believe in strengthening them all</b>, especially because I believe <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2011/05/all-families-are-valuable.html" target="_blank">it's true that</a> "we are all likely working towards the same goals--namely an environment where those we care for, including ourselves, can grow and learn in love, happiness and safety." I believe the truth is that the Lord is most pleased when we all work to love and uplift each other and help each other to stay dedicated to our familial commitments, whatever those may look like.<br>
<br>
As <a href="http://janariess.religionnews.com/2015/05/15/news-flash-americans-like-mormons-better-when-were-not-oppressing-gays/" target="_blank">Jana Riess wrote yesterday</a>, "every time my church does something that appears to diminish the humanity of LGBT persons, our reputation as a religion takes a hit. And when we act with greater love and less condemnation, people respond in kind." However, as she <a href="http://janariess.religionnews.com/2015/05/15/news-flash-americans-like-mormons-better-when-were-not-oppressing-gays/" target="_blank">went on to say</a>, "when we <a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/why-marriage-and-family-matter-everywhere-in-the-world?lang=eng" target="_blank">point to some families as 'counterfeit'</a> and claim there is only one right way to love – and, gee, it happens to be ours! — <b>we’re preaching fear, not truth</b>. And when we ally ourselves with a group that stands accused of denying basic rights to gay people when we have recently helped to pass legislation that gives them those rights, we are sending a very mixed message."<br>
<br>
It also sends mixed messages anytime the ridiculous and (mostly negative) phrase "love the sinner, hate the sin" is perpetuated. PLEASE let us stop using this worthless phrase. </div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4P2TLdK17q9NCaX7VJm7I9Et9BLE-bbRTubUXm0WEoTQH5jaiOuCglTjfibRqqQR4dWl_Y7-LcFTiYNILIGhwfmVPRjFx2Jqk9nlUTxV6tPX8D_f22sN53W4kSNi-K-d5aF08Rp9q_Y84/s640/blogger-image-1484772846.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="331" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4P2TLdK17q9NCaX7VJm7I9Et9BLE-bbRTubUXm0WEoTQH5jaiOuCglTjfibRqqQR4dWl_Y7-LcFTiYNILIGhwfmVPRjFx2Jqk9nlUTxV6tPX8D_f22sN53W4kSNi-K-d5aF08Rp9q_Y84/s400/blogger-image-1484772846.jpg" width="400"></a></div>
</div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div>
I think Jesus made it pretty clear we're to love, period. <a href="http://rationalfaiths.com/putting-stones/" target="_blank">To condemn sin in others was a sin "in and of itself."</a> In fact, "<a href="http://rationalfaiths.com/putting-stones/" target="_blank">the only time we should openly condemn sin is when we find it within ourselves</a>." In other words, we're to focus on loving others, not worrying about their personal life. If we make it our business to judge others business we're simply not able to love them well at all. And then where is the greater sin?<br>
<br>
In <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/dear-elder-christofferson.html" target="_blank">my open letter to Elder Christofferson</a>, I wrote: "Today, in this new Civil Rights era for the LGBT community, I'm afraid that my conscience and the position of officials currently leading the church might also be at odds. So I'm in a bit of a precarious position. I wait patiently, though not passively, and encourage progress in areas that I can, while trying to be anxiously engaged in good causes and follow my conscience without causing harm to the church." <b>The harder question for me, however, is what should I do when it's my church that's causing harm to others?</b></div>
<div>
<br>
It's amazing how much harm we can cause in the name of "defending the family". <b>To "defend" means to "resist an attack, to protect from harm or danger." It doesn't mean to go on offense.</b> Let me be clear, I'll defend my traditional marriage if ever someone tried to strip me of that right, but so far so good--no attacks. I do see marriage equality under attack, so I'm gonna defend that too, cause marriage for all is better than marriage for some, and same-sex marriage doesn't undermine my traditional marriage in the least. My marriage is respected and I respect everyone else's freedom to marry whoever they choose. It's the golden rule. Does our church still believe in that?<br>
<br>
The wise <a href="http://universe.byu.edu/2015/02/04/five-ways-to-help-lgbtqssa-church-members-feel-welcome-in-lds-environment/" target="_blank">Roni Jo Draper once said:</a> "<i>I'm pretty sure the purpose of the gospel is to improve myself and love others. Not to love myself and improve others</i>." Whenever we use religion as a means to control others, we're doing it wrong. "The purpose of religion," said the Dalai Lama, "is to control yourself, not to criticize others." Scripture provides plenty of examples of people using religion to harm others. Scripture also has plenty of examples of using religion to be a blessing to others. We should learn from the past to be more wise than those who used religion as a weapon. We ought to do more to actively be a blessing to others. I agree with <a href="https://www.unfe.org/en/actions/vicky-beeching-faith-and-love" target="_blank">Vicky Beeching</a>: "No one should have to choose between their religious faith and their gay, lesbian, or bisexual orientation. We are all God's children, created to love and be loved."<br>
<br>
The conversation lately about the Family Proclamation has to do with the fact that <a href="http://rationalfaiths.com/from-amici-to-ohana/" target="_blank">its origins had to do with political/legal reasons rather than doctrinal/revelatory reasons</a>. But there is still much of good there that can be expanded and repurposed with an enlarged vision. One example: "We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society."<br>
<b><br></b>
<b>All families deserve to be strengthened. ALL families. Not just the modern Mormon monogamous ideal. </b><b>Attacking gay marriage/marriage equality does nothing to strengthen families. Only the opposite, ironically. An expansion to the definition of marriage does not hurt/harm/weaken ones existing "traditional" marriage. We do that to ourselves by the way we act in our own marriages. </b>If we <i>really</i> want to prevent further disintegration of families, if we truly wish to strengthen families, the FMH community have come up with some very practical ways: "<a href="http://www.feministmormonhousewives.org/2015/03/strengthening-the-family-a-response-from-the-fmh-community/">Strengthening the Family: a response from the fMh community</a>".<br>
<br>
Do you want to know my plan for strengthening families? Teach love and respect and inclusiveness of all, regardless of whether ones family has a mother and a father, two fathers, two mothers, only one parent, and regardless of whether they are able to raise children or not. Teach the Gospel and Faith in Jesus Christ, not the traditional Mormon culture that so many mistake for the pure gospel of Jesus Christ. <b><a href="http://rationalfaiths.com/putting-stones/" target="_blank">Jesus Christ would not be throwing stones at people's families.</a> He'd be putting his arms around all good and sincere human beings, regardless of culture, gender, or orientation, and telling us to "go and do thou likewise".</b><br>
<br>
<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/useful-or-not-i-value-truth-over.html">In 1947 the First Presidency was completely wrong about racism and ethnocentrism</a> in the 1900's--projecting those views onto God, while brother Lowry Nelson--a liberal--was right. History has vindicated brother Nelson. If they could be that wrong then, they could very well be wrong now in <a href="https://www.lds.org/church/news/church-signs-amicus-brief-filed-on-marriage?lang=eng" target="_blank">filing amicus briefs</a> against marriage equality. I personally think God is much bigger and more loving and more inclusive than most Latter-day Saints currently give Him credit for.<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjR-sJ7Fa_xCZghCsV8S8XT3WvKDsAlg7-QEyRwCf9ue2UfmXnmYplh9UqFFHY_0-fQwvKMGL-kbDK_u_3T8kWE3OMM7rxgAPQoItXVeKKDAVLC-7G_CAChFq4JQgugnbDJWMi0qYZov606/s1600/IMG_6818.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjR-sJ7Fa_xCZghCsV8S8XT3WvKDsAlg7-QEyRwCf9ue2UfmXnmYplh9UqFFHY_0-fQwvKMGL-kbDK_u_3T8kWE3OMM7rxgAPQoItXVeKKDAVLC-7G_CAChFq4JQgugnbDJWMi0qYZov606/s320/IMG_6818.JPG" width="320"></a></div>
<br>
<b>If I'm wrong, I would far rather err on the side of charity and inclusiveness than to be a stumbling block in the path of my neighbor--including my LGBT neighbor. I want to be a blessing to all of God's children, including my LGBT neighbors. </b>As the hymn says, doing good [to ALL] is a "pleasure", a "joy beyond measure, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aUeLeKlrac&sns=fb">a blessing of duty and love</a>."<br>
<b><br></b>
<b>I believe our true duty is to help strengthen ALL families without diminishing any particular family in the least. But even more importantly, I think the only family I need to really worry about is not my neighbor's, but the one living within the walls of my own home. </b></div>
<div>
<b><br></b></div>
<div>
<b></b><br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<b></b><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgQBecl2Xuxe-Ir0nfDDvWJOKKwLdugL3Jd-wYMLIoZqsG8f0ZKwBZsO6GA1rXFp56cqlU-0YySuaZSw-DnOy530QDX-ALD7xH80waGwDdfftwoMJDtqIcED6Dn6d9pQTgkEoXHIQP1g4N/s640/blogger-image-1039547672.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgQBecl2Xuxe-Ir0nfDDvWJOKKwLdugL3Jd-wYMLIoZqsG8f0ZKwBZsO6GA1rXFp56cqlU-0YySuaZSw-DnOy530QDX-ALD7xH80waGwDdfftwoMJDtqIcED6Dn6d9pQTgkEoXHIQP1g4N/s400/blogger-image-1039547672.jpg" width="400"></a></div>
<b><br></b></div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-30215453334599981812015-05-12T14:33:00.000-05:002015-05-12T21:29:19.932-05:00Decalogue for Dissenters<i class="tr_bq">The first <a href="https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/" target="_blank">Sunstone</a> piece I may have ever read was likely <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armand_Mauss" target="_blank">Armand Mauss</a>'s</i><i> "<a href="https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/076-07-10.pdf">Alternate Voices: The Calling and its Implications</a>," though I first encountered it at Times and Season's reposted as "<a href="http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/05/alternate-voices/">Alternate Voices</a>". I remember being particularly impressed by the final section, "Decalogue for Dissenters", and apparently Elder Dallin H. Oaks (who himself was a founding member of the editorial board of <a href="http://www.dialoguejournal.com/" target="_blank">Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought</a>) saw value in it too, for he sent a short letter (three lines) to compliment Brother Mauss on his piece and express approval of it’s interpretation of <a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1989/04/alternate-voices?lang=eng" target="_blank">his conference address</a>. Those of us today who at times feel called to dissent, whether in person or even on Facebook or through blogging, will likewise <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/search/label/Armand%20Mauss" target="_blank">find value in Armand Mauss's words</a>:</i><br>
<div>
<i><br></i></div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-style: italic;"><img alt="Image result for dissenters" class="rg_i" data-sz="f" height="320" jsaction="load:str.tbn" name="fpHB6x2G67BITM:" src="" style="height: 187px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: -9px; width: 187px;" width="320"></span><br>
<span style="font-style: italic;"><b><br></b></span>
<span style="font-style: italic;"><b>Decalogue for Dissenters</b></span></div>
<div>
<blockquote>
My remarks in this final section are directed mainly to those who would undertake to join the ranks of “alternate voices” as speakers, not just as listeners. These include, I hasten to add, not only academics or other professional intellectuals but anyone who would aspire to be efficacious in offering alternative ideas or counsel to the saints and their leaders at any level, whether in the pages of Dialogue and SUNSTONE, in ward council, priesthood quorums, Relief Society, or Sunday School. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
I would like to share ten principles that I have learned, sometimes painfully in the breach, during the past twenty-five years from my own efforts to offer an effective “alternate voice” at various forums and occasions. As a rhetorical devise, I will use the imperative tone appropriate for a decalogue; I apologize in advance if the tone also seems imperious in places. Also, since my efforts have taken place in the context of an ultimate commitment to the LDS faith, some of the following principles will be less applicable to those who don’t share that commitment. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>1. Seek constantly to build a strong personal relationship with the Lord as the main source and basis for your own confidence in the alternate voice you are offering. </b>We often have to do without the Church’s approval, but we need the assurance of the Lord’s. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>2. Do your homework before you speak up.</b> We must be sure that our knowledge of the scriptures, of history, and of other relevant data on a given matter will bear up well under scrutiny and under efforts at rebuttal. Otherwise, our offerings will be exposed as unreliable, we will lose credibility as intellectual leaders or teachers, and we will be suspected even by our sympathizers as mere malcontents. No one expects infallibility, but we must know whereof we speak, especially if we espouse an unpopular or untraditional idea. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>3. Relinquish any and all aspirations (or even expectations) for leadership callings in the Church.</b> Actually, that is wonderfully liberating. In any case, stake and ward leaders, to say nothing of general authorities, rarely call people to powerful positions who are suspected of too much “independent thinking.” To be sure, the ranks of “alternate voices” have provided occasional examples of bishops, stake presidents, and Relief Society leaders, showing that there may be some happy exceptions to this generalization, but don’t count on that. If you have a career in C.E.S. or in any other Church bureaucracy, don’t expect approval or promotion to accompany your identification as an “alternate voice.” </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>4. Endure graciously the overt disapproval of “significant others,” including family members, but never respond in kind.</b> Lifelong friends and old missionary companions may sever (or reduce) friendship ties when they learn that you are one of "those.” They simply cannot understand what your “problem” is. If such reactions prove especially crucial in your case (e.g., if your marriage is threatened), you will have some tough choices to make. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>5. Pay your “dues” as a member of the Church.</b> <a href="http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2012/12/are-we-paying-too-much-tithing.html" target="_blank">Pay your tithing</a>, make clear your willingness to serve wherever called, and do your best to get your children on missions. Try as hard as anyone to “keep the commandments.” You still probably won’t get much Church recognition, but you will win over a few who once looked on you with suspicion. More important, you will make it difficult for your critics to dismiss you as an apostate, for all will see that “thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death” (D&C 121:44). </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>6. Be humble, generous, and good natured in tolerating ideas that you find aversive in other Church members, no matter how “reactionary.”</b> As “alternate voices,” we cannot complain when we are ignored or misunderstood if we respond with contempt toward those whose ideas we deplore. Besides, if we have any hope of educating them, we have to <b>start where they are and treat them with love and tolerance.</b> <b>No one is won over by being put down, especially in public.</b> Whether in our writing or in our exchanges during Sunday School classes, we must try to <b>be gracious as well as candid</b> (difficult though it be on occasion) and <b>always remember to show forth afterward “an increase of love</b> toward him whom thou has reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy” (D&C 121:43). </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>7. Show some empathy and appreciation for Church leaders, male and female, from the general level down to the local ward and branch.</b> Anyone who has ever held a responsible leadership position knows how heavy the burdens of office can be, especially in callings like bishop, Relief Society president, and stake president (to say nothing of apostle), in which the decisions made can affect countless numbers of people for good or ill. We may privately deplore the poor judgment, the unrighteous dominion, the insensitivity, and even the outright ignorance of some leaders. Yet, after all, they are, like us, simple mortals doing their best according to their lights. Some of them sacrifice a great deal for no apparent benefit, and all are entitled to our support, and occasionally our praise, whenever these can reasonably be given. When they do something outrageously wrong, they need our sympathy even more. “There but for the grace of God . . . ” etc. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>8. Do not say or do anything to undermine the influence or legitimacy of Church leaders at any level.</b> They have their callings and prerogatives, and we should not step forth to “steady the ark” by publicly offering our alternative leadership. Please don’t misunderstand: I am not advocating silent submission in the face of official stupidity. <b>There is much that we can do without playing the role of usurper. When we write for publication, let us by all means criticize policies, practices, or interpretations of doctrine; but let us not personalize our criticisms with ad hominem attacks.</b> They are not only discourteous and condescending, but quite unnecessary. (They can also get you “ex-ed.”) </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>We should feel free, though, to seek private interviews and/or correspondence with Church leaders, including our own bishops, in which we can offer, in a spirit of love and humility, our constructive criticisms and suggestions.</b> If these are ignored, then at least we have exercised our callings as “alternate voices,” and we have done so without sowing seeds of contention. We are not responsible for how a given leader carries out his or her stewardship. Yet we are not powerless, which leads to the next principle. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>9. Take advantage of legitimate opportunities to express your “alternate voices” and to exercise your free agency in “alternate” ways within the LDS church and culture</b>. We must never lapse into a posture in which we just sit and gripe. If we find the correlated lesson manuals to be thin fare, it is up to us as teachers to enrich them with relevant supplementary material (including some “alternate voices”). If we are not teachers, then at least we are obligated as class members to <b>speak up knowledgeably and enrich the class,</b> not simply boycott it. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
If we find a general intellectual famine at Church, then we are free to start study groups of our own to supplement the Church fare for those who feel the need. Some of our more conservative leaders may not like such unsponsored study groups, but they have no right to forbid them, and they seldom try (but don’t forget principles 2, 3, and 4). In short, even if we are not bishops or general authorities, and even if we are ignored by those who are, there is much constructive that we can do with our “alternate voices”: “For the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves. And inasmuch as they do good they shall in nowise lose their reward” (D&C 58:28). </blockquote>
<blockquote>
<b>10. Endure to the end.</b> <b>The calling of “alternate voice” is too important for us to allow ourselves either to be intimidated by the exercise of unrighteous dominion or to be silenced by our own fatigue. </b>“And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not” (Galatians 6:9; D&C 64:33). I have seen many a rich harvest in people’s lives from seeds planted by “alternate voices,” and I hope to live to see many more. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
Though I have often failed to comply with all ten of these principles, I have learned from my failures as well as from my successes that the likelihood of influence and efficacy for “alternate voices” depends heavily upon compliance with those principles. They also add up to a personal philosophy that has yielded me a great deal of inner peace in my years of coping with <b>the predicament so common among “alternate voices”: commitment to the religion but a feeling of marginality in the Church</b>. That is my testimony.</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-56997909278035393502015-05-06T12:57:00.002-05:002015-05-12T14:38:21.167-05:00A Liahona Latter-day Saint<div>
<i>I never knew <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_D._Poll" target="_blank">Dr. Poll</a> (pronounced Paul--the name was English) in person, but through his writing and recorded work, he has influenced me enough that I can affirm what Thomas G. Alexander said "<a href="https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/096-10-13.pdf" target="_blank">In Memoriam</a>:" <b>Poll was a "dedicated and inspiring teacher</b>," and his legacy deeply and personally influences me today. I consider him, even now, as one of my most significant <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/05/where-truth-flies-you-follow-if-you-are.html" target="_blank">Mormon "maverick</a>" mentors, and <b>my primary example of what it means to be both committed to history and to faith</b>, especially as a <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/03/what-church-means-to-people-like-me-aka.html" target="_blank">Liahona</a> Latter-day Saint. His calm, reasoned, and compassionate voice resonated with me when I listened to this talk <a href="http://mormonstories.org/bonus-2-mormon-mavericks-william-d-russell-and-richard-d-poll/" target="_blank">in audio format years ago</a>, and it continues to inspire me today. In an effort to share it with others and to make the text easier for me to reference in the future, I include it below in its entirety</i>:<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/096-10-13.pdf">R</a><a href="https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/096-10-13.pdf" target="_blank">ICHARD D. POLL</a> was a professor emeritus of history at BYU. This paper was originally presented at the 1993 "Pillars of My Faith" session of the <a href="https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/symposium/" target="_blank">Sunstone Symposium</a> in Salt Lake City on 13 August. He died 27 April 1994.<br />
<br />
<i>M</i><i style="text-align: center;">y life and my study of history have made me optimistic. Things </i><span style="text-align: center;">can</span><i style="text-align: center;"> be better than they are, and they will be if we rise more resolutely and joyously to the faithful proposition: "I am a child of God." Because I believe that God has an interest in the outcome, I confidently anticipate that this church-my church-will continue to change, repenting and improving in response to continuing revelation.</i><br />
<i style="text-align: center;"><br /></i>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHs4ieIhrWCniHYcBSeTUaEVTI7iEbHt_7Cieju-lLz1Bk9Fw7kdm771En6LaEpLK2msLsftbcw13VKaFaXPEFRCh4A0JmIf6I1CoP30k6o59g-6QdkZh6GoeOL8OuvIzzx3M3I6ZVIgkt/s1600/Liahona_close.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="156" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHs4ieIhrWCniHYcBSeTUaEVTI7iEbHt_7Cieju-lLz1Bk9Fw7kdm771En6LaEpLK2msLsftbcw13VKaFaXPEFRCh4A0JmIf6I1CoP30k6o59g-6QdkZh6GoeOL8OuvIzzx3M3I6ZVIgkt/s1600/Liahona_close.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><a href="https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/096-35-38.pdf" target="_blank">A LIAHONA LATTER-DAY SAINT</a></b></div>
<div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
By Richard D. Poll</div>
<br />
<b>For me, faith is what an earlier Paul said it is: "The substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."</b> (<a href="http://biblehub.com/hebrews/11-1.htm" target="_blank">Heb. 11:1</a>.) It transcends empirical knowledge, and because what humanity learns by reason and experience is both finite and fallible, it may even contradict such "knowledge." Where a faith proposition and a knowledge proposition seem contradictory, l feel no compulsion to choose between them <i>unless</i> it becomes necessary to act upon one or the other. Many issues that strain relations between some good Latter-day Saints who are present tonight and some good Latter-day Saints who are not here do not require resolution. For pragmatic and doctrinal reasons, I believe in suspending judgment in such cases. <br />
<br />
<b>I am, in short, a Latter-day Saint who believes that the gospel is true, but has an imperfect and evolving under standing of what the gospel is.</b> My testimony will, I suppose, be of most interest to "people like me"--people for whom neither dogmatic fundamentalism nor dogmatic humanism provides convincing answers to lifes most basic questions.<br />
<br />
The pillars of my faith are two of the Articles of Faith defined by the Prophet-Founder of my church and an interpretive principle provided by a Founding Father of my country.<br />
<br />
The first article of faith affirms: "We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost."<br />
<br />
The ninth article of faith affirms: "We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God."<br />
<br />
<b>James Madison cautioned: "When the Almighty himself condescends to address mankind in their own language, his meaning, luminous as it must be, is rendered dim and doubtful by the cloudy medium through which it is communicated."1 Because I believe with Madison that everyone, including Paul and other prophets, sees eternity "through a glass darkly" (<a href="http://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/13-12.htm" target="_blank">l Cor. 13:12</a>), prophetic infallibility, scriptural inerrancy and unquestioning obedience are not elements of my faith.</b><br />
<br />
I believe in Heavenly Parents who care about me but who will not, perhaps cannot, compel me to obey. <b>I have hope in Christ</b>, and I have drawn strength from the Comforter of whom he spoke. <b>I see history in terms of human strivings to discover divine realities and follow divine principles</b>. Flashes of prophetic insight have elevated those efforts, and Jesus of Nazareth, in his life, death, and resurrection, uniquely embodied those realities. Joseph Smith, a prophet like Moses, Peter, and Alma, gave inspiration and momentum to the gospel dispensation in which, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/03/what-church-means-to-people-like-me-aka.html" target="_blank">as I have written earlier</a>, I find answers to "enough important questions to live purposefully without answers to the rest."<br />
<br />
In The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints I have found ideas, opportunities, and challenges around which I have organized my life. Next to my family, my church is the most important component of that life. I am proud of its contributions to bettering the human condition and grateful for its contributions to my own. <b>If I were in charge of the Church, I would make some changes. Since I am not, I must be patient, but I need not be passive. As a historian, I know that changes have occurred, and the ninth article of faith assures me that they will yet occur.</b> As I reflect tonight upon the building and testing of my faith, I will offer a few suggestions.<br />
<br />
Pivotal in the evolution of my personal testimony was my family's move from Salt Lake City to Texas in 1929, when I was ten years old. In consequence, I had no close Mormon friends, except my younger brother and sister, in junior and senior high school and five years at Texas Christian University. I found many non-smoking, non-drinking friends and in the process lost any categorical "we-they" perception of the world that I might have brought with me from Utah. At eighteen I was both superintendent of the Fort Worth Branch Sunday School and president of the TCU Student Christian Association. My two closest male friends were a Bible fundamentalist and a liberal Campbellite, neither of whom was more persuaded by my testimony than I was by theirs. I decided then, and subsequent experience has not changed my mind, that people convert to Mormonism and open themselves to the witness of the Spirit when they are dissatisfied with some important aspect of their tangible or intangible condition, and they remain converted when they find in the Church a sufficient and enduring response to that need.<br />
<br />
I was confident that I would marry a bright young woman who would be already Mormon or ready to join the Church, either for the gospel's sake or for mine. As it turned out, the lovely and intelligent Nebraska Methodist whom I left behind in 1939 for a mission to Germany sent me a "Dear John." The war that caused me to be transferred to the Canadian mission later brought me, as an Army/Air Force instructor in Miami Beach in 1943, together with a lovely and intelligent Mormon from Utah. Seven weeks later we were married in the Salt Lake Temple by the same Joseph Fielding Smith who had united my parents in 1916. I am reluctant to attribute World War II to a providential design to bring Gene and me together, but now at our golden anniversary we do think that finding each other was some kind of miracle.<br />
<br />
Texas Christian University had a profound influence on my life and faith. It made me a political liberal, a teacher, historian, football fan, and lover of peace. As a senior I was chosen student body president in an uncontested election because I was the only student council member still on speaking terms with all factions in the controversy that forced my predecessor to resign. <b>Throughout my life I have aspired to be a mediating, moderating, and motivating influence.</b><br />
<br />
At TCU I learned Burke's warning against apathy: "<b>All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good [people] to do nothing</b>," and Goethe's warning against zeal without knowledge: "<b>There is nothing so terrible as ignorance in action</b>." I have quoted both in hundreds of history classes. A course in the New Testament introduced me to another epigram that has influenced my deportment in Church classes, both as teacher and student: "<b>The function of religon is to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.</b>" If I were ever asked to speak in general conference, that would be my text.<br />
<br />
The primary activities to which I have devoted the last fifty years have all helped to shape and test my faith:<br />
<br />
1. My relations with Gene, our three daughters, their partners, and our seven grandchildren have been central to my life. Had I experienced "consciousness raising" earlier, I would probably have been a better husband and father, but Gene and I worked hard at building a traditional LDS home and family and both the effort and the outcomes have brought us happiness. We have faith in the proposition "Families Are Forever," and we recently watched a grandson sing the lead in <i><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday's_Warrior" target="_blank">Saturday's Warrior</a></i> without letting theological questions mar our enjoyment of the occasion.<br />
<br />
2. My relations with the Church have included attending meetings regularly, going to the temple occasionally, and accepting callings ranging from branch president, bishop's counselor, and high council member, to officer and teacher in every organization for which I am gender-qualified. Currently I teach the high priests along with a sweet-spirited and knowledgeable retiree from the BYU religion faculty. The class members seem to find his scripture-based answers and my scripture-based questions equally engaging. If the hours devoted to teaching preparation, informal gospel conversations, and unofficial Church-related gatherings are added to the hours in scheduled meetings, both my income and my time have been tithed, and I begrudge neither offering.<br />
<br />
3. Except for the appointment as administrative vice president that took me to Western Illinois University after twenty-two years at BYU, my professional life has been closely linked to Mormonism. <b>As a teacher and writer, I have observed how encountering history affects religious perspectives. It nudges some people toward disbelief and drives others into denial, but it provides more questions than answers. History is hard on myths and traditions that are contradicted by non-Hofmannesque evidence, but it neither proves nor disproves the central faith propositions of the gospel.</b><br />
<br />
My own life with history, including the history of my own life, leads me to these observations about my church and my personal testimony: <br />
<br />
<b>I belong to a church whose past and present leaders, with a few exceptions, have been men and women of ability, integrity, and devotion.</b> <b>I occasionally differ with their collective decisions or think uncharitably about individuals among them, but I believe that they seek to serve God and that, taken as a whole, the fruits of their labors are good. As my brothers and sisters, they are entitled to my sympathy, support, and suggestions</b>.<br />
<br />
<b><a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/11/what-sustaining-our-leaders-really-means.html" target="_blank">I sustain</a> fifteen of my church leaders as prophets, although <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/useful-or-not-i-value-truth-over.html" target="_blank">history tells me that leading any organized religion is primarily a priestly rather than a prophetic function</a></b>. As voices crying in the wilderness, <b>prophets like John the Baptist and Joseph Smith challenged the ecclesiastical status quo</b>. Among recipients of each new dispensation of divine truth, however, there quickly arises concern for preserving and protecting what has been received. <b>Among today's prophet/high priests, there seems to be intense preoccupation with what may happen if unauthorized hands touch the ark of the covenant.</b> <b>There is reluctance to consider any unsolicited suggestion even if "it seems so reasonable and right."</b> <b>I pray that these understandable concerns do not produce insensitivity to <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/07/on-asking-questions-and-patiently.html" target="_blank">changing needs among the Saints and to new possibilities</a>.</b><br />
<b><br /></b>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh53FAIPI8Wh8HjEOsF2DQZD1gcN0VZdaq3y2ealKw_N1PZT-edOIq3QhSD-nuXF13sPCcJaCmHbhMR25DcZQVqiCU9kl14Ar4WLis99uurbS0COyKphqNwbDrgGTCMX3OIHL-LLwJGHTEb/s1600/images.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="185" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh53FAIPI8Wh8HjEOsF2DQZD1gcN0VZdaq3y2ealKw_N1PZT-edOIq3QhSD-nuXF13sPCcJaCmHbhMR25DcZQVqiCU9kl14Ar4WLis99uurbS0COyKphqNwbDrgGTCMX3OIHL-LLwJGHTEb/s1600/images.jpeg" width="200" /></a></div>
<br />
I believe that <b>revelation may come through visions, dreams, and visitations, as God wills, but my Madisonian skepticism rejects the notion that the mind of a prophet--<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-prophet-is-not-always-prophet-only.html" target="_blank">any prophet</a>--is a fax machine linked to a divine transmitter.</b> The history and scriptures of the Restoration testify that almost every revelation is confirmatory. It responds to a proposed <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/07/on-asking-questions-and-patiently.html" target="_blank">answer to a pressing question</a>, and <b>the timing and substance of both question and tentative answer are shaped by the character, experiences, and needs of the questioner.</b> I believe this is true even if the petitioner for divine guidance is a prophet. <b>I believe it is my right to help shape the context and content of future prophetic inquiries, even as I have tried to do in the past, and I pray for wisdom and patience in asserting that right.</b><br />
<br />
I see merit in the apostolic commitment to support decisions once collectively made, but a wonderful range of personal contacts has convinced me that those who wear the <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2013/05/terryl-givens-on-prophetic-mantle-myth.html" target="_blank">prophetic mantle</a> do not all think alike and that they certainly do not always subscribe to the dictum, "<a href="http://bycommonconsent.com/2009/06/25/when-our-leaders-speak-the-thinking-has-been-done/" target="_blank">When the prophet speaks the thinking has been done</a>." <b>For me, their humanness as individuals makes their collective accomplishments more remarkable</b>. <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/11/what-sustaining-our-leaders-really-means.html" target="_blank">I sustain them</a> in their difficult callings with the realization that, taken as a group, they are neither more nor less singleminded, devoted, and inspired than their predecessors.<br />
<br />
Let me illustrate this component of my testimony with three personal experiences: <br />
<br />
1.When BYU was recruiting students over forty years ago, John A. and Leah D. Widstoe rode to California with Gene and me in our Model A Ford. It was a great opportunity to get to know the man whose book <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Rational-Theology-Signature-Mormon-Classics/dp/156085099X" target="_blank">A Rational Theology</a></i>, helped shape my own beliefs and <a href="https://deseretbook.com/p/word-wisdom-modern-interpretation-john-widtsoe-48130" target="_blank">the woman primarily responsible for expanding the Word of Wisdom into a comprehensive health code</a>. Sensitive to the situation, Gene and I ordered whole wheat toast with our breakfast. When the Widstoes joined us, they ordered white.<br />
<br />
2. In consequence of my publicly criticizing Joseph Fielding Smith's book <i><a href="http://www.sainesburyproject.com/mormonstuff/Man%20His%20Origin%20and%20Destiny.pdf" target="_blank">Man, His Origin and Destiny</a></i>, Gene and I had the remarkable opportunity to meet privately with Church President David 0. McKay and immediately thereafter with President Smith, and to hear them give flatly <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2012/01/great-example-of-respectfully-agreeing.html" target="_blank">contradictory answers</a> to the question, "Is the concept of evolution compatible with the gospel?" We remain to this day thankful that the ninth article of faith sheltered us from having to decide which of these venerable prophets was expressing inspired truth.<br />
<br />
3. On more than one occasion I heard <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/10/a-hugh-b-brown-benediction.html" target="_blank">President Hugh B. Brown</a> speak of the difficult predicament of the counselor in the First Presidency who has "responsibility without authority." Both he and President Henry D. Moyle, his strong-minded predecessor as first counselor to President McKay, were ultimately defeated by it. <b>It is true that the Church has developed a "back-up system" that insures continuity in operations, but it is historically demonstrable that the internal dynamics of the apostolic councils change when the one person who is doctrinally authorized to speak for God to the whole church is unable to lead effectively</b>. I pray, I hope, and I believe that options for accomplishing for the Church what the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution" target="_blank">twenty-fifth Amendment</a> has achieved in the national government are under consideration among our prophet-leaders, and that <a href="http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/2465653-155/at-87-mormon-leader-thomas-s" target="_blank">an appropriate solution</a> will in due course receive divine confirmation.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-church-is-made-up-entirely-of-human.html" target="_blank">I belong to a church</a> whose structure, programs, policies, and doctrinal interpretations are in constant flux, as the concept of continuing revelation requires that they be. My testimony has been strengthened by most of the changes that have occurred since I was required to hold my left hand behind my back while passing the sacrament, and I expect to agree with most of the changes that will yet occur. On the premise that recording them here puts them into the context for continuing revelation, I offer two prayerfully considered suggestions:<br />
<br />
1. The Sunday meeting schedule should be redesigned to address at least these three shortcomings of the present block plan: The strain on the attention and patience spans of little children and those who teach them; the difficulties inherent in trying to produce two short, safe, significant classes in quick succession; and the insufficiently met need for informal social interaction among ward members.<br />
<br />
2. <b>The "<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2010/12/womens-place_10.html" target="_blank">woman question</a>," clearly a subject of profound concern among our prophet-leaders today, should be carried beyond the present laudable focus on curbing abuse of women and children to a consideration of the full implications of gender equality in the kingdom of God</b>. <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Women-Church-Magnifying-Womens-Impact/dp/1589586883" target="_blank">Changes requiring only policy modifications</a> might include admitting women to the ritual blessings of babies, enhancing the opportunities and recognition given for teen-age girls, encouraging female children to consider missions, and including active LDS women in decision making--as distinct from decision implementation--at the ward and stake levels.<br />
<br />
This is an issue no less fundamental than <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-puzzle-of-polygamy_23.html" target="_blank">the plural marriage question</a> that produced a revolutionary revelation a century ago and <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/06/owning-our-history-race-and-priesthood.html" target="_blank">the racial problem</a>, the revealed solution to which is revolutionizing the Church today. What does the future hold? Surely this is one of the great and important things on which we can anticipate further light and knowledge. <br />
<br />
<b>It is exciting and faith promoting to belong to a church in which many, many men and women of ability and commitment face challenges as great as any earlier generation</b>. While our prophet-leaders confront the <b>daunting task of separating traditions and customs from gospel universals</b>, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/mormonism-sausage-makers-religion.html" target="_blank">they remodel organizations, policies, programs</a>, even priesthood quorums in <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-church-is-made-up-entirely-of-human.html" target="_blank">ways that suggest both flexibility and inspiration</a>. It seems clear to me that <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/07/men-are-ordained-to-serve-in-priesthood.html" target="_blank">they are asking <i>many</i></a> of the right questions and receiving many excellent answers. Most of their public and private counsel focuses on Christ's precepts for living.<br />
<br />
<b>When things are said and done that suggest the <a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/121.39?lang=eng" target="_blank">thirty-ninth verse of Doctrine and Covenants 121</a> </b>("We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion"), <b>or the fable of the king's new clothes, we may still choose, aware of our own spiritual nakedness, to help create a better royal wardrobe rather than abandon the court and the kingdom. </b>Reinforcing my resolve to carry on is my conviction that among our dedicated and prayerful prophet-leaders there must be a growing awareness that <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/04/a-timeless-argument.html" target="_blank">the present bureaucratic approach to us Mormon mavericks is not only counterproductive but morally questionable</a>. As <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/holy-hope-for-holy-leadership.html" target="_blank">we anxiously discuss what to do about the Brethren</a>, we should derive encouragement, I think, from the clear signs that they are anxiously concerned over what to do about us.<br />
<br />
My life and my study of history have made me optimistic. <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/12/on-being-seasick-while-staying-in-boat.html" target="_blank">Things <i>can</i> be better than they are</a>, and they will be if we rise more resolutely and joyously to the faithful proposition: "I am a child of God." They can and will be when those who must "prove all things" (<a href="http://biblehub.com/1_thessalonians/5-21.htm" target="_blank">1 Thes. 5:21</a>) and those who steadfastly "hold fast that which is good" realize that they are defending two sides of the same divine formula. Because I believe that God has an interest in the outcome, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/dear-elder-christofferson.html" target="_blank">I confidently anticipate that this church--my church--will continue to change</a>, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-churchs-cardinal-sin-of-blasphemy_28.html" target="_blank">repenting and improving</a> in response to continuing revelation. In this expectation I close with an adaptation of my remarks at last year's symposium:<br />
<br />
Encouraged by the apostle Paul's observation, "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" (<a href="http://biblehub.com/galatians/5-9.htm" target="_blank">Gal. 5:9</a>), <b>I aspire to live out my life as a Liahona Latter-day Saint whose questioning testimony perplexes some and comforts others of his brothers and sisters</b>. <b>I intend to frame my questions, make my suggestions, and bear my witness with charity, humility, and persistence</b>. Thus I hope to help produce a Mormon chorus in which almost all the singers hear the dissonant sounds of the <a href="http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/05/alternate-voices/" target="_blank">alternate voices</a> as <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2013/04/appreciating-tapestrysymphony.html" target="_blank">polyphonic enrichment</a> of the message of <a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/the-music-of-the-gospel?lang=eng" target="_blank">the gospel music</a>.</div>
<div>
<br />
NOTE<br />
1. Quoted in Alpheus T. Mason,"<a href="http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/40469454?uid=3739920&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21106300804471" target="_blank">Free Government's Balance Wheel</a>," <i>Wilson Quarterly</i> (Spring 1972): 97. </div>
<div>
<div class="page" title="Page 4">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-37234730840974257102015-04-28T15:03:00.002-05:002015-11-18T10:41:02.688-06:00The Church's Cardinal Sin of Blasphemy/Idolatry<div style="margin: 0px 0px 0.75em;">
<div class="vk_ans" style="margin-bottom: 0px;">
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 0.75em;">
There's a well-known Book of Mormon story in which a humble prophet named Abinadi engages alone in a hostile exchange with the corrupt, rich, and powerful institution consisting of King Noah and the religious leaders of his time (Noah's priest's.) <i>They </i>thought that if Abinadi were a true prophet he'd bring the "glad tidings" that "all is well in Zion" so they could continue to congratulate themselves on the church/culture they had managed to establish for themselves.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhn7scZHFZYab8rc-wGaRCy1cdgGDFhe567KFKwI101adpg8tRyiCT7BNYbSfgZcEgXgEZyNx90gl84rnskOruKm0Yb6XYTN8cog6jfebaTIy0A1iVfnwAL428ynooQhT37zGi0jEZRa5m/s1600/abinadi-before-king-noah-full.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="226" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhn7scZHFZYab8rc-wGaRCy1cdgGDFhe567KFKwI101adpg8tRyiCT7BNYbSfgZcEgXgEZyNx90gl84rnskOruKm0Yb6XYTN8cog6jfebaTIy0A1iVfnwAL428ynooQhT37zGi0jEZRa5m/s1600/abinadi-before-king-noah-full.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
But the true "glad tidings" happen to be that because of Jesus Christ we can repent! <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/grace-like-oasis-in-desert.html" target="_blank">The grace of Christ</a>--even if suffering must be endured to receive it--truly is amazing! Naturally, those who don't think they have anything of which to repent won't find this message to be one of "glad tidings." It's more likely they'd see the outspoken man crying repentance as being "<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2011/03/uncomfortably-negative-for-some.html" target="_blank">overly critical</a>" and negative. Far better to simply silence the voice and cast him out--his reputation burned--so they can continue on with their merry lives and the status quo. <br />
<br />
Fortunately, the Book of Mormon was meant for our day and should be likened unto ourselves. For those with eyes to see and ears to hear, the true message of repentance is like a breath of fresh air. But when the simple suggestion that even an apostle can be "wrong" is met with a reaction of "blasphemy," our mortal servant leaders have indeed been elevated into the realm of idolatry. And if we're to learn anything from Abinadi (who didn't escape from <i>his</i> predicament alive), let it be this: <a href="https://ldstalk.wordpress.com/2012/03/08/can-grace-save-mormonism/" target="_blank">Grace is our only hope for escape from this and many of our other problems too</a>.<br />
<br />
<i><b>*blas·phe·my</b><br />noun<br />the act or offense of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things; profane talk.<br />"he was detained on charges of blasphemy"</i><br />
<br />
When the top brass of an institution become too sacred to question, the corporate culture stinks. Yet, to many lay members of the church, the fifteen mortal men running the institutional church have apparently become a sacred cow--"above criticism."<br />
<br />
<i><b>*sa·cred cow</b><br />noun<br />an idea, custom, or institution held, especially unreasonably, to be <b>above criticism</b> (with reference to the Hindus' respect for the cow as a sacred animal)</i><br />
<br />
At the beginning of his excellent post, "<a href="http://www.patheos.com/Mormon/Living-with-Fallibility-James-E-Faulconer-11-21-2014.html" target="_blank">Living with Fallibility</a>", James Faulconer (a Richard L. Evans Professor of Religious Understanding at Brigham Young University and BYU philosophy professor) wrote about how "Mormons have a joke that is so old it has become a cliché: Catholic doctrine is that the pope is infallible, but they don't believe it; Mormon doctrine is that the prophet is fallible, but they don't believe it." The joke works because there's truth to it.<br />
<br />
<i><b>*fal·li·ble</b></i><br />
<i>adjective</i><br />
<i><b>capable of making mistakes or being erroneous</b>.</i><br />
<i>"experts can be fallible"</i><br />
<i><br /></i><i>(synonyms: error-prone, errant, liable to err, open to error;</i><br />
<i>imperfect, flawed, weak)</i><br />
<i><br /></i><i><b>*in·fal·li·ble</b></i><br />
<i>adjective</i><br />
<i><b>incapable of making mistakes or being wrong</b>.</i><br />
<i>"doctors are not infallible"</i><br />
<i>"an infallible sense of timing"</i><br />
<i><b>never failing; always effective</b></i><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i>(synonyms: unerring, unfailing, faultless, flawless, impeccable, perfect, precise, accurate, meticulous, scrupulous)</i><br />
<br />
<b>We cannot have it both ways</b>. <b>We can't reluctantly acknowledge <i>fallibility</i> yet act as though we should expect <i>infallibility</i></b>. We can't acknowledge God uses the "<a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/1.24?lang=eng#23" target="_blank">weak</a>" things of the earth to do His work (so that we'll put our faith in <i>Him)</i>, but continue to act as though we can place our faith in "strong" mortal leaders. These words actually mean something. Unless we invent our own definitions, these ideas are not harmonious. <a href="http://www.patheos.com/Mormon/Living-with-Fallibility-James-E-Faulconer-11-21-2014?offset=0&max=1" target="_blank">Faulconer goes on to observe</a> that the way Latter-day Saints have traditionally taught about their prophet-leaders has led many to believe in false assumptions that in turn have led to tragic consequences. Sadly, I see those tragic consequences every day. I cannot in good conscience bring myself to look away and ignore them.</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 0.75em;">
Faulconer expresses my own feelings when he shares hope that the <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics?lang=eng" target="_blank">new church essays</a> may signify an important change in strategy and gives "hope that they will help Latter-day Saints rethink what it means to recognize authority and to have a living prophet." The blunt problem is, the majority of people don't read the essays, and many of those that do don't allow what they read to change the status quo of their thinking or simply fail to grasp the implications. <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/10/what-mormons-shouldand-should-notexpect.html" target="_blank">Notable internet exceptions, notwithstanding (thank you Julie Smith)</a>. Faulconer writes:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>We have often been guilty of a kind of idolatry of our leaders, implicitly imputing the characteristics of God to them because we thought that is what it meant to be called by God.</b> To my knowledge few of our leaders asked for our idolatry, but we fell into it anyway. <b>Perhaps our new strategy will help us repent.</b></blockquote>
I can truthfully say that recent interactions with fellow Mormons (online and in person) have convinced me that most Mormons haven't even recognized the <i>need</i> to repent. Many apparently see nothing wrong with this idolatry, nor with the status quo. I sincerely appreciate <a href="http://www.patheos.com/Mormon/Living-with-Fallibility-James-E-Faulconer-11-21-2014.html" target="_blank">Jim's thoughtful analysis</a> and feel the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would be better off by taking it seriously. But I also feel a sense of chagrin because his voice and others like him will largely go unnoticed. <b>It doesn't appear that we're collectively anxious to <i>rethink </i>and <i>r</i><i>epent</i>.</b><br />
<br />
Tradition resists change. From the lay member who thinks "all is well" to those hard at work at Church headquarters, to the apostle who declares essentially the same thing in general conference ("all is well"/"the Church has never been stronger!") it is clear that not everyone is on the same page with "the new strategy of making our story public even when we find it difficult to explain [to] help prevent the kinds of pain we see some people suffering now", as Faulconer writes.<br />
<br />
I submit that if we're okay with Latter-day Saints believing in prophetic infallibility, we should continue to teach that our leaders <a href="http://www.whatsoeverisgood.com/cannot-lead-you-astray-an-alternate-view/" target="_blank">cannot lead us astray</a> and continue to <a href="https://www.lds.org/ensign/2015/01/follow-the-prophets?lang=eng" target="_blank">print Ensign messages</a> and <a href="https://www.lds.org/music/library/childrens-songbook/follow-the-prophet?lang=eng" target="_blank">sing primary songs</a> about following the prophet as though that's a sure and safe infallible standard. Until Mormons are collectively ready to face the hard reality and own the <i>actual</i> historical record, we have an uphill battle to help Latter-day Saints <i>rethink</i> and <i>repent</i>.<br />
<br />
It would be to our advantage to truly and thoroughly <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/12/adam-miller-on-flawed-prophets.html" target="_blank">embrace the good news and the bad news of prophetic fallibility</a>, sooner rather than later. Only then can we recognize what <a href="http://www.patheos.com/Mormon/Living-with-Fallibility-James-E-Faulconer-11-21-2014.html" target="_blank">Faulconer </a>so eloquently stated:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
My hope is that the conversations <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics?lang=eng" target="_blank">the recently published materials</a> create will help us learn that being called by God isn't an either/or. It isn't that either the person is called by God and never makes a mistake in their calling or he isn't called by God at all. I hope we will begin to see the falsity of that dichotomy, that we will <b>develop a more mature understanding of our relationship to those who lead us, one in which we neither idolize the prophets nor assume that their humanity means we ought to no longer follow them.</b></blockquote>
In light of this more "mature understanding", how <i>should</i> we "follow them?" Knowing what we now know about their past track record, how <i>should</i> we "trust" them in the present? What should it mean to "trust" them in light of our "mature understanding?" We can start by recognizing that <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2013/05/terryl-givens-on-prophetic-mantle-myth.html" target="_blank">priesthood keys do not equate to any degree of holiness or infallibilty</a>. We can still trust our prophet-leaders to be called of God and to receive inspiration in their calling. We can trust them to put our best interests at the forefront, and to even be <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-prophet-is-not-always-prophet-only.html" target="_blank">prophets of God at the rare times</a> when God actually <i>does</i> speak through them as opposed to the times when they simply give us good counsel. But we're not trusting them to be perfect. We're not trusting them to never make mistakes or to not be "wrong." Therefore, we should probably stop acting like they <i>can't</i>. We <i>ought</i> to repent of that notion--<a href="http://www.dovesandserpents.org/wp/2013/01/the-false-gods-we-worship/" target="_blank">that idol of infallible leadership</a>.<br />
<br />
It takes hard work to follow prophets because you have to seek personal revelation/inspiration to <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-prophet-is-not-always-prophet-only.html" target="_blank">discern when a prophet is acting as a prophet</a>. Contrary to popular belief, the President of the Church is the president 24/7, but he becomes prophetic only when he becomes prophetic. "Prophet" is not an office--it's a gift. <a href="http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2015/08/how-we-know-thomas-monson-is-prophet.html" target="_blank">Regardless of whether or not those gifts are exhibited, we sustain 15 men and designate them as the only "prophets" for the entire church</a>. We've become accustomed to constantly referring to Church presidents as "the prophet", and perhaps the semantics have unintentionally contributed to the idolatry. Conflating all-important <i>obedience to principles</i> with <i><a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/11/hazards-of-obedience.html" target="_blank">unquestioning obedience to persons</a> </i>will also likely lead to idolatry<i>, </i>among many <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/11/hazards-of-obedience.html" target="_blank">more tragic consequences</a>.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/12/adam-miller-on-flawed-prophets.html">Adam Miller has done an admirable job</a> trying to help us rethink what it means to recognize authority and to have a living prophet and to repent of our idolatry. But how many members of the Church have even heard of Adam Miller? It's nice that the Maxwell Institute has published his work, but the way the Ensign recycled an old CES message and added "Follow the Prophets" as a title to it for the First Presidency <a href="https://www.lds.org/ensign/2015/01/follow-the-prophets?lang=eng" target="_blank">January 2015</a> edition convinces me we still have a ways to go. (It's hard not to sound condescending here, but many unthinking people will continue to see nothing wrong with this, because hey, isn't the Ensign also infallible?!)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/12/adam-miller-on-flawed-prophets.html" target="_blank">Adam Miller</a>:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It's a false dilemma to claim that either God works through flawless people or God doesn't work at all. <b>The gospel isn't a celebration of God's power to work with flawless people. The gospel is a celebration of God's willingness to work today, in our world, in our lives, with people who clearly aren't. </b>To demand that church leaders, past or present, show us only a mask of angelic pseudo-perfection is to deny the gospel's most basic claim: that God's grace works through our weakness. We need prophets, not idols. Our prophets and leaders will not turn out to be who you want them to be. They are not, in fact, even what God might want them to be. But they are real and God really can, nonetheless, work through their imperfections to extend his perfect love.</blockquote>
<b>If the gospel is about God's perfect love (and it is), particularly embodied in Jesus Christ, why in the world do we insist on making this into the church of the prophets? Wasn't Abinadi's point to get the priests to look past the prophets themselves and to land their sights squarely on Christ and His atonement?</b> It has always been so easy for God’s people to misread the scriptures and focus on the lesser law/lesser things. Prophets (like <a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/mosiah/14" target="_blank">Abinadi who in turn quotes Isaiah</a> to make the point even more explicit) give their lives to get us to remember <b>the central focus of the scriptures is the atonement of Christ--<i>not</i> the authority of the religious leaders!</b><br />
<br />
How we have allowed ourselves to go down this "authority" path so long as though it were so literally essential is beyond me. <b>It completely misses the boat to make the main message <i>about</i> the boat, or the <i>crew</i> of the boat. Rather, the main message should be God's perfect love</b>, <b>because God <i>is</i> love, and <a href="http://biblehub.com/matthew/22-40.htm" target="_blank">love fulfills all the laws and the prophets</a>.</b> Since only God is perfect, we can trust the prophet to do his best to seek God's will, but <i>not</i> to never be wrong. Maybe we should have an Ensign message about<i> that.</i><br />
<br />
If I were in charge (thank goodness I'm not!) I'd put a stop to the practice of standing in reverence while leaders enter the room. Even things intended to be respectful can unintentionally be taken too far. But since I'm not in charge (fortunately) I suppose I should just be glad that at least we're not bowing down on the ground before them. <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/04/black-robes-of-false-priesthood-and.html" target="_blank">Hugh Nibley once wrote</a>: "<b>It is quite inconceivable that the gospel should ever be under condemnation, though the Church has been from time to time. They are not the same thing. The one is a teaching; the other, an organization to foster that teaching</b>."</div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 0.75em;">
I have serious reservations about the way the church organization presently fosters gospel teachings. Gospel teachings of following <i>Christ</i> are too frequently substituted for messages of following <i>prophets</i>. I'm not a betting man, but I'd be willing to wager we're <i>still</i> under condemnation. Too many Saints have trouble even making a distinction between the church and the gospel. And too many ecclesiastical leaders have trouble making a distinction between an actual "apostate" and a concerned disciple who prioritizes placing their faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ over their faith in a church organization.<br />
<br />
We've allowed ourselves to turn the 24/7 office of "President of the Church" into a synonym for "prophet", <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-prophet-is-not-always-prophet-only.html" target="_blank">even though Joseph Smith taught that "a prophet is only a prophet when acting as such.</a>" One could be forgiven for wondering whether the Latter-day Saints have indeed placed an additional mediator between us and God. At times it seems as though it's not enough to follow the Savior--the Mediator between us and the Father. Apparently it's becoming expected that we now make "the prophet" into a mediator between us and the Mediator. <b>We must repent of this idolatry--this cardinal sin of blasphemy.</b><br />
<br />
On the one hand we have these wonderfully <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics?lang=eng" target="_blank">nuanced essays</a> that should cause us to <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/10/what-mormons-shouldand-should-notexpect.html" target="_blank">re-evaluate our paradigms of what to expect--and what not to expect--from prophets</a>, helping us to "see that <a href="http://www.patheos.com/Mormon/Living-with-Fallibility-James-E-Faulconer-11-21-2014?offset=1&max=1" target="_blank">prophets don't usually get definitive answers to their questions</a>, and even when the answer is definitive, they don't often, if ever, get definitive directions for how to put into practice what they have been told." On the other hand there are some who clearly want to double down on the old paradigm. How long shall we halt between the two? We can't acknowledge in our historical essays that even our prophet-leaders can be seriously wrong and then continue to spread the message in the Ensign that you don't need to think for yourself, but just do what you're told and you'll be "safe."<br />
<br />
This life wasn't meant to be safe--it comes with great risk. Life wasn't meant to be easy, as though God were a GPS system telling us how to avoid the pitfalls and the detours. He doesn't even do that with prophets. He gives them the keys and then trusts them to get the church to safety in one piece without taking over the steering wheel. Every once in awhile the prophets take longer-than-necessary detours or swerve so hard some are made to feel like throwing up. But we're in it for the experience. And we learn most from the hard experiences. If we're wise we'll learn from our mistakes in order to make the trip better in the future. We won't deny nor condemn others for their mistakes, rather we're to "give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest" to us those mistakes and imperfections, so "that [we] may learn to be more wise than [others] have been" (<a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/morm/9.31.31" target="_blank">Mormon 9:31</a>.)</div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 0.75em;">
While it's not my place to grab the steering wheel (<a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/121.34-46?lang=eng" target="_blank">not even God coerces</a> the driver), I still have a responsibility to love and help the driver as best I can. <b>I believe our prophet-leaders are entitled to our sympathy, our support, <i>and</i> our suggestions.</b> We're not lemmings just along for the ride. We're free agents. It <i>would</i> be easier to just sit back and trust the authorities. But we've seen what happens when we go down that path. (And that path starts looking a lot more like Satan's plan than God's plan.)<br />
<br />
The <i>easy</i> path is to <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/05/when-prophet-speaks-is-thinking-done.html" target="_blank">let someone else do all the thinking for you</a>. It's harder to follow prophets when you have to seek revelation/inspiration for yourself to <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-prophet-is-not-always-prophet-only.html" target="_blank">discern when a prophet is acting as a prophet</a>, discerning if the counsel is inspired and/or applies to your circumstances. If all we do is tell people to sit down and shut up in the proverbial boat, we're no longer expecting people to exercise freedom of the mind and think for themselves, seeking their own spiritual confirmation. Or is the expectation to be told what to do, just obey, and get in line and don't rock the boat? If so, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/04/an-eternal-quest-freedom-of-mind.html">Hugh B. Brown is probably rolling in his grave.</a><br />
<br />
Obviously there's an extreme line somewhere that I wouldn't want to cross in becoming that annoying back-seat driver. I want to always remain loving and respectful, but I feel I have a duty to alert the driver of dangers <i>I</i> may see out <i>my</i> window, especially if the drivers attention is so focused on the road ahead that he doesn't see what the passengers in the back seat may see. Of course it would be extreme if all someone did was ride along in order to criticize your driving. But there's another extreme of actually having an insight that might help the driver out but failing to speak up because of fear it's not your place. And it would be an extreme driver indeed that was too stubborn to listen to suggestions. I believe in trying to navigate the healthy middle ground between the extremes.<br />
<br />
Likewise, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/11/what-sustaining-our-leaders-really-means.html" target="_blank">I sustain</a> the President of the Church. If you don't like the transportation analogies, perhaps you like a musical analogy. The president is like the head violinist in the orchestra. We all have our notes to play but he's in an important seat. I don't pretend he can't flub a note, and I have no desire to constantly criticize, especially when I'm struggling to focus on my own music. I desire for all to feel <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2013/04/appreciating-tapestrysymphony.html" target="_blank">welcome in the orchestra and to make unique contributions</a>, even in our imperfections. Orchestra's are better when their leadership isn't above receiving feedback from the rest of us. <b>Healthy organizations designate appropriate time and space for feedback (not just conducting occasional surveys) so people can be heard.</b> One place the church might start with is adding a <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2008/02/sacrament-meeting-suggestions-box.html" target="_blank">suggestions box</a> somewhere at each stake center, and perhaps at church headquarters too. My first suggestion would be to stop pretending the institutional church can never be "wrong" and thus <a href="http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/2122123-155/no-apology-really-mormons-question-apostle" target="_blank">above sincere apologies</a>.<br />
<br />
In my post "<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/12/on-being-seasick-while-staying-in-boat.html" target="_blank">On Being Seasick While Staying in the Boat</a>", I write that I don't personally stay onboard this ship because of the crew, and I get very seasick when the voyage is made to feel more about our loyalty to men than our loyalty to Christ:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Joseph Smith once said the people were <a href="http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/nauvoo-relief-society-minute-book?p=48">depending <i>too much</i> on the prophet and "hence were darkened in their minds</a>". Notwithstanding, before long <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2010/04/follow.html">emphasis/focus began to be placed on following the mortal church leaders even more than on following the perfect Savior</a>. Maybe there's a healthy and mindful balance, but I'm pretty sure we're out of balance when it's assumed that by following certain mortals in certain church callings we're automatically following Christ. Autopilot substitution of the former for the latter creates an idol, and <a href="http://janariess.religionnews.com/2014/10/24/idols-mormon-prophets-doubt-authority/">some Latter-day Saints turn our prophets into idols without even realizing it</a>. Is it any wonder some of us are getting nauseous? The scriptures warn about trusting in "the arm of the flesh," yet how many equate "trusting LDS priesthood authority" with "trusting God?" </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I can trust that God is perfect, but my trust in prophets is different. I can trust the prophet to have inspiration when acting as a prophet, and I can trust that prophets are doing the best they can in their unique stewardship and have our best interests at heart. But I'm not trusting them to be infallible. The pseudo-doctrine that prophets "<a href="http://www.whatsoeverisgood.com/cannot-lead-you-astray-an-alternate-view/" target="_blank">can't lead us astray</a>" exists in tension with their expressed fallibility and leads some to mistakenly believe that prophets are perfect in the administration of the things of God. I get seasick when we oversell <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2011/09/prophetic-expectations.html">expectations for prophets</a>, even to the point that some Mormons forget that it's not the <a href="http://rationalfaiths.com/fourteen-fundamentals-falsifying-prophet/">(false) fourteen fundamentals of following the prophet</a> that constitute the <a href="http://en.fairmormon.org/Jesus_Christ/Atonement/Centrality_in_LDS_thought">fundamental principles of our religion, but rather the atonement of Christ</a>.<br />
<br />
This isn't to say that I don't respect the crew. They have a unique job and it's not an easy one. I love and <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/11/what-sustaining-our-leaders-really-means.html">sustain them</a>. But I'm not on board <i>because</i> of the crew. Moreover, if the fundamental principle of our religion is the atonement of Jesus Christ, then it's definitely not fundamental that I agree with or even like everything coming from the crew, regardless of how many times I'm told they won't lead the boat "<a href="http://www.whatsoeverisgood.com/cannot-lead-you-astray-an-alternate-view/" target="_blank">astray</a>". It puzzles me how often that word is used, and yet I'm not convinced we're all on the same page as to what "astray" is even supposed to mean. Some assume this is a "promise" that the ship will never be guided wrong, and some assume it was the Lord who made such a "promise" in the first place. It's clear that we need to work through some tensions that inevitably come from <a href="http://www.patheos.com/Mormon/Living-with-Fallibility-James-E-Faulconer-11-21-2014.html">living with fallibility</a>.</blockquote>
If I'm not on board this particular ship because of the crew, can we please stop hearing so many messages about the crew? Can we please hear more messages about Jesus Christ? Other boats do this quite well. If we're humble, perhaps we could learn a thing or two from them. If we even <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-prophet-is-not-always-prophet-only.html" target="_blank">paid more attention to our own history</a> we could learn a thing or two:</div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 0.75em;">
"<b>Our inspired prophets sometimes make mistakes</b><br />
<b>Never blindly follow, caution we must take<br />It is up to us to know how to discern<br />In our search for truth we still have much to learn!</b>"</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-90651381190710271842015-04-18T17:08:00.001-05:002015-04-19T04:34:58.140-05:00Lowry Nelson's Reflections on the State of Academic Freedom at BYU and
the Personality of Heber J. Grant<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>Last month I began reading the memoirs of brother Lowry Nelson. Immediately, the historian in me desired to transcribe and share <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/useful-or-not-i-value-truth-over.html">Chapter 16 ("Again the Church and I"</a>), which included one of the most remarkable exchanges in 20th century Mormon history: <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/useful-or-not-i-value-truth-over.html">the 1947 correspondence between Dr. Nelson and the First Presidency of the LDS Church</a> regarding the <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng">racist Priesthood/temple ban</a>, which so deeply concerned him. <br><br> Yet that chapter wasn't the only chapter in which Dr. Nelson wrote about the intersection of his career and his church. Chapter nine, "The Church and I", gives us a glimpse into the atmosphere at Brigham Young University in the early 20th century, as well as the surprisingly idiosyncratic personality of Church President Heber J. Grant. Moreover, Nelson further details the experience that that got him in "hot water," later published as an article in <a href="http://www.dialoguejournal.com/">Dialogue: Journal of Mormon Thought</a> entitled "<a href="http://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V26N03_101.pdf">The Ordeal of Lowry Nelson and the Mis-spoken Word.</a>" Nelson laments how the atmosphere at BYU began to degenerate enough that he left the university before spending the bulk of his career at the University of Minnesota and finally retiring back to Provo:</i><br>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b style="color: #333333; font-family: Verdana, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 16.899999618530273px;"><br></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br>
<b><i>In the Direction of His Dreams </i></b><br>
Memoirs of Lowry Nelson<br>
<br>
<b>Chapter 9 (pages 248—260)</b><br>
<br>
<b><i>The Church and I</i></b><br>
<br>
<div style="text-align: left;">
During the 1920s and the early 1930s, the academic atmosphere at BYU was remarkably free of restraints. About 1933, however, the Church authorities became somewhat uneasy about what was happening. Partly, this unease was the result of an extraordinary summer session in which four faculty members from the University of Chicago gave courses primarily for teachers in the LDS seminaries at the high school level. There were courses in the Old Testament, New Testament, the history of the Christian Church, and one in social ethics. The men were well-known authorities in their fields. The seminary men were extraordinarily enthusiastic about these courses, which opened new windows on their limited theological education and showed the vast landscape of the world of biblical scholarship. This turned out to be something of an affront to the Church authorities. The Church had always claimed to have the “truth,” so why go outside for instruction?<br>
<br>
My old friend Dr. Widtsoe, now an Apostle of the Church, had returned from presiding over the British and European Mission and was made Commissioner of Church Education. It should be noted that almost any teacher in science—physical, biological, or social—is frequently asked by Mormon students how his ideas or instruction conflict with or conform to Church doctrine. Often the questions are not raised in the class, but letters are sent to the President of the Church complaining about the professor.<br>
<br>
Dr. Widtsoe conceived the idea of holding personal conferences with individual faculty members, with another Apostle and President Harris present. An appointment was arranged for each and every faculty member. Questions about the individual’s faith—whether he prayed, paid tithing, attended meetings, held office in organizations, and so on—were the mainstay of the interviews. I was not asked these questions formally as most others were. Both Dr. Widtsoe and President Harris, as I have pointed out several times in this memoir, were friends, and they always seemed to have complete confidence in me. I mention this because it is important to what happened shortly after this “inquisition”—as the faculty termed it. I didn’t know Apostle Callis, the third man present at my interview. But I was practically waved out of the room a minute or so after I had entered.<br>
<br>
Not long after my interview, I found myself in real “hot water.” It was during the summer of 1934, while I was commuting by car to the State Capitol organizing the Welfare Division. On my return in the afternoon, I always went to my office to see what I had to attend to. On one particular day, I was asked to call President Harris, whose office now was in the Maeser Building on the hill. (I was occupying his former office in the Education Building on the lower campus.) Harris told me that Oscar Russell, an old friend of his, had brought in a French professor of economics from the University of Algiers. This Frenchman was making a study of the relation of religion and economics and would like to interview me and get copies of my studies. I was introduced to him, and he, Russell, and I returned to my office. I obtained the bulletins and presented them to the Frenchman. Since he also wanted to interview a student, I introduced him to one who happened to be in my office, Howard Forsyth. While the interview was taking place I returned to my car, anxious to get home because I had a regional social workers meeting that night in Provo. Oscar came over to the car window as I was about to start the motor and told me that the Frenchman would also like to interview an apostate Mormon. He asked if there was anyone I could suggest. I laughed, and said, “I have a meeting tonight which Dean Brimhall will also attend.”</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Would you consider him an apostate?” Russell asked.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Not exactly, but, you know, he is not active in the church.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Well,” asked Russell, “what would his attitude be about immortality?”<br>
<br>
Of course, that was a ridiculous question, and I simply said it would be necessary to ask him. “What is your own attitude about immortality? he asked.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“I suppose I would have to say that it is something I do not know. It is something one can consider as an hypothesis which cannot be tested by any method we know, whether it is true or not. Up to now, nobody has taken me up and shown me the pearly gates.”<br>
<br>
I was still anxious to leave, but asked him what his own attitude was. “I can explain it this way. My field is the study of speech. I have an explanation as to why people lose their voices. It involves the behavior of certain muscles of the throat. I have never seen these muscles behave, but I know they do act in the way I have been able to describe. In that sense I feel I can say that I know immortality is a fact.”<br>
<br>
I told him I thought he had made a great leap in logic and wished I could discuss it further with him, but had to leave. I did say that I thought his was only an hypothesis about the muscles. Some day it might be tested and found false. He was not impressed.<br>
<br>
I soon forgot the whole thing. He was a Ph.D. and held an important post in his field at Ohio State University. I felt free to talk frankly with him, as I always could with my colleagues at the university. A short time after this event, however, I met a friend on the street in Salt Lake City. After an exchange of pleasantries, he said: “I understand you are a very dangerous man at BYU. Oscar Russell says he wouldn’t send his children there because it would undermine their faith.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>That Oscar was spreading this rather widely soon came to me from other sources. I was distressed. It seemed to me quite beneath the kind of behavior one would have a right to expect from a person of his training and position. After all, our conversation had not even been fifteen minutes long. I was also worried that his spreading rumors about BYU would cause harm to the institution.<br>
<br>
So, out of anxiety, I did the wrong thing: I wrote him a letter. In it I reproduced our conversation somewhat as I have just done. I also mentioned the fact that I felt agnostic about the problem, in the true meaning of the word—not knowing. I submitted to President Harris the draft of what I wanted to send to Oscar and asked, “Should I send this?” He wrote in the margin of the draft, “Certainly, FSH.” [Franklin S. Harris]<br>
<br>
Russell was something of a linguist, by the way, and was acting as interpreter for the French economist. I surely thought he would understand the word “agnostic.”<br>
<br>
In a short time, Oscar struck with everything he could muster. He made copies of my letter, wrote a four-page single-spaced letter of his own, and sent copies of both to the members of the Board of Trustees of BYU and to President Harris and Professor Guy C. Wilson—a veteran Church educator now serving on the BYU faculty whom Russell had known for many years.<br>
<br>
Both Harris and Wilson opened their mail while I was still in class. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Wilson came into my office with his copy later on. I was floored. Russell had used the occasion to tell of his own faith and knowledge about immortality. I don’t recall what all else he had said, except that I was by my own confession no better than Robert C. Ingersoll (probably the most famous self-styled agnostic in American history). We all got copies of the letters on Wednesday. It was the custom then for the Council of the Twelve Apostles and the First Presidency to hold a weekly meeting in the Temple on Thursday. After this meeting, following the receipt of the letters, one of the Apostles, Richard R. Lyman, called President Harris from his home and told him what had happened. President Grant had read the letters in the meeting and was very angry. “You better get Lowry and come up in the morning [Friday] and call on President Grant.”<br>
<br>
We went, of course, and it proved to be a memorable day. We called on Dr. Lyman in his Church office, and he said President Grant was so angry that none of them felt they should try to say anything in my defense. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Then he told us of some of this own talks with his colleagues. He mentioned a fellow Apostle, Orson F. Whitney, who wrote a regular column in the Church newspaper called “Saturday Night Thoughts.” In one of these columns, according to Lyman, Whitney had mentioned the miracle of an ax floating on the water. “Now Brother Orson,” Dr. Lyman had said, “you <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">know</i> an ax won’t float on water.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He also told of challenging Dr. Widtsoe on another occasion when he had written something that Lyman thought less than logical. He had said, “Now John, you couldn’t tell that group of men [pointing to a group photograph of engineers on the wall of his office] what you have just told me.”<br>
<br>
The Council meeting must have been an interesting performance by President Grant, although no more detail was offered by Dr. Lyman other than to emphasize that the President<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>was very angry. One can only imagine Apostles Widtsoe and Callis, who had just gone over the staff to discover any heresies, sitting there with red faces and trying to sink through the floor. As an angry President, Grant was not to be interrupted by anyone when he was on the trail of a “professor,” especially one who was showing something less than complete <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">knowledge</i> that the “gospel was true.”<br>
<br>
<b>President Grant was an uncomplicated man. Far from being intellectually interested in problems, he already <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">knew</i> he had the answers: that he was right, that Mormonism had everything he or anyone else needed to be saved in the world to come. He had one sermon. It dealt with his own efforts to improve his ability—to play ball, to learn to sing, and various other accomplishments. His theme was persistence and practice. He had, in short, a monumental ego. His basic secular interest was business, and he tended to measure the quality of other men by the standard of financial success. He was made an Apostle at the age of twenty-six, and as my colleague Professor John C. Swenson once said: “The trouble with President Grant is that nobody had asked him any questions since he became an Apostle.” He was anti-intellectual</b>, and was greatly annoyed by any letters he received from students at BYU that were critical of their professors. He had already gotten the State to take over several junior colleges of the Church, including Weber, Snow, and Dixie, and had tried to get the Idaho Church to take over Ricks College in Rexburg. In this he and been unsuccessful. Grant wanted nothing more than to get rid of Brigham Young University and the annoying letters about professors.<br>
<br>
President Grant received us by appointment at 11am. He greeted us kindly and affably, but explained that he didn’t want to discuss the matter of our visit until 3pm when his counselors, J. Reuben Clark, Jr., and David O. McKay, could be present. We moved to depart, but he began talking about other things and, as it turned out, spent the entire hour with us sitting there listening to him. He seemed completely relaxed, whereas I had expected him to be cold and standoffish. He told us two long stories, one concerning his outwitting a man—I believe a son of Brigham Young—who came to a bank where Grant was working and expected to borrow a considerable sum. It was the Church bank. Anyway, he told how he avoided having to make the loan, which he knew the man was not worthy to have. I was not interested in the details and remember none. <br>
<br>
The other story was far more interesting. It had to do with a celebrated case in Mormon history in which an Apostle, accused of adultery, was dropped from the Council of the Twelve and dis-fellowshipped. The Council had held an inquiry at which the woman testified. The accused Apostle, A.C. Carrington, denied that he was guilty so vigorously, claiming that he was a victim of the woman’s charges, that the Council voted in his favor. President Grant said he believed the woman, although he had no clear evidence to refute the testimony of Carrington. In some manner, which I now forget, he did get further evidence and again brought the charge against his colleague. This time Carrington confessed to having had sexual relations with the woman, but denied it constituted adultery, because adultery involved “mixing of seed” and he (Carrington) had used a silk handkerchief. <b>All of the President’s stories of his experiences made him the hero.</b> So much for 11 o’clock appointment. We were to be back by 3pm. <br>
<br>
After lunch, President Harris and I called on the manager of <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Deseret News</i>, simply as a good-will visit that might yield favorable attitudes toward BYU. S.O. Bennion had recently been appointed to the position after a long tenure as President of one of the LDS Missions. Somehow he got on the subject of President Grant. He said he was called to the President’s office one day and found the President upset because the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Deseret News </i>had not reported a sermon he had given the day before at a funeral. Bennion said he had been visited several times in his mission by President Grant, and had always found him to be a fatherly, genial guest. “I had never seen this man before,” he said of Grant’s behavior this time. “He was not the President Grant I knew. It was someone else.” Bennion told us he then called his editor, Mark Peterson, and asked him to look up the item—which he knew had appeared—and bring it to the President’s office. When the President saw it, he was embarrassed and apologized. Said Bennion, “I think his daughters put him up to these things.”<br>
<br>
The appearance before the First Presidency was rather brief. I was so embarrassed that President Harris nervously went to such lengths to defend me that I was unable to say anything. I think it was just as well, because there was not much I could say. President Grant said, “Of course, we have the evidence here.” (He pointed to a drawer in his desk.) He went on to say that it would be turned over to the Commissioner of Education for him to make an investigation. About the only word of consolation I got from the meeting came from J. Reuben Clark, Jr., when he said, “You used a very unfortunate word in your letter.” He was referring of course to “agnostic.” I couldn’t say at the time that I thought I was writing to an understanding man of some knowledge; at least I certainly hadn’t written to President Grant.<br>
<br>
The following Wednesday the speaker at the weekly assembly in College Hall was David O. McKay, whom I had known for a number of years and greatly admired. I knew all the McKay family. The youngest brother, Morgan, had been a member of our fraternity. Word was passed to me that President McKay would like to see me after the assembly. I went with him, President T.N. Taylor of the Utah Stake, and President Harris to his automobile at the curb. President McKay said, “All I wanted to tell you was that there will be no investigation.” At that I confess I shed a tear.<br>
<br>
There was still some aftermath. <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/04/the-best-general-conference-talk-ever.html" target="_blank">Apostle Stephen L Richards</a>, who was related to the Knight family through the marriage of their children, came to Provo on a visit and let President Harris know that he would like to have a talk with me. Accordingly, I showed up at the Knight home (now the Berg Mortuary). A fire was lit in a bedroom fireplace upstairs, and Brother Richards and I went there for a talk. <b>As we talked about the letters in which I had said I didn’t <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">know</i> that immortality was a fact, he suddenly said something I shall always admire him for: “I am sure you know as much as I do about it.” I was rather sure that was true, but had heard all my life the burning testimonies of men in authority in the Church that they “knew” that there was an existence after death.</b> He went on to suggest that I write President Grant a letter expressing my loyalty to the Church and so on. I did this, but I am sure President Grant never trusted me. He had all the “evidence” he needed in the tirade of Oscar Russell. I never heard from him.<br>
<br>
A footnote on Oscar Russell. He had been trying for years to obtain an appointment in Utah but to no avail. In his letter, he was obviously attempting to prove his own virtue, and by that to ingratiate himself into the favor of President Grant. I confess that the thought entered my mind that I might duplicate the correspondence and circularize the board of Ohio State University, but I had no intention of doing so. I still wonder what they would have thought. Oscar did finally get a job in Utah as superintendent of the deaf and blind school in Ogden. I received one more letter from him after the election of a new president at the University of Utah. I had been a candidate along with Adam S. Bennion, and the Board was tied seven to seven; after many votes, they had chosen a compromise candidate. Oscar wrote to congratulate me on being a candidate along with “such a distinguished man as Adam S. Bennion.” I did not acknowledge the letter; I was through writing to Oscar. <br>
<br>
<b>Pressures on the faculty</b> <b>were increasing and President Harris was no longer able to maintain the spirit of free inquiry that had been so much a mark of his administration up to this time. </b>At least one other faculty member, Hugh M. Woodward in philosophy, had been called on the carpet over his teaching of comparative religions. He had even published a book, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Common Message of the World’s Great Religions. </i><b>In his interview with the First Presidency, Hugh told me that he remarked to them that, since they were members of the Board, they had a right to eliminate the book if they so desired. “No,” said President Grant, “go ahead and teach about these other religions, but when you get through with them show that they are not worth </b><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">that.</i><b>” He snapped his finger.</b> Some faculty members found other jobs; Murray Hayes, a geologist, went to Washington and Walter Cottam, a botanist, to the University of Utah. Woodward (philosophy) found employment with the WPA educational program, and Coach Ott Romney became Athletic Director at West Virginia University. Grant Ivins (animal husbandry) became price administrator for Utah during World War II.<br>
<br>
I was unhappy and disappointed by these developments. <b>In later years, I could see more clearly that during the 1920s and the early 1930s we had been living in a fool’s paradise as far as academic freedom was concerned. The admonition to the faculty by President Harris to “teach the truth” was both sincere and courageous. Of course, he would spell truth with a small “t”’ and his Board, consisting mainly of Apostles of the Church, would agree with the statement but would spell the word with a capital “T.” Up to 1934, the university had been regarded with what one might call “benign neglect.”</b> Any attempt to get increased appropriations from the Church, despite the rapid growth in enrollment, was brushed off with the remark of President Grant that “BYU is now receiving more money than did the entire Church educational system in the days of Horace H. Cummings.” (This would be about the first decade of the century.)<br>
<br>
Suddenly, however, there was now a new concern that something was going wrong. Every letter from a complaining student regarding some faculty member received extraordinary attention. Students reared in the provincial Mormon communities, knowing only Mormon beliefs, and with little knowledge of the developments in secular knowledge, inevitably encountered conflicts in such courses as geology, biology, anthropology, and sociology. If the Bible, as they had always been taught to believe, was “the word of God,” how could there be an alternative theory of the origin and age of the world as well as the origin of man and other life on earth? The theory of evolution was a formidable problem for some students, not to mention that of the instructor who might try to reconcile it with Genesis. <br>
<br>
<b>It is quite</b> <b>clear in retrospect that BYU cannot enjoy academic freedom according to standards established at most state universities and the great private institutions like Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and the rest. The BYU situation compares with that of Harvard in the seventeenth century, when its first President was made to resign because he failed to have one of his children baptized by immersion. It is not quite that bad at BYU, but the guidelines are quite rigid and conformity with them is enforced; the nonconformist is easily purged because the faculty does not have tenure</b>.<br>
<br>
I was greatly relieved when the offer came from Washington to join the New Deal as adviser for four western states.</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-85251831619187504232015-04-13T15:55:00.000-05:002016-12-16T19:25:52.878-06:00Polygamy was not, is not, and never will be of God<div>
My personal sense is that the LDS Church has paid (and will continue to pay) a high price by electing to present its history in the duplicitous way that it has in the past. However, better late than never! The good news is that it's easier to show mercy for past mistakes when good faith attempts are being made to overcome those mistakes by doing better in the present. Mercifully the LDS Church has begun presenting its history in a more honest and accurate way, evidence of which can be found with the <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics?lang=eng" target="_blank">online "Gospel Topics" essays</a> that <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MN1yFbQB_bs" target="_blank">have been commissioned, vetted, and approved by the First Presidency and Quorum of the 12 Apostles</a> and <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics?lang=eng" target="_blank">posted on the LDS.org website under "Teachings"</a>.<br>
<br>
Still, it's going to take a lot more time and a lot of uncomfortable conversations to undo all the years worth of collectively <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2013/05/terryl-givens-on-prophetic-mantle-myth.html" target="_blank">allowing the myth of prophetic infallibility to spread like a cancer among the church</a>. While the <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics?lang=eng" target="_blank">gospel topics essays</a> provide more honest and accurate historical context, I imagine that in order to get unanimous approval, compromises had to be made regarding just how candid or explicit to be. Compromises are necessary at times for progress to be made, so while on the one hand it's wonderful the essays went as far as they did, it's also clear that they stopped short in some areas.<br>
<br>
One of the areas where they stopped short was definitively slamming down once and for all<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2013/05/terryl-givens-on-prophetic-mantle-myth.html" target="_blank"> the myth of prophetic infallibility.</a> Perhaps our leaders fear for the countless Saints whose fragile testimonies are built upon the sandy foundation of "practically perfect" prophets rather than the solid "rock of our Redeemer, who is Christ, the Son of God" and upon which we "must build [our] foundation" (<a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/hel/5.12?lang=eng&clang=ase" target="_blank">Helamen 5:12</a>.) The new modern church essays take incremental steps forward in the right direction without risking any radical rush to shake things up, as was so common during the early days of the Restoration. <br>
<br>
And yet I have some concerns with some of the essays. My biggest concern was not the lack of a definitive "nail in the coffin" on the myth that God commanded the priesthood/temple ban in the first place, allowing some to read it and come away feeling that the <i>explanations</i> for the ban were wrong, but not the ban itself. No, there is enough evidence made clear by the history that we no longer need to continue to disgrace God in order to save the reputation of <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/useful-or-not-i-value-truth-over.html" target="_blank">past prophets and presidents of the church who were clearly wrong</a> when it came to <a href="https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng" target="_blank">race and the priesthood</a>. No, that's not my concern, especially because<a href="https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng" target="_blank"> that particular essay</a> <i>did</i> "unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form." That alone is enough for me to justify equally and unequivocally condemning "<a href="http://bycommonconsent.com/2012/02/29/pride-gross-iniquity-and-suffering-for-ones-sins/" target="_blank">the policy/practice/doctrine</a>" itself that denied black men the priesthood and kept black men and women from the blessings of the temple <i>because</i> <i>it was itself</i> "<a href="http://bycommonconsent.com/2012/02/29/pride-gross-iniquity-and-suffering-for-ones-sins/" target="_blank">profoundly, irreducibly, and irredeemably racist</a>."<br>
<br>
My <i>biggest</i> concern was with the plural marriage essays leaving no room for me as a reader to conclude on my own that <i>polygamy</i> was likewise not commanded by God. Apparently they think we're all supposed to pretend to be perfectly comfortable <a href="http://rationalfaiths.com/disgracing-god-for-prophets/" target="_blank">disgracing God to save the reputation of a prophet</a>. Surprisingly, the plural marriage essays maintain that polygamy was commanded by God despite the "<b>historical and scriptural evidences which show the practice as being actually contrary to Heaven’s intent. </b><b>The Information Age now unravels over one hundred and eighty years of the tenacious, simplistic and presumptive claim that Deity merely commanded this practice and later commanded that it stop. Today’s available information leaves little credibility, integrity or reason for continued neutrality, duplicity or reticence on this question." </b>(Quote by Curtis Henderson in his preface below.)<br>
<br>
<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/i-will-not-seek-to-compel-any-man-to.html" target="_blank">I dream of a more robust church culture/environment</a> that allows faithful people of conscience to conclude for themselves that polygamy was <i>never</i> commanded by God--<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/03/i-will-not-seek-to-compel-any-man-to.html" target="_blank">an enviornment that allows one to follow the truth no matter where the evidence may lead</a>. I can still appreciate the prophetic gift regardless of a prophet's character. <span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">I can handle prophets who do amazing things and also disgraceful things. I can accept that kind of reputation. (It fits with the reality of prophets, whether we’re talking about Moses, Martin Luther King Jr., or Joseph Smith.) Would that the Church collectively could embrace that instead of <a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/10/joseph-smith?lang=eng" target="_blank">trying to make Joseph Smith out to have impeccable c</a></span><a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/10/joseph-smith?lang=eng" target="_blank">haracter</a>, which is a thing Joseph never claimed for himself. <br>
<br>
We don't have to discount the good that came from the restoration even if we reject polygamy as a true part of that restoration. I'll be even more blunt. Even if it were true that Joseph Smith committed adultery (and there are reasons to be ambivalent about that) we don't need to reject that which came forth when he <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-prophet-is-not-always-prophet-only.html">actually <i>was</i> acting as a prophet</a>. <b>The instrument doesn't have to be spotless to still produce good music. </b></div>
<div>
<br>
A lot of research has been done to help us to indeed <b>hear the beautiful music of the gospel and the restoration without having to embrace the discordant and awful notes of polygamy</b>. Curtis Henderson is an active and believing Latter-day Saint whose "thesis concludes that<b> LDS polygamy came into the Church through errant mortal influences more than through purely divine revelation, and that the long supposed benefits or authenticity of this practice will not be realized by practitioners or anticipators." </b><b>He concludes: "</b><b>There is now ample information for outright rejecting the propriety of polygamy. This work does so from the standpoint of believing and embracing the latter-day restoration <i>without</i> having to accept polygamy as a true part of that restoration."</b><br>
<br>
You can <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-vWTh2fWcoWd0gtc0ZXb1R0Z00/edit" target="_blank">view his full article online here</a> or download a PDF and other work of his from the "<a href="http://athoughtfulfaith.org/curtis-henderson-errant-nature-of-polygamy-fallible-prophets-seeking-for-truth/" target="_blank">A Thoughtful Faith" podcast episode 82: <i>Curtis Henderson – The Errant Nature of Polygamy, Fallible Prophets, and Seeking for Truth</i></a>. I highly recommend downloading and listening to the podcast interview and the rest of his work. What now follows is the complete text from just the preface to his article:</div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><u>"Interpreting and Interrupting Polygamy: A Way For Your Escape"</u></b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://athoughtfulfaith.org/curtis-henderson-errant-nature-of-polygamy-fallible-prophets-seeking-for-truth/" target="_blank">By Curtis Henderson</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
Preface</div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div>
After eleven years of study and writing, <b>this modern documentation on LDS polygamy can enlighten believers to embrace the latter-day restoration without having to accept polygamy as a true part of that restoration.</b></div>
<div>
<br>
I began this project in 2000 upon word of the turmoil, separation and later divorce of a family member whose marriage had been undermined with notions of LDS polygamy. <b>In all my adult years (beginning during my LDS mission) I functioned under misgivings and a reserved conclusion that something was wrong with LDS polygamy—that it did not come purely from God. </b>Firm expressions in this direction started discussions, and in 2000 I concluded to thoroughly research this question once and for all. This task was embarked with a determination as never felt before. I recall how I had expressed myself as a bishop (1990s) with two high priests on an occasion where polygamy was discussed in a matter-of-fact way as being a command from God and a necessary part of “the restoration of all things.” I bluntly responded how I did not believe that—that surely <b>polygamy could and should be explained in different terms</b>. While both were surprised at my opposite candor, one responded especially aghast: “Oh!—really?” <b>The look on his face clearly announced he had just discovered his bishop to be “anti-Mormon” (while I felt I was just “anti-fundamentalist”)</b>. Yet <b>I continued to prayerfully search why God might “command” Joseph to live polygamy, until an occasion where I deemed a firm answer came in the form of a question: “Why do you keep suggesting that I did?”</b> I tried to more thoroughly drop that supposition and further my studies. The reader is free to judge whether my early suspicions disqualify me to be heard on this subject. <br>
<br>
<b> Though I was aware that I came through polygamist ancestors, my mother confided that her parents displayed disdain against the practice</b>. Conversely, I would learn that the family doctor, who helped deliver me at birth, wrote a book celebrating the doctor’s courageous polygamist ancestors for their praiseworthy living of the principle having futuristic promise, and claiming that practice to be “for heaven’s sake.” I wanted to send the doctor a manuscript of my early research findings and title it, “For Hell’s Sake, Doctor: Grow Up” (1 Cor. 13). But I didn’t. The doctor recounted enough community history with polygamy to contribute to my understanding. One small town in the community, Freedom, got its name because the main street was exactly on the State border. If the sheriff from one State came after an illegal polygamist, the fugitive simply crossed the street to a different State to avoid arrest. This home town historical reality not only symbolizes the prolonged dance the LDS institution had with this practice and the law as determined by the “School of Hard Knocks,” but perhaps also symbolizes my lot in life as being one of a transitional generation between opposite views and understandings of a peculiar practice. <br>
<br>
As a relatively new religion, <b>the LDS archives started opening to scholars only in the mid 1970s. Thereafter a wave of articles and books on this subject, escalated by the Information Age and the World Wide Web, is still rewriting and sweeping away the simplistic folklore long used to explain LDS polygamy.</b> I would later see that I had joined a swelling wave already well in progress. <b>Naturally, many will see those on the crest of this wave as deserters rather than reformers toward vital and overdue course corrections. </b></div>
<br>
One can notice the publishing dates of the articles and books in the reference notes and realize that most works with substantial information to offer on this topic came within the years of 1977 to the present, with only a few in the 70s and 80s, the vast majority coming <i>after</i> 1991— the bulk of these since 2000. <b>The first major work studied was Van Wagoner’s <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Mormon-Polygamy-Richard-Van-Wagoner/dp/0941214796" target="_blank">Mormon Polygamy</a></i> (1989) which shocks the orthodox perspective into contrary realizations and awakenings. Van Wagoner’s work shows a volume of evidences exposing LDS polygamy of its clumsy mortal and errant characteristics. I would have never guessed that my early suspicions against the validity or purity of the practice would be historically supported in so many detailed ways.</b> I had expected little evidence contrary to the orthodox view. <b>Soon the biggest puzzle to me was how the LDS institution could continue explaining this practice with the oversimplified and superfluous claim that heaven commanded or required it</b>, and that later heaven commanded or required that it stop. <b>I can no longer believe that portrayal, now certain it will not survive the scrutiny of history or scripture. The explanation for LDS polygamy follows a lengthier, more complex and tragic trail.</b> How could God be “the same yesterday, today, and forever” while directing His Church to spend many years pursing opposite directions of a given question? “How long halt ye between two opinions?” (1 Kings 18:21). <br>
<br>
<b>Nearly all these research works come from qualified and believing LDS scholars who maintain testimonies of the Latter-day Church while, contrary to the orthodox view in one degree or another, choosing to exclude some details or beliefs as being outside rather than inside the perimeter of gospel validity or truth. Many have inescapably abandoned the “all or nothing” notion that everything Joseph Smith or the Church teaches or embraces must endure and be defended as being correct or pure.</b> <br>
<br>
In approximately 2005 I discovered and studied Donna Hill’s biography on Joseph Smith (<i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Joseph-Smith-The-First-Mormon/dp/156085118X" target="_blank">Joseph Smith: The First Mormon</a></i>, [1977]—“the first major biography of the founder of the Mormon Church since 1945”) and was surprised at some of her bold statements, at such an early date, acknowledging potentially grave errors in Smith’s life and leadership—certainly far different than institutional portrayals. As volumes continued to surface, the contradictions only became more pronounced. By 1984 Richard Bushman would say: <br>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I am a practicing Mormon who considers himself believing but who rejects absolutist elements of the fundamentalist world view, e.g., the view of Joseph Smith as omniscient or morally perfect or receiving revelation unmixed with human and cultural limitations. However, I do accept non-absolutist incursions of the supernatural into human experience (Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 629).</blockquote>
Later <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Joseph-Smith-Rough-Stone-Rolling/dp/1400077532/ref=pd_sim_b_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=075P10J2Z7BVSQFZA4SB" target="_blank">Bushman’s 2005 book</a> would hit the streets as a “warts-and-all biography” by “the preeminent Smith scholar.” News reported: “<i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Joseph-Smith-Rough-Stone-Rolling/dp/1400077532/ref=pd_sim_b_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=075P10J2Z7BVSQFZA4SB" target="_blank">Rough Stone Rolling</a></i> also acknowledges contradictions between historical records and ‘official’ records of the LDS Church. ‘We should just admit we have a problem,’ Bushman said. ‘And don’t look for a quick fix solution’” (4:53).<br>
<div>
<!--EndFragment--></div>
<br>
A 19 November 2009 KUTV special on Mormons and Masons included an interview with LDS historian Kenneth W. Godfrey who acknowledged that some forty “words and phrases” in our temple endowment ceremony are identical to what Masons use, requiring us to now conclude that Smith “borrowed” them from his personal Masonic experience (many have long known this). Other recent productions and publications tracing the blacks and priesthood issue of the Church, in similarity to the polygamy issue, clearly manifest how prohibiting blacks from the priesthood was not the initial practice, then became the practice (through some mortal and questionable means and influences), and then became again no longer the practice. Monogamy, then polygamy, then back to monogamy followed this same meandering chronology. Even temple practices and policies qualifying patrons for certain rites are ever changing, added or removed. <b>We need to keep our eye on the North Star (Christ) more than on generational understandings or mortals (even true prophets). </b> We need to test all ideas with all scripture, realizing, as warned by the Book of Mormon and other sources, that even scripture has been dangerously infiltrated. <b>I can not imagine some practices within temple policies being anything more than unfortunate remnants of incorrect polygamy notions which will eventually be eradicated from the Church and its temples. Anything that contradicts God’s character or treats genders unequally will not endure, despite the fact that some such practices still do.</b><br>
<div>
<br>
I realize that the study of LDS polygamy is only one subject of many. During this research I certainly studied numerous other subjects and historical detail (some of these works are broad biographies or histories well beyond polygamy). At one point (approximately 2008), Michael R. Ash’s <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Faith-Reason-Scholarly-Evidences-Supporting/dp/1599552310" target="_blank">Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith</a></i> caught my eye and I took a break designed to remind myself of the inexplicable ways the unlearned Joseph got so many things right (by analysis of modern scholars who now have immeasurably more pieces of relevant information to add to what Joseph gathered in his day). I also read through all the standard works with the polygamy question especially in mind, repeatedly scrutinizing sections, verses and areas which substantially applied. <br>
<br>
But <b>the LDS culture has a predominant emphasis on the infallibility of prophets (especially Joseph Smith). Any periodic insistence that we do <i>not</i> believe in the infallibility of true prophets is followed by many implications, assurances and fanatical portrayals that we indeed do</b>. Besides all the scriptural stories divulging repeated fallibility among the prophets, I collected some of the bold scriptural warnings which teach that individuals must guard against prophetic error. Since we are predisposed to emphasize otherwise, these scriptures are seldom if ever used in LDS culture. For example: “For thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; Let not your prophets and your diviners, that be in the midst of you, deceive you, neither hearken to your dreams which ye cause to be dreamed” (Jer. 29:8). <b>Other scriptures boldly warn that prophets may errantly presume to speak His will or word, may see vain visions, may misinterpret in their divination duties, or may declare something as being the certain word of the Lord which is not from Him</b> (Deut. 18:18-22; Ezek. 13:2-3, 7). This inescapable mortal condition was probably forewarned by Moroni who announced that “God had a work for me [Joseph Smith] to do; and that <b>my name should [not just would but should] be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people</b>” (JS-H 1:33).<br>
<br>
The question is not over motives or intentions of Joseph, Brigham or others. The wrestle is not with any mortal but with “principalities,” “powers,” “…darkness,” and “spiritual wickedness” on their way to penetrating our own lives (Eph. 6:12). <br>
<br>
One of my sons coincidently met a well-known actor at a ski resort (2004) and conversed with him about the actor’s enthusiastic interest in producing a movie about LDS polygamy. The actor had joined the Church (married an LDS girl) and was considering making the movie. Typical of the ongoing confusion with this subject, a California bishop had spent some ten years writing and pursuing the script. The actor’s LDS father-in-law was also supportive and expected polygamy in the afterlife. The actor was anxious to talk with someone in the western United States who might have LDS tenure and experience on the topic. My son, upon the encouragement of a co-worker who was aware of this research, connected the actor with me. An hour-long phone discussion ensued, followed by a more detailed letter. Ultimately, the California bishop was upset with me for introducing the actor to an opposite view of LDS polygamy. The actor learned how a member got excommunicated for writing a recent book (Whelan, <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/More-Than-One-Marriage-Heritage/dp/0971770425" target="_blank">More Than One</a></i>; 2001) defending LDS polygamy with a tone for its inevitable coming future (in this life or the next). The actor was shocked to learn of a view different than the one he had been exposed to. <br>
<br>
<b>Van Wagoner made a bold historical analysis for his 1989 book that, “there has been no comprehensive study of polygamy from its earliest stirrings in the 1830s to its current practice among Mormon Fundamentalists.” This was the case for many reasons, among them being unquestioned loyalty, the popularized assumption that everything done by Joseph Smith was purely from heaven, and the long unopened archives of the Church.</b> Van Wagoner then states that <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Mormon-Polygamy-Richard-Van-Wagoner/dp/0941214796" target="_blank">his book “is intended to be a reliable introduction to a complex subject for both Mormons and non-Mormons alike”</a> (MP, xi-xii). Since then, as shown above, volumes of works have surfaced. <b>Those who have not studied the recent information that became available during the 90s and after 2000 have not taken the first step toward understanding this subject.</b> The Church as an institution has not supposed, portrayed, or hardly left room for the errant nature history is now exposing concerning this practice and its entrance into the Church. <b>We can now see substantial evidence that, despite our schooling to the contrary, Joseph Smith’s exuberance for fulfilling his role in reforming apostate Christianity got him swept up in some radical notions, also prevalent in his culture, for the “rejection of civil, secular, sectarian, non-Mormon marriage” (Compton, <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/In-Sacred-Loneliness-Plural-Joseph/dp/156085085X" target="_blank">In Sacred Loneliness</a></i>, 17) to the point that, for a season, he began to see marital fidelity between one man and one woman as a prudish superstition (despite deep scriptural and historical support for strict one-with-one marriage). This trend for abandoning monogamous marriage could have happened partly because he was unlearned, young and inexperienced, took in converts who believed these things, and entertained and incorporated these notions from other religious movements of his day. </b></div>
<div>
<br>
Fortunately, some key documents expressing his thoughts and reasoning, though he had commonly instructed that they be destroyed, in fact were preserved. <b>His letter to Nancy Rigdon, imploring her to be his plural wife, exposes Joseph’s reasoning which Bushman labels “terrifying” and “unnerving”</b> (Bushman, <i>Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling</i>, 441). Despite extreme efforts to hide this practice by using code words, secrecy and inordinate denial, enough pieces of the jigsaw puzzle have now been reset to portray an identifiable picture. Within eleven days of Joseph’s marriage to Zina Jacobs (and Zina and her husband continued to live and bear children together) Joseph publicly seems to defend his odd actions which would likely cause stirrings since multiple people (including Zina’s husband Henry) were certainly involved in the ceremony: “What many people call sin is not sin;; I do many things to break down superstition, and I will break it down” (NP, 76, 523). This precise perspective against traditional marriage endured and was promoted among sincerely religious people of Joseph’s day; and he clearly began to ignore and reject civil marriages (MP, 7-11, 24, 42-49; Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 17, 20-21; NP, ix-xvi, 479-550). For a season Joseph challenged the longtime proven directives for devoted marital fidelity between one man and only one woman (along with the meanings to several of the ten commandments) and held them at bay during some shocking experimentations before the pendulum would swing back toward a semblance of decorum. Eleven of Joseph’s plural wives were married to other men, seven of these being stalwart Latter-day Saint men (Compton, <i>In Sacred Loneliness</i>, 4-9, 15, 43-54; Bushman, <i>Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling</i>, 437, 439). But his practice of marrying women who were already married gradually decreased— his last such marriage being more than a year prior to the martyrdom. And “the eight-month cessation of [any more] marriages at the end of his life is a notable phenomenon” (Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 3). Joseph significantly experimented with some forms of religious anarchy before settling back toward vital basics; at times he attempted “to adapt religion to human nature,” rather than the reverse (NP, xvi, 407).<br>
<br>
Indeed, even today, “Some members [and policies] of the mainstream Mormon Church are also closeted polygamists” (Moore-Emmett, God’s Brothel, 25-26; NP, 546-548). And, as if Joseph did not possess enough weakness in himself, many researchers on this subject declare that (in one degree or another) <b>Brigham Young took some of Joseph’s most questionable teachings to even more radical levels</b> (ex.: NP, 299). <b>Hill (and others) identify Joseph’s risky and inexperienced tendency to overconfidently trust what came into his mind, presuming heaven must be putting it there as a “command”</b> (page 42).<br>
<div>
<!--EndFragment--></div>
<br>
In retrospect perhaps some naivety allowed Joseph’s confidence in seeing himself as being “void of offense towards God, and towards all men” (D&C 135:4). At least one account reports him fainting during his awful personal experience of facing his angry mob while approaching his martyrdom (Hill, Joseph Smith, 407-408). <b>Somehow, no matter how inadvertent or pure his intent, many had become deeply injured and threatened by him.</b> While some unwavering loyalists inside the Church willingly gave themselves, their wives or daughters to his plurality, others were offended and injured. Some stalwartly followed only to realize their trauma later. Others promptly stood and remained in opposition to the practice while obeying their conscience through their enormous pains of leaving the Church and prophet they loved— some being compelled, others at will. Some of these names are still being castigated by the mainstream Church as though we have all the answers. A careful analysis of the following quote manifests the evolutionary, mortal and experimental characteristics of LDS polygamy. <br>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In other words, for over a decade prior to Smith’s first plural marriages, he met and established relationships with those who would later become his wives. …Polygamy was not the exclusive prerogative of Joseph Smith. In his letters and other documents of the period, from his wedding to Emma in 1827 to his first recorded plural marriage in 1841, he committed himself to allow other men this form of concurrent matrimony. But at first, Joseph did not seek a formal wedding. (NP, 35, 38)</blockquote>
In some respects Joseph Smith seemed to embark his mission as reformer or restorer by wiping the slate clean and starting over. Then, in harmony with the reality that revelation must follow a line upon line process, he started some archaic things on a level near anarchy which desperately needed to be buried and replaced with higher levels through the natural revelatory process. But <b>mortals too often cling to errant lines rather than only the better lines meant to supersede them</b>. It potentially becomes a major tragedy if we fail to be aware of or acknowledge the substantial historical evidence that prior to his martyrdom Joseph Smith came to a deep fear that we had been deceived in our pursuit of polygamy. <b>Although we are left without an official terminal document direct from the martyred prophet proving he “came to believe polygamy was wrong,” the best investigative evidence is not always what comes from one’s mouth or pen, but from the chronology and details of one’s behavior. Todd Compton’s research shows that for over a year before his martyrdom Smith never again married a woman who had a living husband. Added to testimonies that “Smith came to have doubts about polygamy before his death” is the “striking fact” and “notable phenomenon” that he “took no wives during the last eight months of his life”</b> (Compton, <i>In Sacred Loneliness</i>, 3-9). <b>Followers should pay more careful attention to the improved directions of Joseph’s marital practices over his earlier declaratives and experimentations. Peter first taught (before further revelation) that the gentiles should not be given the gospel. To which of opposite teachings will you cling?</b> <br>
<br>
Through this research the reader has the freedom and the burden to question and explore the origins of LDS polygamy and to <b>examine both historical and scriptural evidences which show the practice as being actually contrary to Heaven’s intent</b>. <b>The Information Age now unravels over one hundred and eighty years of the tenacious, simplistic and presumptive claim that Deity merely commanded this practice and later commanded that it stop. Today’s available information leaves little credibility, integrity or reason for continued neutrality, duplicity or reticence on this question.</b> The reader bears the opportunity and sobering burden to discern any social or religious validity in polygamy or its notions.<br>
<br>
<b>This thesis concludes that LDS polygamy came into the Church through errant mortal influences more than through purely divine revelation, and that the long supposed benefits or authenticity of this practice will not be realized by practitioners or anticipators.</b> Unlike this work, other writers have increasingly acknowledged many dichotomies and contradictions in polygamy while leaving readers stranded without sufficiently justifying the option of rejecting the practice if it is not proven to be a legitimate part of the restored gospel. Even some critical LDS historians have seemed determined to preserve space within their repertoire for the ongoing reverencing and sanctifying of past LDS polygamy—as if we cannot or must not make a definitive decision on this question. <b>There is now ample information for outright rejecting the propriety of polygamy. This work does so from the standpoint of believing and embracing the latter-day restoration <i>without</i> having to accept polygamy as a true part of that restoration."</b><br>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<!--EndFragment--></div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
Inevitably, the question arises about testimony. <b>I defend my mortal testimony of Christ, His patient work for His restored Church in this “last dispensation,” and of Joseph Smith’s contributions to heaven’s vast plan. While this study could be feared as undermining testimony, it ultimately unravels mere folklore and misunderstandings—providing doubt where faith shouldn’t exist. </b> We have solemn obligations to gather, separate, and throw away (Matt. 13:47- 48). We each function from our own conscience in our duty to not misunderstand Joseph Smith, one another, or the truth. And <b>“the Holy Ghost not only helps us to recognize plain truth but also plain nonsense!”</b>—Neal A. Maxwell,<i> Ensign</i>, May 1993, 78. “[T]he work of the Church and the work in our homes is all done by imperfect people. Elder Richard L. Evans once said those who will only work with perfect people will soon be all alone” (Bruce C. Hafen, <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Broken-Heart-Bruce-Hafen/dp/1590388852" target="_blank">The Broken Heart</a></i>, 182). Likewise,<b> those who will only hear perfect prophets will soon have no prophets to hear.</b> <b>I find the Lord very patient and helpful in our solemn duty to discard certain things (“God desires that we learn and continue to learn, but this involves some unlearning. As Uncle Zeke said, ‘It ain’t my ignorance that done me up but what I know’d that wasn’t so’”</b>—Faust quoting Hugh B. Brown, <i>Ensign</i>, July 2000, 2). <b>Differences are certain since the burden falls on imperfect mortals to distinguish wheat from the tares and the chaff.</b> <br>
<br>
Curtis Henderson<br>
<div>
<div class="WordSection1">
</div>
<span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: 11.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br clear="all" style="mso-break-type: section-break; page-break-before: always;">
</span><!--EndFragment--></div>
</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-295892832721709232015-04-06T10:27:00.000-05:002015-12-14T12:21:54.060-06:00Grace: Like An Oasis in the DesertLike an oasis in the desert, <a href="https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/the-gift-of-grace?lang=eng" target="_blank">President Uchtdorf's sermon "The Gift of Grace"</a> was itself, for me, a grace. <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/search/label/Grace" target="_blank">For years I've blogged about grace</a>, almost feeling like I was being subversive, and meeting with resistance from fellow Mormons long steeped in a tradition that preached works so loudly that even the loud orchestra of grace found in the Book of Mormon was deafened. Mormonism began to hear the music louder beginning in the 90's, and<a href="https://www.lds.org/ensign/2013/09/his-grace-is-sufficient?lang=eng" target="_blank"> it has been increasing in volume ever since</a>.<br />
<br />
Even still, after feeling as though I was being individually refreshed by the waters of Christ's grace, I've at times felt like a wanderer in a desert of Mormonism that traditionally hasn't collectively been <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2009/05/embracing-grace.html" target="_blank">embracing grace</a> with equal enthusiasm. Individually, Latter-day Saints here and there have expressed their <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2009/05/grateful-for-grace.html" target="_blank">gratitude for grace</a>, but it has felt more like <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLXr9it_pbY" target="_blank">a grass roots effort</a> rather than something coming from the top down. (Parenthetically, Adam Miller's <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Grace-Not-Gods-Backup-Plan-ebook/dp/B00U1WBCXQ" target="_blank">new little book</a> is a must read whether top, bottom, or anywhere in-between: "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Grace-Not-Gods-Backup-Plan-ebook/dp/B00U1WBCXQhttp://www.amazon.com/Grace-Not-Gods-Backup-Plan-ebook/dp/B00U1WBCXQ" target="_blank">Grace Is Not God's Backup Plan: An Urgent Paraphrase of Paul's Letter to the Romans</a>.")<br />
<br />
And for too long, we equivocated about the meaning of <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2009/06/it-is-by-grace-that-we-are-saved-after.html" target="_blank">2nd Nephi 25:23</a>, particularly the line: "<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2009/06/it-is-by-grace-that-we-are-saved-after.html" target="_blank">It is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do</a>." Thus yesterday felt like a joyful and historic shift, to me, as that message of grace came loud and clear directly from a member of the First Presidency, one sustained as a "prophet, seer, and revelator." <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbypUwECb8E&feature=youtu.be&t=15m34s" target="_blank">No more do Mormons have any excuse to misunderstand</a>: <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I wonder if sometimes we misinterpret the phrase “after all we can do”. <b>We must understand that “after” does not equal “because.”</b> We are not saved "because<i>"</i> of all that we can do. Have any of us done <i>all</i> that we can do? Does God wait until we've expended every effort before he will intervene in our lives with His saving grace? Many people feel discouraged because they constantly fall short. They know first hand that "the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak." They raise their voices with Nephi in proclaiming, “My soul grieveth because of mine iniquities.” I am certain Nephi knew the Savior’s grace <i>allows</i> and <i>enables</i> us to overcome sin. This is why Nephi labored so diligently to persuade his children and brethren "to <b>believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God." After all, <i>that</i> <i>is</i> what we can<i> </i>do! And <i>that is</i> our task in mortality!</b>”</blockquote>
<br />
I had never yelled amen as many times and with as much gusto as I did during and after his marvelous sermon:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<b>Salvation cannot be bought with the currency of obedience; it is purchased with the blood of the Son of God.</b> <b>Thinking that we can trade our good works for salvation is like buying a plane ticket and then supposing we own the airline. Or thinking that after paying rent for our home, we now hold title to the entire planet earth.</b></blockquote>
<div>
<blockquote>
President Uchtdorf <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbypUwECb8E&feature=youtu.be&t=15m34s" target="_blank">continued</a>: </blockquote>
<blockquote>
If grace is a gift of God then why is obedience to His commandments so important?...<b>We obey the commandments of God--out of love for Him! Trying to understand God’s gift of grace with all our heart and mind gives us all the more reasons to love and obey our Heavenly Father with meekness and gratitude. As we walk the path of discipleship, it refines us, it improves us, it helps us to become more like Him, and it leads us back to His presence. "</b>The Spirit of the Lord [our God]" brings about such a "mighty change in us,...that we have no more disposition to do evil but to do good continually." Therefore, our <b>obedience to God’s commandments comes as a natural outgrowth of our endless love and gratitude for the goodness of God</b>. This form of genuine love and gratitude will miraculously merge our works with God’s grace. Virtue will garnish our thoughts unceasingly, and our confidence will wax strong in the presence of God.</blockquote>
<div>
Incidentally, another speaker in conference used a quote that stood out to me, one by Marcel Proust: <b>"The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes." </b>Gratefully, my hope and my witness is that Mormonism <i>is</i> seeing with "new eyes" the real good news of the gospel; it <i>is</i> a beautiful landscape. The "good news" isn't Mormonism itself--the "good news" is Christ's grace. And it's the only thing that can save us, both individually and as a church collectively.<br />
<br />
With Christ's grace as our only hope for salvation (whether from crises individual or institutional) we'd be wise to separate "the Church" and "The Gospel" from here on out. Christ must be more than a back seat passenger in Mormonism. For too long, too many have traditionally focused on ancillary things: family history, family, temple work, home teaching, <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/02/a-prophet-is-not-always-prophet-only.html" target="_blank">"follow the prophet"</a>, food storage, tithing, callings, etc, etc. etc. <b>In short, too many focus too much on "the church" itself. Christ's grace needs to emerge from the backseat and sit front and center. And we need to do more to make Christ the focus of all of our meetings, teachings, messages, and families. In short, we must make Christ and his grace more<i> explicit</i> rather than <i>implicit</i> in all that we do and say.</b><br />
<br />
Keeping in mind that “in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established", here are a couple of other eye-witness reactions that caught my eye from some faithful Mormon scholars I deeply respect:</div>
<div>
<br />
Jacob Baker:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
President Uchtdorf's Priesthood and Sunday morning addresses are essentially one magnificent sermon on Grace, the most significant and Scripturally Christian theological address to come out of the Mormon tradition by an apostle, possibly in all of LDS history, in my opinion. It can and should be studied, not just quoted from, in the future.</blockquote>
<br />
Dr. David Bokovoy:<br />
<blockquote>
Today was a great day. I especially enjoyed President Dieter F. Uchtdorf’s sermon “The Gift of Grace” and wanted to share a few personal thoughts. Shortly before my now 20 year-old daughter left on her full-time LDS mission in Chile, we enjoyed a fun, playful conversation.<br />
<br />
“Dad,” she said, “I’m a bit nervous."<br />
<br />
"What if I teach something that the Church doesn’t really believe?”<br />
<br />
“Why would you be worried about that?” I asked.<br />
<br />
“Well I am your daughter,” she jokingly replied.<br />
<br />
“So you think I’ve taught you false doctrine?”<br />
<br />
She smiled and replied, “Well, Dad, we all know you’re really big on grace.”<br />
<br />
“Teach grace, Kate,” I said. “Teach grace.”<br />
<br />
Though this conversation was somewhat whimsical, I do believe it captured one of the hermeneutical challenges within Mormonism. It’s admittedly not easy to fully reconcile an LDS emphasis upon obedience with the concept of salvation through God’s grace. The two perspectives create something of a religious paradox. In LDS scripture, God states “I, the Lord, am bound when ye do what I say; but when ye do not what I say, ye have no promise” (D&C 82:10). Historically, many within the LDS community have used these types of statements to support a type of Pelagianistic belief that humans can earn at least some form of salvation through a work-based effort. Today, President Uchtdorf taught that this view is incongruent with God's plan of salvation. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
“Salvation cannot be bought with the currency of obedience,” he declared to a world-wide audience, “it is purchased by the blood of the Son of God. Thinking that we can trade our good works for salvation is like buying a plane ticket and then supposing we own the airline. Or thinking that after paying rent for our home, we now hold title to the entire planet earth." </blockquote>
<blockquote>
President Uchtdorf continued: </blockquote>
<blockquote>
“If grace is a gift of God then why is obedience to His commandments so important? We obey the commandments of God out of love for Him. Trying to understand God’s gifts of grace with all our heart and mind gives us all the more reasons to love and obey our Heavenly Father with meekness and gratitude. As we walk the path of discipleship it refines us, it improves us, it helps us to become more like Him, and it leads us back to His presence.” </blockquote>
<blockquote>
This was a remarkable conference sermon. Theologically, if we believe that God should save us because of our faithfulness then Jesus may be a helper; he may even be our example and inspiration, but he is not our Savior. Instead, we are our own saviors. This point is admittedly a challenging theological notion, which is why I was so fascinated and touched by President Uchtdorf's sermon. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
It reminded me of one of my favorite books on the topic of grace—<i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Prodigal-God-Timothy-Keller/dp/1594484023" target="_blank">The Prodigal God</a></i> by Timothy Keller. Keller is a great Christian theologian. He is the founding pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City. <i>The Prodigal God</i> is a powerful devotional reading of the famous parable in Luke 15:11-32. Keller explains that the parable describes two lost sons, one who abandons his father entirely in order to live a sinful life, and the other who lives a life of strict obedience in order to bind his father into giving a reward.<br />
<br />
As Keller explains, it’s easy to recognize that the “younger brother” in this story is spiritually lost. Yet it’s much more difficult to see that the older brother—the one who faithfully attends Church and keeps the commandants-is likewise lost. “I never transgressed your commandments at any time," the older brother reminds the father. “And yet you never gave me a kid so that I could make merry with my friends.” This constitutes an extraordinary statement, and yet the father never denies the claim. The older brother in the parable had obeyed all the commandments.<br />
<br />
So why was he spiritually lost? The answer is that the older brother obeyed the father for the wrong reason. He obeyed the father so that the father would feel forced to grant rewards. This explains why the older brother felt angry, and could not accept the grace extended to the younger brother who spent his share of the father's inheritance on riotous living. </blockquote>
<blockquote>
If our obedience to God derives from a desire to control divinity then our morality consists of a way to use God as an instrument to grant our desires. As the parable illustrates, this mindset causes us to look down upon younger brothers. Efforts to bind God through obedience creates elitism and classism (both of which are spiritually problematic or "lost" conditions). This is why the "older brother syndrome" fosters resentment towards younger brothers and divinity. On this point Keller writes: </blockquote>
<blockquote>
"The first sign you have an elder-brother spirit is that when your life doesn’t go as you want, you aren’t just sorrowful but deeply angry and bitter. Elder brothers believe that if they live a good life they should get a good life, that God owes them a smooth road if they try very hard to live up to standards. What happens, then, if you are an elder brother and things go wrong in your life? If you feel you have been living up to your moral standards, you will be furious with God. You don’t deserve this, you will think, after how hard you’ve worked to be a decent person! What happens, however, if things have gone wrong in your life when you know that you have been falling short of your standards? Then you will be furious with yourself, filled with self-loathing and inner pain. And if evil circumstances overtake you, and you are not sure whether your life has been good enough or not, you may swing miserably back and forth between the poles of 'I hate Thee!' and 'I hate me.'” (pp. 49-50).<br />
<br />
It’s not that obedience and good works are insignificant for the Christian life. It’s that they must be performed for the right reason—the reason President Uchtdorf explained today in General Conference: because God is "prodigal" with humanity. He gives his grace so fully that there is nothing else left. God is the type of father we encounter in the parable, a father who runs out and embraces younger brothers and gives them all that he has. Christians should obey a God like that because we love him. Because he is so good we want to do more than do. We want to serve and become.</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com17tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3920640965536781054.post-809410710494440342015-03-31T20:50:00.000-05:002015-05-20T12:05:01.557-05:00An Inconvenient Truth: Lowry Nelson was right; The First Presidency was wrong<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:DocumentProperties>
<o:Revision>0</o:Revision>
<o:TotalTime>0</o:TotalTime>
<o:Pages>1</o:Pages>
<o:Words>14</o:Words>
<o:Characters>84</o:Characters>
<o:Company>Alamo Heights ISD</o:Company>
<o:Lines>1</o:Lines>
<o:Paragraphs>1</o:Paragraphs>
<o:CharactersWithSpaces>97</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
<o:Version>14.0</o:Version>
</o:DocumentProperties>
<o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
<o:AllowPNG/>
</o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>JA</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:EnableOpenTypeKerning/>
<w:DontFlipMirrorIndents/>
<w:OverrideTableStyleHps/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="276">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]-->
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<!--StartFragment-->
<!--EndFragment--></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2014/11/we-are-to-embrace-all-truth-not-just.html" target="_blank">Darius Gray has inspired me to embrace the full truth, not just the convenient truth</a>. I look to the past not to find fault, but to learn lessons that should inform us to be better today. With that said, I have found many important lessons from <a href="http://mormonstories.org/other/Lowry_Nelson_1st_Presidency_Exchange.pdf" target="_blank">the 1947 correspondence between Lowry Nelson and the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints</a>. I consider it a prequel, of sorts, to Greg Prince's "<a href="http://www.amazon.com/David-McKay-Rise-Modern-Mormonism/dp/0874808227" target="_blank">David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism</a>." I find in <a href="http://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V26N03_101.pdf" target="_blank">Lowry Nelson</a> an example of someone who followed his conscience to seek and to speak truth, even though the leaders he sustained at the time weren't ready for the truth. Please consider the magnitude of this ordeal and the fact that he actually was right and they were wrong. Perhaps we can all learn to be more humble about what we "know" to be true, and <a href="http://biblehub.com/ephesians/4-15.htm" target="_blank">speak the truth in love</a>:</div>
</div>
</div>
<br />
<br />
<b>In the Direction of His Dreams </b><br />
Memoirs of Lowry Nelson<br />
<br />
<i>Ch. 16 (pp. 334 through 349)</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><i>Again The Church And I</i></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
My reference in the previous chapter to the fact that I taught summer school at Utah State University would justify no further comment except for the fact I received a very upsetting letter. Because the ensuing correspondence was destined to put me in conflict with the authorities of my church, it is justifiably part of this chronicle.<br />
<br />
The <a href="https://archive.org/stream/LowryNelson1stPresidencyExchange/Lowry_Nelson_1st_Presidency_Exchange#page/n1/mode/1up" target="_blank">disturbing letter came from Heber Meeks</a>, an old friend of my college days at Logan. Heber was now president of the Southern States Mission of the Mormon Church, with headquarters in Atlanta. He informed me that he had been in Cuba on instructions of the First Presidency to investigate the possibility of doing missionary work there. In Havana, he had met Chester Young, a friend of mine, who informed him that I had spent a year studying rural life in Cuba. Heber went on to say:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I would appreciate your opinion as to the advisability of doing missionary work particularly in the rural sections of Cuba, knowing, of course, our concept of the Negro and his position as the Priesthood.<br />
<br />
Are there groups of pure white blood in the rural sections, particularly in the small communities? If so, are they maintaining segregation from the Negroes? The best information we received was that in the rural communities there was no segregation of the races and it would probably be difficult to find, with any degree of certainty, groups of pure white people.<br />
<br />
I would also like your reaction as to what progress you think the Church might be able to make in doing missionary work in Cuba in view of, particularly in the rural section, the ignorance and superstition of the people and their being so steeped in Catholicism. Do you think our message would have any appeal to them?</blockquote>
<br />
I was stunned. <a href="https://archive.org/stream/LowryNelson1stPresidencyExchange/Lowry_Nelson_1st_Presidency_Exchange#page/n2/mode/1up" target="_blank">My reply to Heber, dated June 26, 1947</a>, in part, was as follows:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The attitude of the Church in regard to the Negro makes me very sad. Your letter is the first intimation I have had that there was a fixed doctrine on this point. I had always known that certain statements had been made by authorities regarding the status of the Negro, but I had never assumed that they constituted an irrevocable doctrine. I hope no final word has been said on this matter. I must say that I have never been able to accept the idea, and never shall. I do not believe that God is a racist. But if the Church has taken an irrevocable stand, I would dislike to see it enter Cuba or any other island where difference races live and establish missionary work. The white and colored people get along much better in the Caribbean and most of Latin America than they do in the United States. Prejudice exists, there is no doubt, and the whites in many ways manifest their feelings of superiority, but there is much less of it than one finds in the U.S.A, especially in our South. For us to go into a situation like that and preach a doctrine of “white supremacy” would, it seems to me, be a tragic disservice. I am speaking frankly, because I feel very keenly on this question. If world brotherhood and the universal-God idea mean anything, it seems to me they mean equality of races. I fail to see how Mormonism or any other religion claiming to be more than a provincial church can take any other point of view; and there cannot be world peace until the pernicious doctrine of the superiority of one race and the inferiority of others is rooted out. This is my belief. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The Methodists, Presbyterians, and Baptists have, as you know, done a great deal of missionary work in the island, and have rendered Cuba a great service in maintaining schools, hospitals, etc.; however, they have limited their work largely to the urban centers. There is a great service to be rendered rural Cubans if the right approach were made. Mormonism is well adapted to render such service with its system of lay leadership and many activity programs. Many rural Cubans have nothing in the way of organized social life. To them, the family is the basic institution, and beyond it the neighborhood. Our Church would provide them with something very sorely needed. It would develop leadership among them, provide them with hope and aspiration, give them a feeling of importance as individuals which they have never had. They have been exploited by priest and politician; they have been led to believe that the government is not any of their responsibility and that the Church is the business of the priest and the bishop. While there is a great deal of individuals among them, they have definite and discernible feelings of inferiority when it comes to matters of leadership. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I am talking about the white people now; the rural people are predominantly white. That is, they are as white as Mediterranean peoples are—Spanish, Italians, etc—who have been in contact with “color” for centuries. There are no pure races; on this anthropologist are in general agreement. Of course, this does not mean that Negro blood exits throughout the white race or vice versa. There is grave doubt, however, as to the purity of the Nordic, Mediterranean, or even the Negro. Because I think our system of religious organization could serve the rural Cuban people as no other system could, I am sad to have to write you and say, for what my opinion is worth, that it would be better for the Cubans if we did not enter their island—unless we are willing to revise our racial theory. To teach them the pernicious doctrine of segregation and inequalities among races where it does not exist, or to lend religious sanction to it where it has raised its ugly head, would, it seems to me, be tragic. It seems to me we just fought a war over such ideas. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I repeat, my frankness or bluntness, as you will, is born of a fervent desire to see the causes of war rooted out of the hearts of men. What limited study I have been able to give the subject leads me to the conclusion that ethnocentrism, and the smugness and intolerance which accompany it, is one of the first evils to be attacked if we are to achieve the goal of peace.</blockquote>
<br />
On the same date, June 26, [1947] I wrote President George Albert Smith of the Mormon Church as follows:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Dear President Smith: </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I am in receipt today of a letter from President Heber Meeks, an old school friend, copy of which I am enclosing together with a copy of my reply. It is self-explanatory.<br />
<br />
Perhaps I am out of order, so to speak, in expressing myself as I have. I have done so out of strong conviction on the subject, and with the added impression that there is no irrevocable Church doctrine on this subject. I am aware of statements and impressions which have been passed down, but I had never been brought face to face with the possibility that the doctrine was finally crystallized. I devoutly hope that such crystallization has not taken place. The many good friends of mixed blood—through no fault of theirs incidentally—which I have in the Caribbean and who know me to be a Mormon would be shocked indeed if I were to tell them my Church relegated them to an inferior status. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
As I told Heber, there is no doubt in my mind that our Church could perform a great service in Cuba, particularly in the rural areas, but it would be far better that we not go in at all, than to go in and promote racial distinction.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I wanted you to know my feelings on this question and trust you will understand the spirit in which I say these things. I want to see us promote love and harmony among peoples of the earth.</blockquote>
I was shortly informed by Joseph Anderson, secretary to the First Presidency, that I had failed to enclose a copy of my letter to Heber Meeks. This I promptly supplied, and in due time received <a href="https://archive.org/stream/LowryNelson1stPresidencyExchange/Lowry_Nelson_1st_Presidency_Exchange#page/n5/mode/1up" target="_blank">the following reply, dated July 17</a>:<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Dr. Lowry Nelson<br />
Utah State Agricultural College<br />
Logan, Utah </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Dear Brother Nelson: </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
As you have been advised, your letter of June 26 was received in due course, and likewise we now have a copy of your letter to President Meeks. We have carefully considered their contents, and are glad to advise you as follows:</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
We make this initial remark: the social side of the Restored Gospel is only an incident of it; it is not the end thereof. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The basic element of your ideas and concepts seems to be that all God’s children stand in equal positions before Him in all things. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Your knowledge of the Gospel will indicate to you that this is contrary to the very fundamentals of God’s dealings with Israel dating from the time of His promise to Abraham regarding Abraham’s seed and their position vis-à-vis God Himself. Indeed, some of God’s children were assigned to superior positions before the world was formed. We are aware that some Higher Critics do not accept this, but the Church does. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Your position seems to lose sight of the revelations of the Lord touching the preexistence of our spirits, the rebellion in heaven, and the doctrines that our birth into this life and the advantages under which we may be born have relationship in the life heretofore.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
From the days of the Prophet Joseph even until now, it has been the doctrine of the Church, never questioned by any of the Church Leaders, that the Negroes are not entitled to the full blessings of the Gospel. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Furthermore, your ideas, as we understand them, appear to contemplate the intermarriage of the Negro and White races, a concept which has heretofore been most repugnant to most normal-minded people from the ancient patriarchs till now. God’s rule for Israel, His Chosen People, has been endogamous. Modern Israel has been similarly directed. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
We are not unmindful of the fact that there is a growing tendency, particularly among some educators, as it manifests itself in this area, toward the breaking down of race barriers in the matter of intermarriage between whites and blacks, but it does not have the sanction of the church and is contrary to Church doctrine. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Faithfully yours,<br />
(signed) Geo. Albert Smith<br />
J. Reuben Clark, Jr.<br />
David O. McKay<br />
The First Presidency</blockquote>
<div>
<br /></div>
As much as I was “stunned” at Heber Meeks’ question regarding my knowledge of the existence of people of “pure white blood,” this letter from the First Presidency was shocking. I knew these men quite well, especially Presidents Smith and McKay. I knew all of the McKay family; the youngest son, Morgan, had been a member of my fraternity in Logan. I referred in an earlier chapter to the assistance of Dr. and Mrs. George R. Hill during my illness. Mrs. Hill was a sister of David O. McKay I adored the whole family. I had associated with President Smith in Boy Scout work. When he came to Minneapolis (in 1943?) he made a special point of having a talk with me. President Clark I knew only casually. He was a member of the First Presidency <a href="http://latterdayspence.blogspot.com/2015/04/lowry-nelsons-reflections-on-state-of.html" target="_blank">when I was called “on the carpet” earlier, as already described. [in chapter 9 “The Church and I”</a>]<br />
<br />
There is no doubt in my mind that he drafted this letter to me. A lawyer by profession, he had spent most of his career in political positions in Washington: Undersecretary of State in the Harding-Coolidge era and Ambassador to Mexico under Hoover. It was while he was ambassador that he was named a Counselor to President Grant. However, he continued to spend most of his time in New York with the Foreign Bondholders Association until the 1930s.<br />
<br />
But the draftsman is only incidental. This was the law and the gospel on the subject. One revealing paragraph put words in my mouth that seem to favor intermarriage. This was gratuitous and I resented it, although I did not put my feeling in writing. It reveals the fear, as expressed by Southern whites, of “mongrelization.” It was probably a basic factor in the continuation of the policy.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://archive.org/stream/LowryNelson1stPresidencyExchange/Lowry_Nelson_1st_Presidency_Exchange#page/n7/mode/1up" target="_blank">My reply, dated October 8, was a long one</a>:<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
University of Minnesota<br />
Department of Agriculture<br />
University Farm, St. Paul 1 </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
October 8, 1947 </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The First Presidency<br />
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints<br />
47 East South Temple<br />
Salt Lake City, Utah </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Dear Brethren:</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Your letter of July 17th sent to me at Logan was forwarded here, but I had already left for Europe and so did not get it until I returned to my office September 8. I want to thank you for it, and the attention you gave me. The letter is, however, a disappointment to me, as you may surmise it would be from what I said in my letter to President Meeks.<br />
<br />
It seems strange to me in retrospect—as it must have seemed to you—that I should have never before had to face up to this doctrine of the Church relative to the Negro. I remember that it was discussed from time to time during my boyhood and youth, Priesthood meetings or elsewhere in Church classes; and always someone would say something about the Negroes “sitting on the fence” during the Council in Heaven. They did not take a stand, it was said. Somehow there was never any very strong conviction manifest regarding the doctrine, perhaps because the question was rather an academic one to us in Ferron, where there were very few people who had ever seen a Negro, let alone having lived in the same community with them. So the doctrine was always passed over rather lightly I should say, with no Scripture ever being quoted or referred to regarding the matter, except perhaps to refer to the curse of Cain, or of Ham and Canaan. (I went back and re-read the latter the other evening. It was difficult to find any element of justice in Noah’s behavior toward Ham, since the latter merely reported to his brothers that his father was lying there in a drunken state and in a nude condition., and the other boys put a cover over him. Because Ham reported his father’s condition, he was cursed.)<br />
<br />
But anyway, I really had never come face to face with the issue until this summer. In the meantime, since my youth, I have chosen to spend my professional career in the field of the social sciences, the general purpose of which is to describe and understand human behavior. I probably should have had less difficulty with some of these problems—such as the race problem—had I remained in agronomy and chemistry, my undergraduate fields of specialization. Be that as it may, my experience has been what it has been. As a sociologist, I have sincerely tried, and am still trying, to understand human social relations: the varied forms of organization, the process of conflict, cooperation, competition, assimilation, why peoples and cultures differ form one another, etc.<br />
<br />
As one studies the history and characteristics of human societies, one comes to recognize certain basic principles. One of these is social change. Any given society over the years undergoes changes. It is forever in a state of flux. Some scholars have regarded such changes as <i>progress</i>, and have even considered that progress is inevitable. Others chart the <i>rise</i> and <i>fall</i> of civilizations and think in terms of cyclical change. Others express still different hypotheses, but none of them considers society as a static entity. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Another principle which stands out as one studies the development of cultures is the tendency of institutions to resist change. Although they are established, or grow up, originally as means to the end of satisfying the ends in themselves. It seems to me that Jesus was trying to get this point over to the society of his day, when he spoke of putting new wine in old bottles, and that the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath. This was an affront to the legalism of the Pharisees, and others of similar outlook, and of course the institutions had to be protected even at the cost of His crucifixion. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Another principle that has come to occupy a central position in the analysis of human behavior is that of <i>ethnocentrism</i>. As defined by William Graham Sumner, who first developed the concept, it refers to the “view of things in which one’s own group is the center of everything and all others are sealed and rated with reference to it.” (<i>The Folkways</i>, p. 13.) Insofar as the “out-group” differs from the “in-group” it is regarded as inferior by the latter. A people with a different skin color would be automatically assigned to an inferior status. A language different from that of the in-group is, of course, an “inferior” one; and so on. This tendency is common to all groups. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Now, what does this add up to in my thinking? It means that (1) if one accepts the principle of cultural or social change and applies it to the Hebrews, the Old Testament history of the group is interpreted accordingly. In their early stages of development they had beliefs and practices, many of which were subsequently supplanted by other ideas. Jehovah to the Hebrews of the Pentateuch was essentially a tribal deity. It was not until Amos that the idea of a universal God was proclaimed. And the concept of God as Love was an essential contribution of the mission of the Savior. (2) This, to me, represents “progressive revelation.” It seems to me that we still have much to learn about God, and some of our earlier notions of Him may yet undergo modification. (3) The early Hebrew notion of the colored people with whom they had contact in the Mediterranean basin was, quite naturally that those people were inferior to themselves, a consequence of their extreme ethnocentrism. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Why did they not have something to say about the Japanese or Chinese or the American Indian? To me the answer is that they did not know these groups existed. But one can be pretty certain that if they had known about them, they would have developed some similar explanation regarding their origin to that concerning the Negro, and would have assigned them also to a position less exalted than their own. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(4) And once these things got written down—institutionalized—they assume an aura of the sacred. I refer in this respect not only to the Scripture, but to more secular documents as well—the Constitution of the United States, for instance, which many people do not want to change regardless of the apparent needs. So we are in the position, it seems to me, of accepting a doctrine regarding the Negro which was enunciated by the Hebrews during a very early stage in their development. Moreover, and this is the important matter to me, it does not square with what seems an acceptable standard of justice today; nor with the letter or spirit of the teachings of Jesus Christ. I cannot find any support for such a doctrine of inequality in His recorded sayings. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I am deeply troubled. Having decided through earnest study that one of the chief causes of war is the existence of ethnocentrism among the peoples of the world; that war is our major social evil which threatens to send all of us to destruction, and that we can ameliorate these feelings of ethnocentrism by promoting understanding of one people by others, I am now confronted with this doctrine of my own church which says in effect that white supremacy is part of God’s plan for His children, that the Negro has been assigned by Him to be a hewer of wood and drawer of water for his white-skinned brethren. This makes us nominal allies of the Rankins and the Bilbos of Mississippi, a quite unhappy alliance for me, I assure you. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
This doctrine pressed to its logical conclusion would say that Dr. George Washington Carver, the late eminent and saintly Negro scientist, is by virtue of the color of his skin inferior to the least admirable white person, not because of the virtues he may or may not possess, but because—through no fault of his—there is a dark pigment in his skin. All of the people in India—who are not Negroes according to ethnological authority, but are Aryan—would presumably come under the Negro classification. I think of the intelligent, high-minded, clean-living Hindu who was a member of the International Committee over which I had the honor to preside at Geneva from August 4 to 10, this year. He drank not, smoked not, his ethical standards were such that you and I could applaud him. Where should he rank vis-à-vis the least reliable and least admirable white person in Ferron? Or I could name you a real Negro with equal qualifications. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Now, you say that the “social side of the Restored Gospel is only an incident of it; it is not the end thereof.” I may not have the same concept of “social” as you had in mind, but it seems to me the only virtue we can recognize in men is that expressed in their relations with others; that is, their “social” relations. Are the virtues of honesty, chastity, humility, forgiveness, tolerance, love, kindness, justice secondary? If so, what is primary? Love of God? Very Well. But the second (law) is like unto it. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I must beg your forgiveness for this intrusion upon your time. I realize that I am only one among hundreds of thousands with whom you have to be concerned. My little troubles I must try to work out myself. But I desire to be understood. That’s why I have gone to such length to set down here the steps in my thinking. I am trying to be honest with myself and with others. I am trying to find my way in what is a very confused world. After seeing the devastation of Europe this summer, I am appalled by the sight of it, and the contemplation of what mankind can collectively do to himself unless somehow we, collectively—the human family—can put love of each other above hatred and somehow come to a mutual respect based upon understanding and a recognition that others, although they may be different from us, are not by that fact alone inferior. Are we becoming so legalistic (after the fashion of the Pharisees) that we cannot adjust our institutions to the changing need of mankind? Are we, as some have charged, more Hebraic than Christian? </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Sincerely your brother, </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
(signed) Lowry Nelson, Professor of Sociology LN:ed</blockquote>
<br /></div>
<div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Dr. Lowry Nelson<br />
University of Minnesota<br />
Department of Agriculture<br />
University Farm<br />
St. Paul 1, Minnesota </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="https://archive.org/stream/LowryNelson1stPresidencyExchange/Lowry_Nelson_1st_Presidency_Exchange#page/n10/mode/1up" target="_blank">November 12, 1947</a> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Dear Brother Nelson: </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
We have your letter of October 8 in further development of the matter discussed in your earlier letter. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
We feel very sure that you understand well the doctrines of the Church. They are either true or not true. Our testimony is that they are true. Under these circumstances we may not permit ourselves to be too much impressed by the reasonings of men however well-founded they may seem to be. We should like to say this to you in all kindness and in all sincerity that you are too fine a man to permit yourself to be led off from the principles of the Gospel by worldly learning. You have too much of a potentiality for doing good and we therefore prayerfully hope that you can reorient your thinking and bring it in line with the revealed word of God. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Faithfully yours,<br />
THE FIRST PRESIDENCY<br />
(Signed) G. Albert Smith</blockquote>
<br />
I showed this correspondence to some friends, perhaps three or four all told. They wanted copies and I gave them to them. In a short time I began receiving letters from persons in various parts of the country saying they had obtained a copy and congratulating me. I do not recall getting an unfavorable comment. I really began to feel some guilt for having released the letters to friends without permission of the First Presidency. Especially when it became apparent that the sub-rosa circulation was so widespread. But, after all, there was no secret about the doctrine, except for those who like myself were uninformed that the dogma was fixed. Kimball Young wrote me that he was surprised that I didn’t know the doctrine was in force. But, unlike Kimball, I had never served a mission for the Church, and certainly missionaries must be instructed on the matter before they leave.<br />
<br />
In any case, I had decided to dismiss the matter and do nothing more about it. Then, in 1952, a friend in Salt Lake City, sent me a clipping from the Church Section of the <i>Deseret News</i> that set me off again. The story had to do with two missionaries in South Africa who were asked by a woman church member on her deathbed to do her “work” in the Temple when the boys returned to Salt Lake. Since she lived in that part of the world, the men had to make sure that her blood was not “tainted” before they could proceed to gratify her dying wish. The story recounts their search for her genealogy and their happy discovery that she was born in Holland. So the lady’s request was granted and photos of the men with their wives appeared with the story, all rejoicing.<br />
<br />
I was disgusted and sat down and wrote an article entitled “<a href="https://archive.org/stream/NelsonMormonismAndTheNegro/Nelson_Mormonism%20and%20the%20Negro#page/n0/mode/1up" target="_blank">Mormons and the Negro</a>” and sent it to the <i>Nation</i> magazine. It was published in May 1952. For the first time, this policy was out in cold print for the world to see. The Negro press was alerted and the story was widely published. Some of my friends were rather shocked, even disappointed, that I had published it. Their reasoning was typical of Mormon liberals who always try to get things changed from within. But this had never worked out. Only when polygamy became a serious embarrassment to the church did it finally agree to stop the practice. The Church at that time was suffering from what today would be called a tarnished image. It was unable to obtain statehood for Utah because of the practice, although Utah had long since met the usual requirements for this. I figured there would never be any change in the Negro policy until the facts were widely known and pressure could be brought to bear from without as well as from within.<br />
<br />
Pressures there were, both by blacks and by their white sympathizers. The Brigham Young University athletic teams were subjected to demonstrations wherever they appeared. Stanford University severed athletic relations with BYU. However, nothing happened for a long time. The Church leaders evaded any pressure for change by saying they were “waiting for the Lord to speak”—that is, for a “revelation.” In addition to increasing pressures on the Church from the outside, agitation for the change of Church policy by liberals from within continued, resulting in <a href="http://mormonheretic.org/2011/07/10/events-leading-up-to-the-1978-revelation/" target="_blank">numerous excommunications</a>, until, in 1978, Prophet Spencer W. Kimball <a href="https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/od/2" target="_blank">announced a new revelation</a> granting the Priesthood to blacks.</div>
Clean Cuthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08383123314458721660noreply@blogger.com8