Lost People

It surprises me that in my ward, I teach teenagers. It surprised me even more that, after coming into the classroom to hear her daughter teach, one mother told me, "you are just what these girls need."

I do not feel like I'm just what these girls need. I am not a good example of the efficacy of the things I was taught as a teenager. I waited for a temple wedding, only to have it fall down around my ears. I'm a single working mother with little hope and no expectation of marrying again, in small part because I will not marry outside the temple.

Based on my reading of scripture, both public and private, I have thoroughly failed to do what the Lord asked of me. There is little left. But I intend to do my best at what little there is. At least I'll die trying. I'm too German to give up in the face of failure.

There are two things I have been called to do which still may have some application to my life. I have been told to be a mother and to be a teacher. So when I listened to Paul H. Dunn's decades-old talk, (nearly fifty years old!) I knew what I needed to write about.

Trees or Veils: a Division of Authority

In 2010, Valerie Hudson Cassler presented an idea in FAIR that addresses an idea of Priesthood and Motherhood. While I think there is some valuable insight into our eternal nature in this theory, it has one huge problem. It isn't doctrinal truth. Unfortunately, the idea has exploded across LDS blog thought, finding particular root in faithful feminists, that is people who support the Church and also believe in feminine eternal power, that women are not subjected to men via the priesthood, but have access to their own brand of power that works in tandem.

A very rough summation of the theory, in case you didn't want to follow the link above and read it for yourself, is that there are two Trees, the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, and the Tree of Life. In this theory, Eve was foreordained to partake first of the first Tree (of Knowledge of Good and Evil,) ushering mankind through that phase of existence and Adam is then to partake first of the second Tree (of Life) and usher mankind through that phase of existence (per Lehi's dream, I imagine.)

I can see why this idea is compelling. It explains why men have the priesthood and women do not, but still validates that women are powerful and important to God's plan. There is a very similar hypothesis that women and men are to preside over different veils, that women preside over our first birth (into mortal bodies) and men preside over our second birth (accept Christ's atonement.) This is slightly different, but still the same general idea. There are several problems with it, however, which I don't intend to touch upon until the very end. First, I'm going to take Elder Holland's advice and lead with what I know and believe.

Unrighteous Questions

As I am certain my parents would attest, I am big on asking questions. Even now, I have little shame in probing into the how and why of everything from human motivation to scientific knowledge, though I would hope I've developed a little more tact than I once had.

It is my parents' fault, of course. One of my earliest memories is, as a 3-year-old in Sunbeam class at church, sharing what I heard in Church that day only to have my dad ask me why I believed it. Because of that gift of a questioning spirit, at eight years old I was fully prepared with a testimony of the truthfulness of Jesus Christ, the Book of Mormon, and the story of Joseph Smith's vision. I had actually read that book myself and prayed as he did.

That is a gift that every parent should try to give their children. I only hope that I do half as well as my parents did with me.

That burning need to understand, to experience and know things for myself, is a huge part of what draws me to internet discussions. There are fewer social courtesies online, things can be discussed that many people would hesitate to share in person. My beliefs are questioned and challenged, and I thrive on that.

Questions help me delve more deeply into myself, help me reach out to my God more fully. They keep me from ever being satisfied with what I know and who I am.

There is a darker side to questioning, however, which I am beginning to see more clearly.

The Tenth Day: A Living Prophet

"On the tenth day of Christmas,
my true love gave to me
ten lords a-leaping."

There is a unique tension between the principles of agency, personal revelation, and a living prophet. Most people prefer their prophets dead, unable to argue with them and their choices. It is much more comfortable to direct our own spirituality without another source of input.

When we used to teach investigators into our Church, the first thing we taught them was Joseph Smith's vision. The second thing was the pattern by which they could find out for themselves if their Father in Heaven and His Son, Jesus Christ did actually visit Joseph in the grove.

That same pattern, the ability for us to ask God directly if something is from Him or not, is not just a test of truth, it is also a way for us to learn to listen to the Lord.

Evidence of Things Not Seen

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
—Hebrews 11:1

Evidence, in a court of law, is information whereby a case is established to be true. Faith, we often think, is believing in something without evidence. So how can faith BE evidence? How can a belief have substance?

Because faith is not just belief.

"I Have to Disagree . . . Just a Little"

I was sitting in Relief Society listening to a lesson about obedience and experiencing one of my days where I raise my hand more than I should. Most of the lesson was focused on how we can receive blessings for being obedient. But the more I thought about that, the more I realized that we keep trying to fit obedience into an equation. Obedience + Sacrifice = Blessings.

And there is some doctrinal basis for that line of thought. In fact, one might argue that the entirety of scripture demonstrates that when we obey, we are blessed.

But I think there is another level to that, beyond being blessed for obedience, that comes as we truly learn to love the Lord. We obey not because we are blessed, but because we love Him and trust Him. The blessings that we get are not part of an equation, but are much more complicated and less guaranteed. There is some evidence of this in scripture, Nephi slaying Laban, Paul preaching the gospel, even Mormon and Moroni guarding the plates. Sure, we can point to how the Lord blessed them, but the bulk of their personal blessings came as a result of being obedient, not as a result of the actions they took by being obedient. There was no expected personal blessing that one could point to and say "because you did this, you got this." In fact, most of the blessings in such cases weren't for them, but for others. They, themselves, had sorrow, death, and loneliness as their reward for obedience.

I think that this is eventually an important concept to understand, and felt moved to share my perspective with the class by referring obliquely to a personal commandment I received which, like Nephi's, went against the general commandments of God, and which had little to no personal benefit. (I had to hasten to add that I hadn't killed anyone!)

I think that suggesting that not all obedience results in a causation blessing made several people uncomfortable, because we would all like to believe that we can somehow control what blessings we receive. One woman raised her hand and said that she disagreed with me "a little," that ALL obedience comes with attached blessings.

She disagreed with me more than a little, but she was not willing to say it. Another woman chimed in and said we were both right, trying her best to make peace. Embarrassed, I thought about trying to clarify my point, but got the feeling that those who needed to hear what I said, if any, had heard it. I felt distinctly that not all in the room would benefit from understanding more what I was saying. So I let it lie there and turned hideously red (curse that pale Scandinavian skin).

The reason I'm sharing this here is because I think that as we gain knowledge by experience, as we gain a greater appreciation for the Savior and His love, as we come to develop a desire to serve those around us, we will find ourselves mimicking His teaching style more and more. Opening our mouths is important, when moved upon by the Spirit, but sometimes shutting our mouths is appropriate, too.

And it is okay to disagree more than just "a little."

The gospel is like a stretchy shirt. It is one size fits all, but that doesn't mean it looks the same on everyone.

Seminary Answers

I don't have any great scriptural or spiritual insights this time. I've tried to post numerous times, but lack the current clarity to formulate what I feel while preserving the privacy of others in my life. (My own privacy is not as important to me when it comes to sharing what I have learned in the gospel, but I can't make that choice for others. I've learned something of discretion.)

To be as blunt as possible, I have little control over events in my life for now, and I am very frightened. I have tried to do the best I know how, tried to consult the Spirit, but my confidence in my ability to hear well is weak. I have received a blessing that told me I had no need to be afraid, and that angels surrounded me in protection. Knowing I am not worthy of this protection, I have nonetheless used this assurance many times in the last several days to battle my fear as it wells up and threatens to destroy my peace. It is a very real and bloody battle I have fought to have faith in my Savior. It has left my spirit somewhat tattered, and I have yet to enter the real fight.

I would like to share a few things that have kept me from drowning in my fear.

I stand at risk to hear many accusations and attacks on my character. Although my faults are many, and I am not gaining progress against them as quickly as I would like, these particular accusations are false. They come from someone who is very hurt and angry, and probably no less afraid than I am. I fear that, despite the my best efforts at impartiality, truth and concern for all parties involved, I will not be believed. I have come to cling to the Spirit's reminders that I am not the first to be falsely accused. The scriptures have assured me that I stand in good company. Job was accused of evil by his friends, Joseph Smith was surrounded by former friends and enemies thirsty for revenge. Even, and most importantly, the Son of Man himself was silent before those who accused Him wrongly. Although I am far from equal to any of these men, I am comforted to know they landed safely in the arms of their Maker.

There have been friends calling when I need them most. The outpouring of support has left me feeling rather foolish for feeling alone. Home and Visiting Teaching has gained greater meaning to me. I do not refer to officially called Teachers, for I have seen little of them, but I refer to the spirit of Teaching, which is charity in its purest form. Many of those with no reason otherwise, have buoyed me up and shaken me out of the hands of the Adversary.

My lifeline has been prayer. I know that no matter what others think of me, my God knows my heart. He knows that I have sought nothing but what is right, though I have made a mess of it. I have always wanted more meaning in my prayers, but now that I must sometimes stand largely alone against the power of the destroyer, I have reached new depths of humility and pleading. Praying for His Spirit to be my constant companion has become the only thing to save me at times.

Prayer, Home and Visiting Teaching, the Holy Spirit, and the scriptures.

I hope I have learned never to use the term "seminary answers" again.

I Believe in Authority from God

Articles of Faith #5
[I] believe that a [person] must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

I have been called to several callings in the Church. Rarely, have I felt it was a calling from God by prophecy. Usually, it is a calling from man by expediency, with God's approval. The one time I was called to preach the Gospel, however, the divinity of my calling was unmistakable.

When I was fourteen years old, I heard a testimony during a Young Women's camp fireside which struck a fire deep into my heart. From that moment, I knew I was to serve a mission for my Church, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Our missions consist of 19-year-old boys serving two years and 21-year-old girls serving for 18 months in a place chosen by Apostles of the Church.

Although this desire to serve did not immediately change my behavior, I feel it had a subtle effect on my life over the next few years. I cleaned up my language, began listening to different music, continued to go to Church when all pressure pointed otherwise, and made small but very personal changes towards purifying my thoughts and my behavior. I attended college, taking a missionary preparation class. One requirement in this class was to attend a fireside. My memory being what it is, I don't remember who spoke, but during that talk came the distinct and strong impression that I was not to go on a mission.

I was devastated. I had been planning to go, assuming I would go, for years. I had felt called. After a great deal of tearful soul-searching and discussions (relieved on their side) with my parents, I stuck by the feeling I had not to serve.

It was a couple years later when a telephone conversation with my mother sparked an even stronger feeling that I was now to go. It was late for sisters, I was 22, about the time most sisters would be returning from their missions, but the feeling never left me. Thinking I was perhaps wrong, that my feelings came from me, I hesitantly begin to make preparations.

My parents would not support me on this mission, since I was living as a complete adult, and I did not know how to get the money to serve. After sharing this feeling with my visiting teachers, feeling like a tearful nutjob for opening myself up to them this way, I was approached by one who said she would contribute $25 per month. I was filled with gratitude. It would not cover the complete expense, but it was a spark of hope. Her offer was followed by one from my aunts and grandparents. Eventually, my parents called to let me know they would cover the rest. It was nothing short of a miracle to me, and an outpouring of support. I knew from how things all came together that the Lord had provided the means for me to accomplish the things He was commanding me to do by working through those who believed on His name.

Although my bishop was less than supportive of my choice, it was only two weeks from when I submitted my papers to receiving my call, and only a month until I was to report at the MTC. Two weeks after that, I found myself on German soil, feeling rather unprepared, but knowing I had been called of the Lord to be there at that time.

That calling was a protection and a strength to me during a rather trying mission.

I know that many people feel called of God to teach or preach whatever their particular agenda is. I know many take it upon themselves to teach what they think is right, against the counsel of those who are in authority. I believe that it is important to follow those the Lord has set in place to lead His Church. They are human, they are not perfect, but there is a principle greater than perfection, greater than being "right", and that is the Atonement. Christ's suffering, death, and return to life covers the imperfections of our leaders as well as our own sins, should we repent and be faithful to His teachings.

I was not a perfect teacher when God called me to teach. I made many mistakes I still regret. But I am humbled to know that God called me at that time to serve Him in that way, and to know that His purposes are fulfilled even in my imperfections. That understanding has led me to be a little more careful in how I judge the Lord's Anointed, a little more charitable when I don't understand their admonitions and guidance. I fully support the leaders of our Church. I believe they have been called as men to serve in the calling of God, and I am glad we have men upon the watchtower to see those dangers coming and to guard us.

Obedience Despite Disagreement

I want to share a story. I apologize, but it is a mission story, I can't help that. It is something quite personal and sacred to me, but at the urging of a friend I shall share it here.

My mission president was the sort of man who was able to see straight through you and into your soul when he shook your hand. He was wise and patient, and able to interview and teach missionary work on levels suited to the individual missionary. He was quite strict, having inherited a somewhat chaotic mission. He was roughly halfway done with his mission when I entered the mission field. He also loved sisters and sister missionary work.

I was in four areas during my first nine months, transferred nearly every transfer, until I was sent to the most remote sisters' area in the mission. The nearest member priesthood wielders were in a town 10 minutes away by train. The nearest missionaries were 30-40 minutes away by train. We were effectively alone in our work. Moreoever, the ward did not like missionaries. They had some bad missionary experiences in their fairly recent past, and still largely thought of the missionaries as parasites with no benefit to them.

The work was difficult there. We were remote, and had no car. We walked and used public transit. The terrain was fairly hilly, and communities were spaced relatively far apart. With little member support and no other missionaries, it was lonely. We struggled to teach and bring investigators to church, only to have them shunned and ignored. It was difficult. After praying about it for some time and receiving strong Spiritual confirmation, my companion and I decided to recommend that the area be closed to missionaries for a time. It would give the members time to rest. Eventually, our desires were granted.

I was sent to a place I had always felt I would be sent. I felt I had some specific work to do. It was four and a half months before the end of my mission, as I had decided to take the later return home. Also, two weeks after my transfer, we were to change mission presidents and merge with another mission. I was placed in a companionship which was amiable for about two hours, but then fell apart when I looked over the book and, as the senior companion, prepared to direct our companionship's work.

My companion of the time was very headstrong, and though she was junior companion in her previous companionship, she made all the decisions. In the brief time observing the companionship before the other sister returned home, I saw a rather emotionally abusive relationship. This sister resented my outlook on missionary work, as I thought we should spend our time teaching and tracting, and not lounging around members' houses, having come from an area which was still suffering from such behavior. She felt the best way to do the work was to buddy up with the members.

As those who have been in these sorts of relationships know, when the parties agree, it is as if there is no senior and junior companionship. When the parties do not agree, however, it is the job of the senior companion to prayerfully and considerately make the decision. I admit I was not as considerate as I now wish I had been. To me, the mission was about work, not play, and I was still young in my position as senior companion. The companionship quickly became completely unbearable, and we spent more time split with the office sisters in our apartment next to the main office, and not together as companions. In this personal climate, we gained a new president and merged with the other mission.

The new president knew our previous president fairly well, as they had served missions together. Purely in speculation and feelings I gained, as they made little to no outward sign of it, I feel they did not particularly get along before. They were completely cordial to each other, however, and our beloved mission president left the mission in the hands of his successor. Perhaps because there had been some history behind them, perhaps because all new presidents feel they need to change things, perhaps because of the merger, our work quickly changed. The new president felt that triple companionships were a waste of resources, and since there were two sister companionships of that nature in the mission, within a week my previous companion and I were sent back to the area we had been relieved to leave.

I couldn't help but feel that it was a personal failure on my part. If I had been a better senior companion, had known how to deal with my angry junior companion, perhaps I would have been allowed to stay where I felt I should be and do the Task I thought the Lord wanted me to do. My failure, in my eyes, was spectacular. My companion was transferred out of the area in the next transfer and I was paired with a senior sister.

She was in her seventies, but extremely fit, especially for her age. It was good that she was so, because the terrain had not changed and we still had no car. Feeling like a failure, I redoubled my efforts to work hard and frankly pushed her far too hard to learn the language and keep up with the work. I was perfectly horrible to her. I felt completely crushed by my situation, and at a loss to know what to do. Each transfer I prayed to leave, each time I stayed I knew I was still a failure. I knew I had messed up beyond repair, and I was banished to a place I could do little further harm, paired with someone who could not help me prove I was worthy.

During this time of angst, the president decided that as a mission, we were not working hard enough and doubled our goal numbers. He strongly favored the other mission we had merged with and constantly lauded their efforts and their successes. They were a much smaller mission and had not been transferred very often. Most missionaries there would serve in one or two areas before going home, our average was more like four or five. They were the golden children, and resentment was building in our half of the mission. As the most senior sister remaining from that mission, I was the recipient of a great deal of complaining.

The resentment only grew worse as rumors began to circulate that the new president's favorite sister missionary was calling her previous Zone Leader (across two countries) after curfew. Other similar rumors began to fly. As telephone records came out, so did the truth. This sister and the elder involved were sent home honorably, from what I remember, as it was time for her to return home anyways. That was not the end of it. Perhaps because of the infrequent transfers or smallness of that mission, most of the rumors were true. It quickly became common knowledge that the Golden Child was in a state of decay, and the whipping boy was boiling in anger over it.

I thought it would be a good idea to let the president know the state of feeling among many of the missionaries, including myself, before it boiled over. I was recalled from my remote area, riding 5 hours alone to return to the area I felt I was supposed to serve in. I had no idea what was going on. When I got to the office, I sat for some time before being invited in. There followed a long, tearful, emotional interview in which I was informed that the Mission President was sending me home in the next transfer. I was to be given an honorable discharge, but was not to stay the extra month I had felt strongly I was to serve, despite my personal difficulties.

He felt I was breaking under the stress of the mission and could not handle another month. I plead with him as I have never done so with anyone else. I knew I was supposed to stay. I promised I would no longer complain and would do all I could to disperse the ill feelings of others. I can't remember everything I said in that interview, but by the end, he let me stay (on probation.) I returned, completely humiliated and broken. I served my last month without the zeal and energy I had before depended on.

In my time after being sent back, we had completely ceased doing member meals. At first this was only our companionship's choice, but the president had meanwhile told the missionaries that member meals were to be done on their free time and were not to count as missionary work, unless a nonmember was present. We tracted. Fairly early in my return, a referral came in from a member in another mission. This lady had gone through a divorce and had one son, about two years old. She was utterly sweet, and lived in the furthest reach of our area. We had to travel an hour and a half by train to teach her. We had been teaching her every week when I was recalled to the office, and after I returned, she set a baptismal date and ended up being baptized the Saturday before I left for home. She was the only baptism of someone I had taught which I saw in the course of my mission.

Gradually, during my last month, my humiliation became mixed with humility. I began to see all the many things I had done wrong in the latter course of my mission. I began to understand that I had no right to take upon myself the responsibility of informing the mission president what he was doing wrong. I certainly should never have participated in all the ill feeling towards him. Even if I had felt it, I should have kept it to myself.

I believe his efforts, though misguided, were deeply sincere. He had been trying to do the right thing. It was some time after my mission that I saw that his situation was not so different from what mine had been as senior companion to a girl who resented me. In my own small way, I had been in a leadership position I was ill prepared for. I had made serious mistakes, despite trying to do what I felt was right and trying to follow the Spirit with all my energy of soul. How wonderful it would have been, and how much more I could have learned, had my companion chosen to support me with gentle discussions of how she felt I was wrong. If she had given me time to grow and learn, we could have been a stellar companionship.

I'm sure the new president learned some life-changing lessons in the course of his service, despite its stormy beginnings. I still cherish him and his wife, and wish I were better at keeping up with them. I know he is—and was—a man of God, called by Him to be there in that place and time, despite his imperfections and insecurities.

There is a time, place and manner in which to disagree with our priesthood leaders. They are imperfect, but I have never once met one who wasn't trying to do the right thing according to their understanding. It is so vitally important to treat them with charity and understanding. Love them, even if you don't agree with them. Realize that the Lord has called them to their position for reasons you don't know. Through their leadership service, they will learn charity and humility. In the meantime, support them with a whole heart, even if you cannot agree with them. Disagree respectfully and lovingly. You never know when you will be in a place of leadership where you will wish that you had one person willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

But Behold, They Did Not

I am slowly going through a change in the way I approach my opinions. It is generally accepted that, should one have an opinion different than the majority, or (barring majority) socially accepted, one is perforce wrong and should keep it to oneself. My natural inclination is to not make waves, though my upbringing has taught me that challenging beliefs—mine as well as others—is, to a point, healthy. (Of course there is balance in all things, and challenging merely for the sake of challenging crosses that line.) I hate contention, though I'm always for a bout of debate, so long as no hard feelings are present at the end. As I read the chapters in Alma which correspond to my Sunday School lessons, I'm starting to feel that this may not always be the best approach, however. Alma 9, especially poignant, reads:

And they stood forth to lay their hands on me; but behold, they did not. And I stood with boldness to declare unto them, yea, I did boldly testify unto them, saying: Behold, O ye wicked and perverse generation, how have ye forgotten the tradition of your fathers; yea, how soon ye have forgotten the commandments of God.

This troubles me, because I don't see this sort of boldness in myself. I still have too much fear. But where is the balance between boldly testifying and not offending? Where does the burden of not offending lay with me, and where does it lay with the one being offended? I suspect some will be offended, no matter what is said, for they are offended by the word of the Lord, and expect you to tell them what they want to hear.

I suspect the balance lies somewhere in the words of Jacob. We are to trust in the Spirit to guide us to what we should do. Even though boldness in testifying may be difficult for us, we should say what the Lord commands us to say, even should it offend others. We should always try to have the Spirit in all we say (or type!) That isn't to mean we shall always be perfect at it, but that is also not to mean that just because someone is offended, we should not say it. Sometimes, despite the best of efforts, others will do all they can to be offended. If they can ferret out things to be offended by, they can discard the rest of your words, no matter how Spiritually inspired they may be, and thus don't have to change.

I think just that was observed when Sister Beck shared her controversial talk.

The end remains that, though you should try to see another's point of view, a point will come when you cannot agree with their conclusions. When given the choice between serving the master of popularity, who asks for you to say things that are pleasing, and rails against you when you do not, or the one who pleads and chastens.

For obvious reasons, this has been on my mind quite heavily of late. It is a frightening proposition, but I am no longer going to make peace out of default. If I have said something I believe in, I will declare it should the Spirit so move me, and no longer labor under the burden of agreeability. Sometimes the only way is for the Church to assert its position and beliefs firmly enough that those who disagree with its most basic tenets find the impetus to follow their beliefs, no matter how painful and difficult it may be to those who love them, and no matter the social and physical danger. Not all those who rail against the word of God find themselves unable to harm those who testify.

Priestcraft and the Modern Mormon, Part I

A combination of reading and thinking this week has led me to a sobering train of thought. The book of Alma in the Book of Mormon introduces a man named Nehor. Nehor sets in motion a movement that proves the ultimate destruction of the people of Nephi. Despite his eventual ignominious demise, the organization inspired by Nehor's teachings introduces priestcraft and secret combinations to the people. Nehor is an antichrist. I've read the story dozens of times, but I've never before applied it to my current life this way, nor have I really thought about what an antichrist is.

First, hallmarks of Nehor's teachings.

1. Nehor taught things he claimed (believed?) were from God.


2. Nehor taught against the established Church.


3. Nehor wanted teachers of the gospel to be supported by the people, and essentially voted into place.


4. Nehor said that all men would be saved, and that all men ought to rejoice because all had been redeemed.

It amazed me how many of Nehor's teachings and behavior are in alignment with modern thought. Despite the desires of those who follow current society's pressure to seem tolerant and modern, their mode of thinking is anything but new. We would like to think that we are tolerant of other people and their beliefs, but the Internet and media discourse are rife with examples of "I'm tolerant unless you think this way." Nehor used the freedom to preach according to belief to gain money and prestige, but he did not allow Gideon the same freedom to do so without money or price.

Nehor also taught against the established Church doctrines. While it is obviously not definitive of antichrist status, teaching against the established Church, especially in certain political climates, is something that bears looking into. In order to determine whether preaching against the established church is indicative of antichristianity, one must examine the motivations. Such motivations are extremely difficult to judge objectively in another person, since (as stated before) the person in question often claims to be preaching according to belief. However, although such judgment isn't objective, it is rather easily determined subjectively by a person's nonverbal behavior. If they are enjoying the attention or popularity, it is priestcraft. A person preaching God's words honestly is largely unconcerned with others' reception of it. They will preach earnestly and entreatingly, rather than with an self-serving personal agenda. They will be shining God's light to the world, rather than their own.

Also, Nehor believed in grassroots change. He taught that the people should determine who should teach. Much like many people today, he thought that the people would be best able to direct the direction of the Church. He thought that those who teach should be paid. I find it interesting how many times I have heard people claim that the LDS Church should switch to paid clergy because the quality of teaching improves.

Nehor also preached that, in the end, all will be saved. This is an enticing teaching that we humans have difficulty releasing. I've heard an increasing number of modern LDS members proffer the opinion that all will be well in the end. They say, for example, that even if a family member does not accept the gospel in this life, despite all opportunity, they will still be able to all live together because the gospel teaches that families are eternal. Essentially, this means that what we do here has no value, so long as we more or less try to be good people. This is one of the most insidious of the Adversary's ideas because deep down, we all want the happy ending and deep down, we have all defined what a happy ending is. We forget that even those who are wicked on this earth will have some level of happiness. We forget that the Church teaches that families can be together forever, not will be. Only those who meet the complete laws of mercy and justice can become as the Father, but everyone else will be happy where they are, too.

Second, Nehor's actions:

1. Nehor began to wear expensive clothing.


2. Nehor gathered followers and established his own church.


3. Nehor fought and contended with those who taught the Church's doctrines.


4. Nehor became violent during one of these contentions.

I won't spend as much time on these, as they are self-explanatory for the most part. Suffice it to say that there are those who, excommunicated or disaffected from the Church, continue to teach things they claim to believe and who do all they can to gather supporters. Although I don't think physical violence and expensive clothing are prerequisites to being antichrist, they are certain indicators that their "beliefs" are hollow. I think we "modern" humans tend to believe that if the most extreme of indicators are not present, there is no problem. On the contrary, one does not have to apply with the government to establish a church, nor does one have to buy Dolce & Gabbana sunglasses or gas-guzzling Ford F-350's to fulfill the spirit of "expensive clothing".

Next post, I'll discuss how Nehor's teachings and behavior affected both his followers and church members.

Highly Suggested Reading

Our Strengths Can Become Our Downfall by Elder Dallin H. Oaks, 1994. I stumbled on this while researching priestcraft. It is an utterly amazing talk, given almost a decade and a half ago. Read it! I think everyone can find something useful to them in it.
Why We Serve also by Elder Oaks, 1984. This one also holds a magnifying glass to our motives. Well worth a read.

The Visions and Blessings and Glories of God

A recent conversation about the second anointing and receiving the second Comforter has me formulating some things into words that I haven't before. I apologize if I'm awkward trying to get my meaning across, I'm not sure how to say what is in my heart right now.

Sometimes there is so much pain and discipline in the Gospel of Christ, we forget about the blessings and glories. Because the blessings come after the discipline and pain, some people never see them. How I wish I could show them! It's amazing to me how things which were only words can be magically transformed by the Spirit of the Lord into profound teachings. Even the simple sentence, "I know God lives!" can seem trite, empty, and even controversial on the surface, but when communicated through the Spirit receives inexplicable dimension and beauty.

It is one thing to see Christ in vision and another to receive the second Comforter, to come to the point where you are truly communing with Him as a friend. There are those alive today who have that glorious relationship with Him! How I long for that. How I ache after knowing Him that way again! How I wish I were not so full of sin as to still be separated from my Redeemer! When we are commanded to receive Him every week in Sacrament, we are being pointed towards this great experience. Not only do I believe it possible to receive this in this life, I believe it is God's true goal for us. Everything else builds towards that true communion with the One who snatched us from the depths of separation from Him. What could be more glorious than to conquer Satan completely and fully while still under influence of the Fall? If we do not receive it in this life, I believe that God is merciful and we will still be able to receive Christ in the next life, but I believe that is our truest goal.

Those who have seen visions from God and received the second Comforter so often find themselves weak in communicating. All we have objectively are words. It takes a subjective quality in the receiver and in the teacher both to truly communicate these things. Even I, who have not yet received anything of such import, find myself struggling to define the things I have been given. No one can teach it to another any more than the virgins could share their oil because the same words undergo such a indescribable transformation once a seeker is ready to understand the deeper meanings. That can't be taught, only invited.

I want to be with Him again. If He sees fit to grant that to me in this life, I will be even more grateful than I already am. But if not, still I will never give up trying. I will never set my sights lower than communion with my Savior. Flashes of the Spirit are not enough for me. It is not enough for me to taste the bounty of the Gospel, I want to feast upon it.

Blogging by the Spirit

When speaking in Sacrament meeting or teaching a class, I subscribe to Gene R. Cook's method described in his book "Teaching by the Spirit." My mission president gave me this book early in my mission, and it changed the way I teach. To sum it up, it is essentially focusing on self-preparation rather than speech-preparation. In it, the speaker reads, ponders, lives according to the commandments and prays, then stands up to teach and lets the Spirit take over. It is a slightly frightening way to teach, especially at first, and I've had a few times where my confidence overreached my humility and it didn't go well.

Nevertheless, I've found it highly effective both to teach and to learn. This year, I've applied it to Sunday lessons, though I've only taught once. I find the lessons are far more meaningful, and the scriptures are merging into one in ways I never before understood. It is also highly effective in less formal teaching/learning moments in life, such as when a friend needs help, when driving . . . and when blogging.

Although I once found debating points of opinion scintillating, I have progressed to a point where I no longer enjoy it. Discussion is still enjoyable to me, but it is easy to discern between the two. There is a certain level of hostility absent in discussion. The Spirit departs from debate. In blogging and commenting on blogs, I have tried to apply this method. If what I am saying has any significance at all, if I cannot feel the Spirit flowing through my mind and heart and into my fingers, I refrain from "speaking." I've mentioned this once before.

I have found that I spend a lot less time reading and writing on blogs (a blessing, since I don't have much time to spare) and more time away from the computer, pondering on the "things of eternity". My understanding and heart has opened more to the things of God.

I try to no longer engage in debate of any kind. The part of me that once found it intellectually stimulating now realizes that it was just a disguised attempt to prove how smart/intelligent/wise/spiritual I was to myself. Moreover, I don't really want to be intellectually stimulated in that way nearly as much as I want to be spiritually stimulated. There is no way for the "natural" or intelligent man to understand the things of God. There is no way for an intellectual discussion devoid of the Spirit to bring us to better understanding of God's ways.

Intelligence is good when it submits to the Spirit, but if it doesn't, it is better not to be intelligent. What is more, if you write by the Spirit, nothing anyone says against you matters. You know you were doing your best to follow the Lord's will for you. If you write when filled with the Spirit, though you may be frightened of the judgment of men, you are a prophet of God.

You Have No Idea What You are Doing

Those of you who preach contrary to the word of God, I have only this to say: you have no idea what you are doing. You sew your seeds of unrighteousness, thinking you are right. You tell people that parenthood is a trap, that life is about the individual and the needs of the one. You teach that whatever a person does is right for them, as long as they feel it is right. They can choose whether or not to have an abortion, they can determine how many children to have purely of their own will, they can leave family and home to pursue a self-fulfilling career, and that is right. You hide from them the consequences of their actions. You lead them into believing that life is a silver platter from which they can pluck only the foods they want and avoid any consequence for their choices. Your work brings disillusionment, pain, shattered lives and pure evil. What you teach is no better than rape, because it leaves minds and lives broken almost beyond all repair. You teach what you do because you think you have a right to do so. You think your tiny mind, with all its human faults, is somehow smarter and greater than the mind of God. You are wrong. You are so very wrong.

And the consequences for your actions are not limited to those deceived by your lies. No, innocent children, husbands and wives are damaged by your teachings. How many broken hearts have been broken not to humility before God, but to the darkest depths of self-hate because of the lies you have spun? How many men and women and children, real living people, have spent how many hours wishing they or their loved ones had never listened to you?

You have shown me that you don't have to say there is no Christ to be an antithesis to all that He is. Someday, oh ye Anti-Christ, someday you will have to face the fruits of your teachings. Someday you will have to answer to the pain you have caused in the lives of innocents, all in the name of your own intellect. Some day you will plead to avoid the consequences of what you have done, you will say, "I always knew that there was a God. But I was deceived. I said what I did because it made people happy. I taught what I did and many believed me, until even I believed that what I taught brought happiness," but it will be too late for you to have the curse removed because the curse is of your own doing. I feel so sorry for you, Anti-Christ, even as I rage at what you have done, helpless to stop your effects in my life even though I, personally, shut you out. I feel sorry for you because you will never understand real joy. You will never discover how to have pure happiness lifting you up even in the midst of your darkest time. You will never understand how to forgive.

I forgive you for what you have done to me and my family. I'm still hurt by it, but even that will pass in time.

Please stop. Please stop teaching all the things you have worked out in your own head and turn back to the scriptures and the prophets. What they teach may seem so restrictive, but once you accept those restrictions, entire worlds of joy and opportunity open to you that you will never find so long as you live in the congratulatory world of your own intellect. Please, please stop pushing your agendas on the weak and innocent. Please, please, please stop hurting yourself and your brothers and sisters. Humble yourself. Repent. For now, there is still time.

When "Funny" Isn't

Once upon a time, I prided myself on my ability to make a person feel two inches tall in less than ten words. I was good at using sarcasm and "wit", and built quite a reputation for myself. I was careful to use my linguistic power only when the situation warranted it and the object of my censure was fully deserving of it. I thought that made me safe, excused me from any sin. A long series of experiences gradually led me to change my opinion, culminating with my husband's explanation of his extreme distaste for any form of sarcasm.

I've recently had an experience with a blog post that has led me to think about this topic again. I observed a once-admired person ridiculing a group of people I do not agree with. Despite being superficially on the "side" of the ridiculer, I felt uncomfortable and finally felt that I should speak up, lest my silence be construed as tacit approval. As a result, I put myself in a position to also be ridiculed. I have mixed feelings of disappointment and hurt about this. Gradually, the hurt is fading, though I'm still disappointed. I thought perhaps I was wrong in my stance, so I decided to make it the topic of study in my scripture study this morning. Since I think best when I write, I thought I'd share my conclusions here. It's not meant as an attack or justification; it's just a way for me to cope with what happened and to resolve my internal concerns. I have found that both scriptures and leadership, with one exception, seem to agree with me.

There is an undeniably bitter chasm between those who have left the LDS Church and those who still profess to believe. Often, those who have left mock and point fingers at those who believe in the Gospel. Sometimes, this mockery becomes downright attack. Unfortunately, mockery is not the sole prerogative of the disaffected. In fact, sometimes mockery creates the disaffected. President Hinckley in 1986 said "Everywhere is heard the insulting remark, the sarcastic comment, the verbal attack against the reputations of others. Sadly, these are too often the bases of our conversation. . . . In the Church it sows the seed of inactivity and finally apostasy." Those who become inactive and/or leave the Church can be either source or subject of the mockery. Ofttimes, they either begin to mock sacred things, even in jest or, when they find themselves doubting or with questions, they find themselves denigrated and shunned by those who should be their brothers and sisters in the gospel. In the latter case, the situation often seems to prove to those who are doubting that the Church is not founded by God. Some find it hard to believe that the Church of God would include those who do not practice His charity, and so they stop believing and they leave.

There is no doubt that not all humor is wrong, but sarcasm is a particular brand of so-called "humor" of its own. Peter B. Rawlins in his 1974 New Era article explains,

"A most damaging form of humor is sarcasm, or cutting, hostile, or contemptuous remarks. Such humor is usually based on inordinate pride and is usually aimed at some person or group thought to be inferior, such as minority races, ethnic groups, and the physically handicapped. Occasionally some good comes from these jokes when taken in good humor by the object of the joke . . . . but this occurs only when the feelings of all concerned are considered.

Though often meant to be harmless, sarcasm denotes insensitivity to the feelings of others, stemming either from thoughtlessness or maliciousness."

In other words, the very nature of sarcasm includes insensitive thoughtlessness or maliciousness, depending on whether or not the person is aware that they are hurting others. To say that someone deserves the sarcasm is to admit, perhaps without conscious realization, to intentional hurting of another child of God, no matter how far led astray that child of God may be.

That is not to say that one should never criticize behavior. As President Hinckley later says,

"I am asking that we look a little deeper for the good, that we halt the sounds of insult and sarcasm, that we more generously compliment virtue and effort. I am not asking that all criticism be silenced. Growth comes of correction. Strength comes of repentance. Wise is the man who can acknowledge mistakes pointed out by others and change his course of action."

The trick is to make certain that criticism is being done in a spirit of love and not one of mocking sarcasm. ANY time criticism is necessary, the criticizer must show an increase of love towards the person if they wish to criticize righteously. One should try to evaluate and see if their love is stronger than death. Otherwise, one should probably refrain from criticizing, unless otherwise directed by the Spirit. (And if you're in the frame of spirit necessary to be directed by the Spirit, you are probably also filled with love for the person needing to be criticized!)

Those who are struggling with questions and doubts need that love more than anyone. It is too common (and easy) to label people with doubts as near-Apostates, and then to ignore and revile them. After all, Korihor was not allowed to teach among the Anti-Nephi-Lehis, and Christ did not always give the Pharisees nothing but warm fuzzies. Most of the time, however, if the situation is examined with a prayerful heart, it will be discovered that the people in question are not nearly anti-Christs and are almost never deliberately misunderstanding the Gospel as the Pharisees did. Usually, people with doubts are just like every other person in the Church. Can any long-term member honestly say that they have never had questions or doubts and yet still have a strong testimony? If there are any, they are rare.

I guess that most of the time, those members who overreact to questions and doubts do so because they do not have a true understanding of agency and the Atonement, or faith in their own testimony. They are afraid of questions and doubts because they are afraid that if they are exposed to questions, their testimonies will be undermined.

Of course, my last two paragraphs do not apply to those few souls who are truly anti-Christ. These are people whose only goal is to lead others away from the Church and from Christ. It is usually quite easy to tell the difference. Anti-Christs are rarely questioning, but they often pose rhetorical questions. They rarely seem as though they are searching, but will exude confidence in the answers they have already received. If nothing else, if you can feel the Spirit's true love and sorrow for a person, but still feel that you should not engage in discussion, the Spirit is directing you away from a conversation, rather than your own fears acting to categorize and revile a person who is honestly seeking to know.

What I have found is that sarcasm is not compatible with Christian discipleship. I could find no references to God or Christ mocking anyone. The one exception I found in the scriptures is when it mentions in Proverbs and Psalms that the Lord will laugh at the wicked. Given the nature of these two books of scripture, I think that is a bit of literary word painting on Solomon's and David's (or others') parts, and not literal.

Meekness is compatible with discipleship, and as Elder Maxwell stated in his 1982 BYU address, the meek know how to not speak. They have nothing to prove and no need to revile others. "The meek think of more clever things to say than are said. And it’s just as well, for there is so much more cleverness in the world than wisdom, so much more sarcasm than idealism."

Rawlins says later in his article:

"Would it not be better to “lift up the hands which hang down, and strengthen the feeble knees” (D&C 81:5) than to humiliate and disgrace one of our neighbors? When humor is such a powerful tool in building subtle bonds of brotherhood, in cheering those who suffer, and in teaching profound and memorable lessons, why should it be used to belittle and discourage?

Those who profess belief in Christ should shape their humor in the light of Christ’s teachings. Being rejected from His kingdom because of a warped sense of humor would not be funny."

Sarcasm is never funny. "Remember, too, that no matter what you see in the TV sit-coms and movies, put-down, cutting humor is not good humor. While it may be entertaining to watch, in real life, cutting humor and sarcasm are too unkind to be funny. They can only injure, never uplift." (Chris Crowe, New Era 1986)

What disciple of Christ would wish to harm any of the souls for which He died? Whether or not those souls accept His sacrifice is irrelevant; He died for them unconditionally, should we not give them the benefit of the doubt and love them unconditionally? Let their choices push them away from the Church and the comfort of God, if that is what they wish. Never let your choices force that decision upon them. If you criticize, criticize with love, not sarcasm. You might be surprised how many "near-Apostates" only need that love to give them the courage and strength they need to come back to Him.

Other interesting and pertinent articles:
Brad Wilcox 2000
Rex A. Skidmore 1988
James E. Faust 2000
Russell Wilcox 2007
FHE Book 1997

A Plague of Agendas

I'm a little concerned by some things I've read lately. Namely, that my daughter's future Young Women leaders might be pushing a feminist agenda. I'd be just as concerned were it a Republican agenda, or any agenda. The fact is, I don't like agendas. When you focus on one issue to the point of it interfering in supposedly unrelated areas of your life, and you are insisting that everyone else copy your behavior, that is the basis for cult-like behavior. I appreciate the irony that some people feel this can apply to the LDS Church and, to an extent, I agree with them. If you are unable to be friends with anyone but Mormons, for example, there is a problem. If you are unable to teach history without spouting your anti-religion babble, there is a problem. If you are unable to teach Young Women's without diverting from the gospel to push your feminist ideals, there is a problem.

Is nowhere safe?

What will I do if I find my daughter isn't being taught the gospel in Church?

Confessions of a Half-feminist

Due to my recent vacation and return, I had the pleasure of experiencing two of the "The Women of the Church" lesson, one in Connecticut and one in my home ward in Utah. I found an interesting phenomenon that proves 1) that different environments affect one object differently and 2) I am multiple personality. Allow me to illustrate.

The Connecticut lesson was taught in a relatively small room in a relatively small and brand-new ward building. The attendant Relief Society was diminished in numbers from their usual women. The president had us pull our chairs around into a circle. I felt as comfortable as I could feel chasing a toddler among strangers. Many of the attendant women were single, widowed or divorced. The president taught the lesson gently and beautifully, quoting from the book where applicable. The Spirit was the strongest I have felt at Church in a long time. Several women testified to the beauty of women's God-appointed role. I felt moved to bear testimony of the divinity of women, the divinity of servitude and the Divinity of women's calling to serve and to seem to take a second-place role. It was amazing, despite the toddler (who, blessedly, fell asleep.)

***One week later***

The Utah lesson was taught in a recently-expanded Relief Society room in a fairly large, though somewhat aged Church building. The room was packed with about 80 or 90 women. We sat in the usual rowed seats. I felt as comfortable as I could feel chasing a toddler among somewhat-disapproving mostly-strangers. Many of the attendant women were single, widowed or divorced. The teacher stood in front of the class and read from the lesson manual with a modicum of discussion. There was an uneasy feeling in the room. Several women testified to the appropriateness of women's role. Feeling an increasing unease, I felt moved to testify to the need to teach our sons the same lessons about preparation for marriage and responsibility that our daughters get. I mentioned that the Priesthood rarely get prepared, spiritual lessons (based on reports from my husband and brother.) I mentioned that boys are not taught to prepare themselves to be good husbands and fathers the way girls are taught to be good wives and mothers. I testified that, in the words of the manual, "Every [boy], and I say every [boy], should prepare [him]self for marriage and for domestic responsibilities." I am certain I offended at least two women who took their turns to emphasize that their husbands got the same lessons they got in Relief Society. Despite believing that, as in Connecticut, I was moved by the Spirit to say what I did, I left with a feeling of embarrassment and frustration.

The same lesson. The same me. The same toddler. Two vastly different experiences.

It is funny, because I know I'm labeled by the largest portion of LDS bloggers who have registered my existence as a very conservative person. Sometimes this frustrates me, too, because no one online has any idea of the things I have gone through in relation to the Church and the behavior of her people towards me. No one has any understanding of the years of soul-searching and divinely-oriented pleading I have willingly traveled through to finally reach my current level of faith and acceptance. Only my Father and I know that. For years I have longed to speak personally with someone who knows, despite knowing I will never have that chance. What I wouldn't give for a half hour with one of the Apostles, certain of the Seventy or the First Presidency. What I wouldn't give to speak with them. I wouldn't ask them questions, exactly. I'd only want to hear from a friend of Christ that I'm doing alright and I'd want to hear them speak of Him - as a friend. To testify of Him. Not in a General Conference sort of way, but in a way that is real.

Fairy Godmother

I am a relatively new mother of a seven-month-old girl. Lately, I've been mulling over things that I hope to teach her. This morning I compared it to the gifts the fairy godmothers give Sleeping Beauty at her birth. If I were able to grant her anything, what would I give her?

First, I would grant her charity. I don't mean the inclination to hand money out the window to the man on the street corner, or drop some change in the bell-ringers buckets at Christmastime. I mean true, empathic charity. I would hope that she could "mourn with those who mourn" and "comfort those who stand in need of comfort." I would bless her to feel joy for others' accomplishments. In short, I would grant her all the beauty of love for her fellow man that I cannot seem to acquire.

Second, I would give her the gift of self-worth. It isn't the same as the cliche buzzword "self-esteem." Self-worth involves knowing her place in God's plan. With self-worth, she would know unequivocally that she is loved and wanted. She would be able to see herself through my eyes and the eyes of her God. She would recognize her beauty. Self-worth would have her esteem herself as she esteems others. It would guide her charity to a greater understanding of her own worth. Faith not only in God, but in His ability to love and save her is part of self-worth. I would grant her the beautiful self-image that has always eluded me.

Third, I would give her intelligence. She would be able to understand how to help people, to know how the world works. She would be able to enjoy the beauty of the earth and of people's hearts. Her intelligence wouldn't draw her down into the spirals of analyzation and cynicism, but would spiral her upwards towards rejoicing in God's work. She would revel in the transient beauty of this telestial world and its inhabitants without losing excitement for terrestrial and celestial worlds. She would be happy here without being content. I would wish her the deeper understanding that brings joy in this life.

How do you teach your children values you cannot possess? How do I teach her to be happy, to love and be loved when I cannot do any of these things? I know they are possible.