Sunday School Lesson Recap: Sharing the Gospel Using the Internet

Last Sunday was the 5th Sunday, and, since I was leading the 3rd hour combined adult lesson on "Using the Internet to Share the Gospel", I decided to teach the same lesson in my Sunday School class, as well. Preaching the Gospel is framed as a priesthood duty, and Elder Oaks had used serving missions as an example of how women are authorized to exercise priesthood authority (meaning that sharing the Gospel online can be seen as a priesthood duty for both men and women), so I figured it was okay to teach this lesson in a month focused on the priesthood.

I read (and we discussed briefly) the following sentences from Elder Ballard's commencement speech at BYU-Hawaii in Dec 2007 ("Sharing the Gospel Using the Internet") that was reprinted in the July 2008 Ensign:

I am in my 80th year. By some accounts that makes me pretty old. Actually, some folks think some of the Brethren may be too old to know what’s going on in your world. Let me assure you we are very much aware.

Ours is the world of cyberspace, cell phones that capture video, video and music downloads, social networks, text messaging and blogs, handhelds and podcasts. This is the world of the future, with inventions undreamed of that will come in your lifetime as they have in mine. How will you use these marvelous inventions? More to the point, how will you use them to further the work of the Lord?

There is truth in the old adage that “the pen is mightier than the sword.” In many cases it is with words that you will accomplish the great things that you set out to do. And it’s principally about ways to share those words that I want to talk to you.

The emergence of new media is facilitating a worldwide conversation on almost every subject, including religion, and nearly everyone can participate. This modern equivalent of the printing press is not reserved only for the elite.

There are conversations going on about the Church constantly. Those conversations will continue whether or not we choose to participate in them. But we cannot stand on the sidelines while others, including our critics, attempt to define what the Church teaches . . . Perceptions of the Church are established one conversation at a time.

All of you know that members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are reminded and encouraged continually to share the gospel with others. The Church is always looking for the most effective ways to declare its message.

Now, may I ask that you join the conversation by participating on the Internet to share the gospel and to explain in simple and clear terms the message of the Restoration.

Remember, as the proverb states, that “a soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger” (Proverbs 15:1). And remember that contention is of the devil (see 3 Nephi 11:29). There is no need to argue or contend with others regarding our beliefs. There is no need to become defensive or belligerent . . . We simply need to have a conversation, as friends in the same room would have.

I then shared ten suggestions for internet participation taken from a post by Daria Black in February 2007 that I found when I started blogging entitled "The Blogger's Guide to Comment Etiquette", plus two more I added, and we discussed how each suggestion relates specifically to sharing the Gospel online. For this summary, I will skip the obvious applications but add an explanation for suggestions that aren't as obvious.

1. Write a comment, not spam.

Spam is the bane of all webernet existence and has caused many a blogger to resort to counterproductive measures such as closing their comment section. Even worse than spam, however, are comments that do little more than consume bandwidth. What most bloggers are looking for is feedback that continues the discussion about the topic at hand. Comments like “You don’t know what you’re talking about” or “I was here first,” are not helpful.

Take the time to read the blog entry and put some effort into writing a response that adds to the conversation and/or helps the blog writer. Your comment is your calling card. The webernet is an open rolodex and as such, how you present yourself through your words will tell people whether or not they want to look you up.

I simply mentioned that the first few comments a person writes in any comment thread (and the first few posts a person writes on a new personal blog) can establish that person's reputation and determine, to a large degree, how seriously that person will be taken by others. I emphasized that they don't have to try to write "perfect" or deeply profound comments and/or posts, but they should try to make sure they are commenting and furthering the discussion - or creating an opportunity for thought and/or conversation.

2. Stay on topic.

This policy may differ from blog to blog. Some blogmasters don’t care if the participants drift off onto tangent. Others will do a round house kick on you if you get too close to the white line. As a general rule if you find that you fall into a discussion with other visitors about something unrelated to the post, offer to email them privately.

We talked about "threadjacks" and how it is impolite to change the course of the discussion from what the author of a post intended - that when a person takes the time to write something, respect is shown best by honoring that intent. I did mention that some blogs and authors don't mind threadjacks, especially if lots of comments and good discussion have occurred prior to the threadjack.

3. Respect the rules.

Some bloggers will have an official comment policy in place. Usually because of issues they’ve run into with their feedback. Read it and respect it. Visiting someone’s blog is just like being a guest in their house. The last thing they want is you pooping all over their couch and doing so will usually result in them pushing you out the front door.

The kids got a kick out of that image. (I had to warn the adults in the 3rd hour about it and offer a quasi-apology before we started.)

4. Comments should be comprehensible.

Make an effort to use good grammar and spelling and to communicate your thoughts clearly. People cannot respond effectively to your concerns if they cannot understand what they are in the first place. Don’t forget that people cannot see your expression or hear your voice. Flame wars are often the result of a misinterpretation of the meaning of your words. This is why smilies and snark tags, such as “sarcasm”, were invented. Use them.

Also, be sure your writing reflects the level of formality of the blog. Throwing around slang terms on a blog that is highbrow may cause you to appear uneducated even though you are Mensa member. On the other hand, using language more suitable for a doctoral thesis on a blog that is very informal may come across as pretentious and snooty.

We talked about how lots of people assume Mormons are ignorant and how badly worded comments, with grammatical and spelling errors can reinforce that perception and actually hinder sharing the Gospel in a meaningful way. Again, I emphasized that comments don't have to be perfect and can include a mistake here and there, but that lots of people write a comment or post in Word first and run SpellCheck prior to copying it into a comment or post.

5. Avoid setting the whole blog ablaze when flaming a topic.

Let’s face it there are some subjects in life that, no matter how hard we try, cause us to flip out at the mere mention of them. But while you have the right to act like a jerk when the topic is raised, unless you want to be banned from the internet I suggest you refrain from doing so.

I mentioned, explicitly, that there is a reason some people refuse to talk about religion and politics - that they are highly emotionally-charged issues. We listed some religious topics that fit that description: abortion, gay marriage, morality, polygamy, witnessing/testifying, abuse by leaders, etc. I simply pointed out that we need to comment and post about these topics as carefully as we can, understanding how emotional they are.

We talked about respect for differing views and the idea that all people have the right to worship according to the dictates of their own consciences - without being called stupid, blind, idiotic, apostate, etc. for following their own consciences.

6. Follow up on comments.

Be sure to respond to comments directed at you even if just to say you don’t wish to talk about the subject. Services such as Co-Comment can help you track conversations you are involved in.

In the context of sharing the Gospel, I mentioned that I had commented recently on Facebook about a newspaper article that badly mis-characterized the recent statement from the FP and Q12 about the priesthood and apostasy. The title was, "LDS Church leadership says that only men are worthy to have the priesthood" - and my comment was simply, "That title is extremely inaccurate - and the inaccuracy is important." I told them that a high school classmate with whom I had not talked in decades responded with, "Why is that, Ray?" I then had a chance to go into more detail about what the statement actually said, as well as Elders Oaks' and Ballards' most recent statements about the priesthood.

If I hadn't looked at that thread (followed-up on my comment), I would have missed a golden opportunity to share the Gospel with that friend in that way. I also pointed out that it would have been simply disrespectful not to follow-up and answer a sincere question.

7. Keep it to a reasonable length.

Most blog topics don’t require more than a one or two paragraph response. Avoid writing a novel especially if it is your first visit to a blog. It also helps to read the other comments to make sure you are not adding to the broken record effect.

I asked the students how they respond when they realize something they want to read is multiple times longer than they thought it would be. They all agreed that they often skip it entirely. I mentioned that when the same person writes long epistles all the time, people simply see the person's name and skip all of their comments entirely. I told them they can't share the Gospel if nobody reads what they write.

I also emphasized that it is better to say, "I agree with Mary," or, "Wonderful comment, Mary," than to say exactly what Mary said in another comment.

8. Link to your sources.

When citing material to make your case, provide a link so that the participants can read it at their leisure. Be careful of linking to your own website when you first start commenting at a group site, since this can be seen as spam if you are a first time visitor.

Particularly when sharing the Gospel, if you are quoting or summarizing someone (like an apostle), sharing a link to what they actually said is important - and allows someone to go to lds.org, for example, in a non-threatening way. They might or might not read more there, but at least they have the opportunity to do so. It's also critical to make sure you quote or summarize them accurately, since it can be highly embarrassing to have the person read the linked talk and come back with, "I read your link, and the person didn't say what you claimed was said."  

(In the 3rd hour adult class, the 2nd Counselor in our Stake Presidency mentioned how important it is to make sure any quote you forward or reference is accurate.  He used an example of a friend who had forwarded a quote via Facebook that was attributed to President Kimball - but that President Kimball actually had not said what was quoted.  He mentioned how easy it is to go to lds.org and run a search for any quote to see if it is accurate.  I really appreciated that contribution, and I added Snopes.com as a good way to check the accuracy of things.)

9. Do not feed the trolls.

They’ll just follow you home and poop on your doorstep.

The students loved this, and we talked about how intentional trolls often strive to derail good conversations by being inflammatory and diverting the thread into a verbal fistfight - and how they will keep doing so if fed but leave if ignored. I also used it as a chance to talk about how we (Mormons) can be trolls, if we: 1) go to conversations about other religions and start preaching the Mormon gospel there (like commenting on baptism for the dead in a thread about Catholic communion); 2) do nothing in our comments except call people to repentance; 3) go to a liberal or conservative blog and comment from the opposite perspective simply to show them how wrong they are; etc.

I also told them that they should read each comment as if someone else was writing it to them - and that, if they wouldn't like it being said to them they probably shouldn't say it to someone else - that they might be acting as a troll if they submitted that comment.

10. A word about anonymous commenting.

For one reason or another, people feel the need to make anonymous comments. This practice is not right, wrong, good or bad. In some cases this is the only option available especially when personal safety is a concern. However, just so you know using a pseudonym is the same as talking to people with a paper bag over your head which can hurt your credibility. Even when leaving negative comments, it’s best to leave either your name or your web identity.

I told the students that I agree completely that there are times and situations when commenting anonymously is important, and I used a group blog where I am an administrator as an example (where people who are struggling with faith crises often are worried about how family, friends and church leaders might react if they used their real names), but that, generally speaking and especially when sharing the Gospel, if they don't feel comfortable attaching their real name to a comment they probably shouldn't submit the comment as written.

The last two suggestions (the ones I added) were:

11. Don't participate just to argue, correct, testify or call to repentance.

We had talked about that with a couple of the other suggestions, but I wanted to emphasize it at the end of the lesson, as well.

12. Pick compatible group blogs.

I told them that my personal blog has a section that lists multiple Mormon-themed blogs, another one that lists a few aggregators of Mormon-themed blogs and another one that is my personal blog roll of individual blogs I like to read regularly. I mentioned a few of the larger group blogs in order to illustrate just a bit how diverse the options are: By Common Consent (one I really like with lots of variety in the posts), Times & Seasons (one I like but don't read nearly as often as BCC), Millennial Star (an extremely conservative one I tend to avoid, since it can be polemic), Feminist Mormon Housewives (obviously not a conservative one, which drew some chuckles), Wheat & Tares (one that addresses a wide range of topics from multiple perspectives that I tend to like), Mormon Momma (less doctrinal with more of a "practical, everyday" slant), etc. I told them to look for a forum that fits what they want to get out of online participation - to make it a positive experience of growth and learning and not just a place to share the Gospel.

Balancing Zealousness with Concern for Others

On this day of unabashed patriotism, I want to share the following that has application to that topic, as well: 

There is a fine line between zealousness and fanaticism. I think charity is the delineator of the two - and, unfortunately, people do many things "out of love" that aren't at all charitable.

I look at the Golden Rule, and I can't help but wonder how (the collective) we would feel if our non-Mormon acquaintances acted toward us the way we sometimes act towards them - or if we learned that they talk about us the way we sometimes talk about them. I look at how some people interact with their "wayward" children and wonder how they would react if their parents weren't members and interacted that same way with them (their own "wayward children").

I believe in zealousness when it is manifested in a righteous manner, but I also have to be able to look at my own actions (and the actions of others as examples) and see the difference between righteous zealousness and something else. For example, I am concerned whenever I hear or read anything like the following - which I read in a comment a couple of years ago:

(In order to be zealous,) we have to stop worrying about “the other guy” and worry about how God views us.

Frankly, I think we have to be concerned about the other guy AND about how God sees us, specifically because if there is one lesson in all of our scriptures I believe it is that "concern for the other" is absolutely central to the Gospel and mission of Jesus Christ. I agree completely that concern for how others see us can't get in the way of doing the right thing, but I also believe that "doing the right thing" without regard for "the other guy" often (and I mean very often) leads to doing the wrong thing in the name of righteousness. I don't need to use extreme examples of that principle; regular, daily examples are all around us.

I believe that being righteously zealous is not a simple thing that can be measured by a universal checklist. I need to be concerned with my own zealousness and whether my own zealousness is acceptable to God - and, for me, that absolutely must include a deep, central, strong element of how my actions in the name of God impact "the other guy" - since charity is the heart of my own measure of my own righteous zealousness.

One example to illustrate my point:

I love and admire Captain Moroni, but he was wrong - 100% dead wrong - in his chastisement of Pahoran during the war he was fighting. He didn't write that letter out of righteous zealousness; he wrote it out of frustration over seeing his soldiers die unnecessarily. (Those are his own words, not my assumption.)  He wrote it in anger - and the condemnation in it of Pahoran was unfounded. Captain Moroni was described by Mormon in the abridgment as a "perfect man", but he erred in that instance when he wrote that letter (which does not contradict Mormon's assessment of him). The letter was not charitable; it was not accurate; it was not in line with the standard articulated in D&C 121; it was not sensitive to the plight of a friend, supporter and fully righteous man; it was not a righteous judgment; it was not an example of "being moved upon by the Holy Ghost"; it was not an example of righteous zealousness.

Again, I admire Captain Moroni deeply, but I admire Pahoran even more deeply in that example - since he easily could have reacted very differently. It was Pahoran, not Captain Moroni, in that situation who "saved the day" - and he did it explicitly by remembering, in a time of great stress and distress, to "think of the other guy" and not return threat for threat. He did it by remembering the pure heart behind the mistaken accusations and not holding Moroni's mistake against him. He did it by loving the man even though the man's words must have cut him deeply. He did it by not being zealous in the traditional, stereotypical manner but by being zealous in love and meekness.

I believe in zealousness, but I also believe it is manifested differently in different situations and that, for me, at the very core, it absolutely involves "worrying about the other guy" in a very real and important way. I believe charity is the balancing agent between righteous zealousness and unrighteous fanaticism - and, if I have to choose between one extreme or the other, I try to choose to be overly charitable rather than overly fanatical.

Leaders Shouldn't Manage So Much that They Forget to Minister

"I do not worry about members of the Church being unresponsive when they learn of the needy as much as I worry about our being unaware of such needs. … Please, priesthood leaders, do not get so busy trying to manage Church programs that you forget about basic duties in what the Apostle James described as ‘pure religion, undefiled’ (James 1:27)." (Spencer W. Kimball. at a seminar for Regional Representatives in 1979)

Mis-Using the Book of Mormon

Note: This is a long post.   I want to make a point as comprehensively as I possibly can, so please pardon the length.

I don't draw the straight-line connection between a testimony of the Book of Mormon and an automatic acceptance of all other truth claims of the LDS Church that some members of the Church do, especially onward in time all the way to our day.  There are way too many other factors that theoretically could come into play and break such a chain of logic.  I think there is a direct link to the Book of Mormon being an inspired recording of the word of God, exactly as we view the Bible in that regard (where inerrancy of the text is not required) and Joseph Smith being a prophet of God, exactly as we view Biblical prophets - but everything else doesn't have that direct correlation, imo.  After all, there are prophets who recorded the word of God but didn't establish new churches.  In fact, those that did were the very small minority, especially within Judeo-Christian history.  Most prophets are more like our modern prophets - caretakers more than radically innovative establishers.

However, I think we miss the real power of the Book of Mormon (the reason it is the keystone of our religion) when we have people read selected verses and passages to prove doctrine and fail to ask them to approach it as it asks to be approached - even if we insert the First Vision as the new keystone of our religion.  I don't see anywhere in the Book of Mormon that says, internally, in the words of the authors and abridgers, to use it as a doctrinal proof-text - especially by isolating and emphasizing specific verses and doctrines.  What it asks internally - what the words themselves ask - is that the book be read in its entirety in order to open the reader's mind to the reality that God has worked with people throughout history and, therefore, will speak directly to her and manifest truth to her.

When I attended Seminary, one of our Scripture Mastery passages was Moroni 10:3-5.  Now, as my children go through Seminary, the passage is only Moroni 10:4-5.  I think that is a shame, since it is 10:3 that sets the stage for 10:4-5.  Teaching Moroni 10:4-5 without 10:3 is an example of the proof-texting I'm addressing.

Moroni 10:4-5 reads:

"And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things."  

That is Moroni's invitation (not a "challenge", which is another personal soapbox) - the "doctrine" of prayer and personal revelation, if you will.  It's fine to use that text to teach that doctrine.  However, leaving out Moroni 10:3 eliminates entirely a key part of the actual method Moroni is trying to encourage readers to use to go beyond proving doctrine and encounter really deep, meaningful understanding of and communication with God.

Moroni 10:3 reads:

"Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts." 

The proof-text approach "challenges" someone to pray about the Book of Mormon - or, in many cases, to pray about some specific passages from the Book of Mormon - or, in many cases, to pray about everything else the missionaries are teaching.  It becomes a very generic:

"Pray about what we are teaching you, including the parts of this book we're quoting as we teach these things".  

**That's not what Moroni's actual words exhort people to do.**

Moroni says, "when you shall read these things" - which can be while reading or upon finishing reading the multiple records he and his father abridged into one volume, not a few proof-text passages.  Furthermore, 10:3 includes the following prior to 10:4 even asking people to pray:

1) Remember the Lord's mercy throughout time (described for those of Israelite descent explicitly throughout the Book of Mormon and the Bible but, interestingly, also applicable to a Buddhist in Japan or a Muslim in Iraq with regard to their own understanding of God's mercy to their own ancestors);
2) Ponder that mercy.

Moroni 10:3 does NOT say to ponder "these things" (doctrines) in "your mind" (by thinking about them).  It says to ponder "it" (God's mercy) in "your heart" (by feeling that mercy settle inside you).

A reader of the Book of Mormon can't have the experience Moroni is urging if the Book of Mormon isn't used as he's urging it to be used.  That reader might gain a converting testimony, but it won't be what Moroni is exhorting her to experience in her heart.  That is important to me.

A testimony of the First Vision can't provide the experience Moroni is exhorting people to have, either.  It is wonderful and a necessary part of the Restoration, but it is fundamentally different than the Book of Mormon.

Serving with Others: "Tenderhearted"

Serving With Others - Patty (I Believe in Christ)

When Someone Comes Home Early from a Full-Time Mission

I have a friend online whose son returned home from a full-time mission as a result of anxiety attacks he thought were under control prior to beginning his mission.  She asked me for my advice about how to try to lessen the possible negative impact of that situation on her son, and I came across what I told her and decided to post it here. 
-------------------------------------------------------------
One of my very close friends growing up came home early from his mission, entirely because he didn't feel right telling people they could have experiences he hadn't had. He asked for the release, and he was given an honorable release by a good Mission President who understood. I admired my friend immensely for that, and even more so when his girlfriend broke up with him because, in her words, she only wanted to marry a "real" RM. (I really loathe that attitude, and I choose that word intentionally.)  He faced some judgment from others when he returned home, but his parents were very supportive - and he has a strong testimony of compassion, love and charity as a result of his experiences.

I would share with your son the details of Pres. George Albert Smith's life - of his constant physical trials and his struggles with depression throughout his life. I would explain that Pres. Smith was one of the most loving, humble, charitable leaders we have had in the Church - and I believe his struggles were a large part of reinforcing his natural tendencies in that regard. If a President of the Church struggled as much as he did, there is NO shame or guilt whatsoever in your son's situation.

I also would have him read 2 Nephi 4 from the perspective of a clinical evaluation of Nephi. I believe there is a very good chance Nephi would have been diagnosed with depression, bi-polar disorder or something similar, based on the symptoms in that chapter. That chapter is one of the reasons he is one of my favorite prophets - not because of his recorded visions. I appreciate the struggle described in that chapter FAR more than any sanitized accounts of other prophets.

More than anything else, I simply pray for him and your family. May you be able to rise above the pettiness that you might face and be the example for others they should be for you - amid your struggles, not without them.

One of the most oft quoted verses in the Book of Mormon is 2 Nephi 25:23. It says:

"we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do."

I'm NOT going to go into the different ways that verse can be interpreted right now, but I think it might help your son in his current situation to understand that, no matter what others think about him and his release (even the leaders of your ward and stake, perhaps), and no matter how the verse above is interpreted, it says in crystal clear terms that your son has been saved by the grace of God in the specific instance of his missionary service.

Saved from what? I think it is fair to say from every negative aspect of his release. Period.

Isaiah 53:4-5 says:

Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows . . . the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

The parts I skipped don't apply to your son's situation, but the parts above do. I hope he can recognize what is taught in these three verses and accept that, in God's eyes, his service was enough - since it was "all (he) can do".

My Sunday School Lesson Recap: Our New Framing of the Priesthood - Elder Oaks: Part 4

Last Sunday, we covered the last five paragraphs of Elder Oaks' talk - with paragraph defined loosely.

I close with some truths about the blessings of the priesthood. Unlike priesthood keys and priesthood ordinations, the blessings of the priesthood are available to women and to men on the same terms.

I mentioned that Elder Oaks said this, with different words, multiple times throughout the talk (including in the upcoming paragraphs) - but that he was about to use two specific examples that rarely have been discussed in those terms in the past.

The gift of the Holy Ghost and the blessings of the temple are familiar illustrations of this truth.

We defined "the priesthood" one more time (the power of God) and I asked the students if they could list times / events in life when we could say we represent God in some way. The obvious responses were ordination for the young men and baptism, so we talked about those and others.

1) We believe we all are children of God, so, in a very real way, if we believe that, we also believe we can represent him as his children. That is emphasized in our theology by our belief in the light of Christ, which we equate with our consciences. Everyone, with a few exceptions, represents God in this way.

2) When we are baptized, we covenant to take the name of Jesus upon us - to become "Christian". That is a direct commitment to do what Jesus would do and represent him.

3) When we are confirmed, we are told to receive the Holy Ghost - which we equate to striving to understand and do the will of God.

4) We talk of the Priesthood in terms of service - which, phrased differently, is participating in the work and glory of God.

5) When members are endowed in the temple, every ordinance men experience, women also experience - and women perform almost all of them. We talked about each ordinance - what it is meant to convey, what blessings are promised, what covenants are made, what symbolism is used, etc. I told them that there are two primary wording differences for men and women in the endowment and the sealing - and that I personally see them as cultural remnants of our earlier history that don't match a lot of what has been taught in numerous talks over the last couple of decades and the last part of what we discussed last week from Elder Oaks' talk. (the description of marriage as a full partnership of equals)

All of these things are "exercising the authority and power of the Priesthood" - and all of them are available, according to Elder Oaks, to men and women alike. Currently, the only exceptions are, in his words, "priesthood keys and priesthood ordinations" - and those can change if the top leadership receives revelation that would change the historical "pattern" they see right now and not if they don't. 

In his insightful talk at BYU Education Week last summer, Elder M. Russell Ballard gave these teachings:

“Our Church doctrine places women equal to and yet different from men. God does not regard either gender as better or more important than the other . . . When men and women go to the temple, they are both endowed with the same power, which is priesthood power . . . Access to the power and the blessings of the priesthood is available to all of God’s children.”

This is another reiteration of one of Elder Oaks' central themes - but it is one of the first times I have heard two apostles say unequivocally that women are endowed with priesthood power when they attend the temple. As was the case with his words earlier in the talk, Elder Oaks did NOT frame this as women having access to the priesthood power men are given; rather, once again, he framed it explicitly as women having / being given the same power men are given - that the priesthood power they exercise is their own power, endowed directly and personally to them.

We talked about the temple garment - the "garment of the holy priesthood". I explained that both men and women wear symbolic clothing ("robes") in the temple that represent the ceremonial clothing temple priests wore in the Old Testament time. Thus, in the temple, men dress as priests and women dress as priestesses. We talked about how men AND women leave the temple "clothed in the garment of the holy priesthood" - which means, in a tangible way, BOTH men and women "hold the priesthood" when they leave the temple. In other words, when women wear the garment, they are "putting on the priesthood" once again, symbolically - and that the garment is the tangible representation of their priestess robes outside the temple. Again, with that in mind, when women do the Lord's work outside the temple, they are doing it as priestesses through the priesthood power with which they were endowed when they first went through the temple.

I testify of the power and blessings of the priesthood of God, available for His sons and daughters alike. I testify of the authority of the priesthood, which functions throughout all of the offices and activities of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I testify of the divinely directed function of the keys of the priesthood, held and exercised in their fulness by our prophet/president, Thomas S. Monson. Finally and most important, I testify of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, whose priesthood this is and whose servants we are, in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

I told the students that if they wanted an interesting experience they should go through the talk again, in its entirety, and count the number of times Elder Oaks said that men and women both have access to the power and authority of God and exercise it in everything they do in the Church. I asked why he would have to repeat it so many time, and, after we talked about that, I told them that I think it's because members who are close to my age and older need to have it repeated that many times to have it register and to understand and accept it. I asked them to be patient when they heard members repeat the former framing - to understand how hard it can be to let go of things that were learned when those people were teenagers and early adults - but to commit to make sure they helped change the Church into more of what Elder Oaks described than it currently is.

Nakedness is Not Shameful

I see the story of Adam and Eve, as presented in the temple endowment, as Lucifer positioning himself as the "God of this world" by inserting himself between Adam & Eve and God, "commanding them" and convincing them to hide from God. In other words, Lucifer pointed out their nakedness and then used that nakedness as a wedge to separate them from God. 

Having said that, I don't take it literally, so I don't believe things actually happened as I just described. I'm talking about the meaning taken from the story within the endowment - and I really like that meaning, since it includes shame and guilt over simple nakedness as being introduced by the "father of lies". The idea that nakedness is shameful in and of itself is a horrible lie, in my opinion - and I appreciate a story that attributes that shame to "the devil".

We Ought to Serve with Charity and No Expectation of Conversion

I gratefully follow up on anyone’s interest in learning about the Church, but I also know that we Latter-day Saints take Jesus’s charge seriously to love our neighbor, clothe the naked, feed the hungry, and visit the imprisoned (see Matthew 25:34–36) without expecting the conversion of the recipient or those who serve with us. Sincere and respectful interfaith engagement never requires any group, including ours, to disavow its beliefs. Rather, it encourages participants to “contend against no church” (D&C 18:20) and “clothe [themselves] with the bond of charity” (D&C 88:125). (Betsy Vandenberghe, December 2013 Ensign)

Jesus, the Christ, and Rudolph, the Red-Nosed Reindeer: Redeeming We Misfit Toys

The Island of Misfit Toys, with all its issues, still was a haven for the toys there - and their collective charity and acceptance of another misfit eventually set them free.

Jesus was a true misfit in many, many ways - and he spent his life serving his own "kingdom of nobodies" - on an Island of Misfit Toys he intentionally and purposefully created during his ministry. Who cares if we are blind? He healed the blind. So what if we feel "dead" sometimes. He raised the dead. Who cares if we are rejected and despised by the "mainstream" religious culture of our time?  He walked and talked and healed those outside the mainstream.  What does it matter if we are sick or tired or different? He loved and blessed the sick and the tired and the different in a very special way.

I believe we are doing God's work here in mortality, in a very real and important way, when we interact with and love those who are suffering and struggling in some way - and I think if Jesus were to spend any time with members of the LDS Church in a second ministry, it would be with those who struggle the most in the Church. I really think he would spend more time outside our meetinghouses than in our Sacrament Meetings, if his first mortal ministry is any indication - and I am not disparaging our meetinghouses and Sacrament Meetings in any way by saying that. I wish badly that more of our congregations and activities were gatherings of misfits much more obviously than currently is the case. 

I really love the idea of looking for and loving those who live on their own Island of Misfit Toys (and realizing that all of us, in a real and important way, are Misfit Toys) - and my teary eyes as I type this are a testimony to that feeling.