This Linked Post Is Hard to Beat for Inventive Scriptural Comedy

Ultimate Church Fighting, or, Ol' Shiz Lost His Head in the Heat of Battle - Scott B. (By Common Consent)

Single Adults: Some Thorns Are Harder to Soften Than Others

One of my fondest wishes is that we simply would stop judging each other and our individual situations. I understand and have no problem with the need to preach an ideal, but I also understand that not one of us is living fully the ideal we preach. Each and every one of us struggles with some aspect of life that constitutes a thorn of mortality - and I am bothered more than I can explain that some people’s thorns are harder to soften than others.

I really struggle with this one. I do want to emphasize marriage and motherhood in a world that is devaluing them more and more. I don’t want to weaken the ideal, particularly as it is crumbling in many of the areas around me. I do want to encourage my daughters to be worthy to enter the temple - and to not delay marriage if they find someone with whom they want to spend eternity. I value the concept of eternal marriage above nearly all else in the Restored Gospel, and I want my daughters to experience what it is like to find true perfection (wholeness and completion as one united entity) in a marriage.

However, I want my daughters, first and foremost, to feel worthy and special and noble simply because they are daughters of God. I don’t want the importance of their mortal existence to be tied solely to marriage, and, while I realize that the Church’s full teachings don’t devalue single women, I also realize that single women and men live in the here and now - so they need praise and validation and worth and power and fulfillment to the highest extent possible in the here and now.

In the end, I believe it comes down to our actions - including our words, but more how actively we are willing to ensure that the voices of those whose lives don't reflect the full ideal we peach are heard - that their lives can be immersed and their opinions are valued in the Church. In many ways, it comes down to accepting their lives as legitimate lives (every bit as “right” for them as marriage is for the married) - and resisting the urge to impose the ideal individually as we still must teach it collectively.

I wish I had a better answer, but never-ending awareness is a start - along with never belittling the struggles of a single adult in a family-focused religion.

Charity Believeth All Things: Being Open-Minded

In my New Year's Resolution post last week, I included some thoughts from previous posts in my initial contemplation of the idea that charity believes all things - and I asked for input about how I might take that idea the rest of the month. As I have considered how to organize my thoughts, I have decided to start with two statements by Presidents of the LDS Church (Joseph Smith and Gordon B. Hinckley) and an excerpt from the Book of Mormon.

First, the very last thing Joseph Smith wrote in the 13th Article of Faith was:

If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

Next, Gordon B. Hinckley said more than once, in echoing another famous statement by Joseph Smith, that Mormonism should encompass all good:

“To anybody who is not of this Church, I say we recognize all of the virtues and the good that you have. Bring it with you and see if we might add to it.” (Ensign, November 1996, p.48. - From a General Conference talk in October 1996)

Finally, the Book of Mormon includes the following wonderful statement and counsel in Moroni 7:13-14:

But behold, that which is of God inviteth and enticeth to do good continually; wherefore, every thing which inviteth and enticeth to do good, and to love God, and to serve him, is inspired of God. Wherefore, take heed, my beloved brethren, that ye do not judge that which is evil to be of God, or that which is good and of God to be of the devil.

I believe the point of Paul's message that charity believeth all things is encapsulated in these statements - with the caveat that I'm certain he meant believeth all "correct/true/ennobling/virtuous, etc." things. I think that such a qualifier is both obvious and important, so I simply want to mention it in passing here to be explicit.

My main point tonight is the link between "charity" and the ability to "believe all things". The epiphany that hit me hard only now as I was typing and editing that last sentence is that the ability to be truly and fully open-minded is central to the ability to believe all things - since it is impossible to believe anything unless one is willing to consider it first. Likewise, the ability to grant that others might have something that can enlighten us - that we don't know everything and what we do know we don't know fully - is the heart of charity. Thus, the truly charitable are the people who are most likely to be open to being taught by those with whom others reactively disagree - since they are the ones most likely to seek for ways to understand without judgment and reflexive rejection.

I have never considered that perhaps ONLY charity believeth all things, but I really like the way my mind is being led.

In Short, I Can Trust the Spirit

1) I have had too many experiences with Priesthood blessings where I have addressed situations of which I knew nothing to doubt the reality of "the Spirit". I also have had moments of flashing insight (like tonight immediately following a blessing) that stopped me in my tracks - and ended up being spot-on. I just don't have a solid and clear understanding of what "the Spirit" is. I know it can lead me to say things that are spot-on with no foreknowledge of them, but that's about all I know.

2) I have no option other than to follow what I feel to be true - or at least as close to truth as I can get at any moment. I like the Moroni 7 standard, summarized in my own words as, "If it brings joy and leads you to real humility, it is of God; if not, not." I also like the Matthew 5 standard, again summarized in my own words as, "Develop the characteristics of godliness and someday you will be perfect (complete and whole and fully developed = finished)." If a feeling leads me toward what I think is that desired end, it's good enough for me.

In short, I can trust the Spirit - within the basic parameters I have constructed to distinguish it. Anything outside that framework, and I have to question - much like I believe Nephi did to his dying day about killing Laban. He believed and followed what he felt he was being led to do, but he had to construct a justification for it, nonetheless - since it was outside the normal limits of what he thought the Spirit would prompt him to do.

I've done things according to what I thought were promptings that ended up seeming to be failures. I'm not certain if they were or weren't, but I've had enough other similar experiences that in hindsight appear to be obvious cases of inspiration that I figure I will keep doing whatever I feel prompted to do and let God allow for my mistakes of human weakness in the end. I believe in Him, and I believe in the Spirit, so I'll err on that side and let the chips fall where they may - understanding that I'm doing the best I can even while my own glass remains clouded and I still see through it darkly.

Living with Ambiguity as a Spiritual Process

"Living with ambiguity is a form of intellectual honesty, of humility. It is only when we admit that we don't know that we are receptive to what lessons may be taught. In some strange way, it also brings an inner peace since we are no longer fighting reality to maintain our inner fantasies on how things should be. While I am characterizing it as an intellectual process, it also has spiritual implications, since only an open mind is capable of hearing God."

- Andy Piereder

The Impact of Proper Leadership on Zion

“What’s the closest you’ve ever gotten to a Zion experience?”

1) My family, growing up - with wonderful parents;

2) Marching band and choir in high school - with wonderful teachers;

3) My current and most recent wards, on a larger scale - with two amazing bishops.

I don’t think the similarity is accidental.

Slow Down and Let the Spirit Testify

Elder Packer was right about bearing testimony - Tim Malone (Latter-day Commentary)

Spotlessness Can Be Next to Manslaughter

Some people need to let go of something in order to stay sane and not beat themselves up over unrealistic expectations. I'm fine with the tornado effect that is my house, since keeping it "tidy" with all the traffic that parades through it is nigh unto impossible.

Cleanliness might be next to godliness, but spotlessness can be next to manslaughter. I'll take clutter and general disarray over the alternative.

I simply have chosen those things that I really want to do - what I consider to be the most important uses of my time - and focused on making sure those things get done. Everything else is garnish, and I really don't like garnish all that much.

There is a Gospel lesson in this post, so . . . "They who have ears to hear, let them hear."

Charity Believeth All Things: A Few Connected Thoughts

My New Year's Resolution this month is to "believe more things" - taken, as has been the case all year, from 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 where it states:

Charity believeth all things.

As I contemplated this resolution, some connected yet autonomous thoughts that ran through my mind. Rather than write a typical post this week, to start off the month I want to record those thoughts and ask everyone who reads this post to offer your thoughts about my thoughts. I'm not sure exactly in what direction I want to take this particular resolution this month, so I would appreciate any help anyone wants to give.

1) I remembered a quote I cited earlier this spring in a post that deals with the idea of believing regardless of "truthfulness" - and I'm sure it will factor into how I approach this resolution:

"If you want to believe in something, then believe in it. Just because something isn’t true, there’s no reason you can’t believe in it. Sometimes the things that may or may not be true are the things that a man needs to believe in the most: that people are basically good; that honor, courage and virtue mean everything; that power and money mean nothing; that good always triumphs over evil; that true love never dies. It doesn’t matter if they are true or not. A man should believe in those things, because those are the things worth believing in." - from the movie, "Second Hand Lions".

2) I wrote the next thought almost exactly a year ago, and it also deals with the same general theme I am starting to develop as perhaps the core focus of this month's resolution:

“To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world. To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful.” (D&C 46: 13-14)

If some have to "believe" something as fundamental as that Jesus is the Son of God, then it seems logical to assert that even more are going to have to believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet - and myriad other uniquely Mormon teachings.

I have no problem with saying, "I know” about a lot of things - but there also are things that I still believe without yet knowing. I would love to hear more people stand in front of the congregation and say, “I believe . . .”- or even, "I want to believe . . ."

3) I wrote the following just over two years ago:

A friend once said to me, "I see you as an academic believer." My response follows:

I like that term, since the primary emphasis is on being a "believer" rather than an "academic". I am inquisitive by nature; I try to see everything from every side and reach my own conclusions; I do so, however, from a foundation of faith - because I have found that it is such a foundation that brings me the most joy.

This means that I always try hard when I read or hear something for the first time to see if there is a way I can see "correctness" within it - even if that ends up being only a very small portion. Often, I end up rejecting 10%-90% of something - but my approach, I believe, allows me to gain something from most of the things to which I am exposed. That is true sometimes of things I have considered carefully previously - if the perspective is somewhat different than what I have considered previously.

I am not an "academic believer" if that means someone who only accepts what I can understand. (I would term that type of person to be a "believing academic".) I certainly am an "academic believer" if that means someone who tries to think about and understand everything but who, first and foremost, believes. My heart and experiences are bound rock-solidly to the Restored Gospel, but my mind is looking constantly for ways to understand it better.

I am leaning on tackling this month's resolution from the standpoint of the need for faith in world I see through my glass, darkly - but I would love to have input into the quotes above and any other thoughts about the idea of charity believing all things.

Communication Varies at Differing Levels in the Church

I believe the difference between ward and stake disciplinary councils is reflective of the role differences between the Bishop and Stake President. In other words, the Bishop's primary focus is much more on the individual (minister), and that makes him play a different role in most disciplinary councils than the Stake President, whose primary focus is on the organization (administrator).

Likewise, I believe this explains why most of the decisions that make waves are reached at the stake level (or higher) - because they are taken to "protect the organization" rather than to "help the transgressor". The opportunity to "help the transgressor repent" generally is confined to the ward level, while the responsibility to "protect the organization" generally is held by those above that level.

Fwiw, most of the truly angry and loudly condemnatory statements I have heard from those who have been excommunicated have come from those whose decisions were reached at the stake level or beyond, while I am aware of quite a few ward level decisions that didn't cause a stir at all - or were very positive experiences. That fascinates me.

On a more individual, non-disciplinary level, I agree completely with the need to "administer to the one". I believe in that fully. It struck me, however, as I was reading multiple threads here across the Bloggernacle that some people are upset that their own individual takes on certain practices aren’t being validated by their leaders - that uniformity of the group was overriding individual wishes. That actually is what got me started thinking about this post and its relation to disciplinary councils.

The most obvious examples for me are discussions about the Word of Wisdom (for example, where some members feel like they could handle moderation in some areas and feel like the communal prohibitions are not necessary for them - and, by extension, for many) and discussions of sexual practices (again, where the communal standards for all exclude a minority of members whose individual standards are outside of the communal standards), but I don’t want to narrow the discussion to only those topics. This post isn’t meant to be about any one topic; it’s more the meta perspective that struck me as I was reading about multiple topics.

I have thought for a long time that the central tension in the Church is about defining the line between community and individual, and I also have believed for a long time that there is a real difference between the type of focus that (I believe) must distinguish leadership at “lower” (local) and “upper” (area and global) level leadership. This post is the result of all of that percolating in my head.

One more thing:

I see a big difference in the kind of individualized messages we get in a ward setting, the slightly less individualized message in a stake setting and the much more universal messages we get in General Conference. At the ward level, there can be nuance and personally unique applications, but at the global level the messages can appear to be black and white directives that don’t allow for individual nuance - even when the speakers include multiple disclaimers. The tension inherent in many members who hear the globally standardized directive but not the disclaimers fascinates me.