"And the church did meet together oft, to fast and to pray, and to speak one with another concerning the welfare of their souls.
"And their meetings were conducted by the church after the manner of the workings of the Spirit, and by the power of the Holy Ghost; for as the power of the Holy Ghost led them whether to preach, or to exhort, or to pray, or to supplicate, or to sing, even so it was done" (Moro. 6:5, 9).
My wife and I watched a news report from a Salt Lake City news station last night that discussed the growing number of discontents within the Mormon faith. The reporter quoted the recent Marlin Jensen interview in which he stated that more members are falling away today than any time in the past 175 years. Of our total reported church membership, there are as few as one-third that are active.
As I considered why this was taking place, a number of reasons came to mind. Among those reasons, my mind turned to the spirit of our meetings. While it is not the root cause of this falling away, the dullness of our meetings is a reflection upon and outgrowth of Mormon culture at large.
The ancient church met together oft to speak one with another about the "welfare of their souls." Think on that for a moment. What is the purpose of such a discussion? What are you trying to figure out? Does this mean they were actually concerned about the welfare of their souls? Is the purpose of such a discussion to reassure one another that everything is going alright? Did they wonder if their souls were acceptable before God? Is it possible that they could have at times discovered that the welfare of their souls was in jeopardy? What, otherwise, would be the purpose of speaking one with another about the welfare of their souls?
Do we discuss the "welfare of our souls" as much as we discuss our testimonies of the things we know to be true? Is pontificating about everything that you know to be true the same as discussing the "welfare or your soul?" What if a discussion of the welfare of souls requires more than soft words and messages of reassurance? What did it mean to Nephi's brother Jacob to speak unto the people concerning the welfare of their souls (Jacob 2:3-11)? What about Nephi with his brothers (2 Ne. 1:24-26). My experience is that if the welfare of souls is mentioned in a meaningful manner in our congregations today, speaking plainly about our current situation, it leads to unease and resentment. Yet it may just be what is needed to jump-start the waning spirituality of the many members who long for more. Members need to hear about the awful situation they find themselves in if it's to be fixed. We may ultimately discover that folks aren't interested in idle words after all. And many shall discover they weren't as grateful for the message that 'all is well' as they once thought they were.
We've been instructed to conduct our meetings as directed by the Spirit, just as was done anciently (D&C 20:45). Yet, our meetings are often rote and unenthusiastic. What if the church (locally) felt at liberty to conduct meetings after the manner of the workings of the Spirit, as is directed in the scriptures? What if the power of the Holy Ghost led them to pray? Would that be unacceptable? What if the power of the Holy Ghost led them to sing? Would this disrupt good order in the Church? Would a Bishop feel at liberty to have his congregation pray and sing the entire meeting if directed by the Spirit? Would the gifts of the Spirit be more greatly manifested if we were more sensitive to the Spirit's direction?
The fact that the Church is "the same no matter where you go in the world" isn't necessarily complimentary. If by "the same" we meant that all meetings were "conducted by the church after the manner of the workings of the Spirit" then it may be worth mentioning. Though it's always mentioned excitedly as a testimony booster by those who've traveled, to me it is evidence of strict adherence to the Church Handbook of Instructions, Book 1, that institutionalizes our culture. Though Moroni 6:9 is mentioned there as a "general guideline" for meetings, a template follows illustrating how meetings should look and run, as well as other shoulds and should nots. It is quite organized, and I'm sure very helpful in our worldwide church. That template is followed with virtually no deviation, and perhaps to our handicapping. It seems those who preside at our meetings have a challenging responsibility to seek after and act upon the guidance of the Spirit while honoring the intent of general leadership.
There are those who would say I need to fix my attitude and then I might find fulfillment in boring meetings. I don't believe that anymore. If a meeting is boring, I have no problem feeling bored to death by it. If a meeting is not edifying there's no sense in me wishing it lasted longer. If the speaker doesn't care much for the gospel that I've come to love, or speak by the power of the Holy Ghost, I'm frankly not edified. It doesn't mean I don't like that person anymore. We've all got different feelings about the gospel, what it is and how it works. We're the Church, after all, not Zion.
Don't think for a moment that Joseph Smith would pretend to be edified by some of the drivel you sit and listen to. I don't believe he'd much enjoy our regimented culture or our stale lessons. He's actually been to meetings and firesides that were conducted "after the manner of the workings of the Spirit," and knows the difference between dull templates and the breathings of the Spirit of God.
I still find satisfaction in my church experience. I understand there are others who no longer do. Where else can I meet and worship with a group of good people who believe in the restoration? Though our views may diverge upon numerous issues (most often never voiced), they consider me a friend, and I them. For those who increasingly consider themselves aliens in the Lord's church, my invitation is for you to seek the Spirit of God and bless the Church, and not to abandon it.
Showing posts with label culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label culture. Show all posts
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Friday, November 16, 2012
Moroni Finishes His Record, Part 4
Moroni wrote a "few more things" at the end of his record, after finishing his abridgment of the record of the Jaredites. The things he wrote were intended to be of worth unto "the Lamanites" in the last days, but are beneficial to us as well (Moro. 1:4).
The first thing about which he wrote was the manner in which Christ gave his disciples power to give the Holy Ghost. He explains that Christ called them by name and said the following words as he laid hands upon them:
"Ye shall call on the Father in my name, in mighty prayer; and after ye have done this ye shall have power that to him upon whom ye shall lay your hands, ye shall give the Holy Ghost; and in my name shall ye give it, for thus do mine apostles" (Moro. 2:2).
These were instructions specific to the disciples and not heard by the multitude who had gathered to view the Savior. Before the disciples went about giving the Holy Ghost, they were to call upon the Father in mighty prayer, in order that they may receive "power." Is "mighty prayer" a part of the receipt of this power in our day? If not, why does it seem it was of primary importance anciently? Are we to understand the phrase "for thus do mine apostles" as also applying to our day, or just the ancient apostles?
Moroni then gives the manner in which ordination was performed in that ancient church. He explained how those disciples, who where called "elders of the church," ordained both priests and teachers. They first prayed unto the Father in the name of Christ, and laying their hands upon them, said:
"In the name of Jesus Christ I ordain you to be a priest, (or, if he be a teacher) I ordain you to be a teacher, to preach repentance and remission of sins through Jesus Christ, by the endurance of faith on his name to the end. Amen" (Moro. 3:3).
This was the manner of ordination. Moroni makes the point that those ordained were done so "according to the gifts and callings of God unto men" (Moro. 3:4). The offices of priest and teacher were given to men, not according to age or duration of church activity, but according to the gifts and callings of God unto men. How do you suppose that was determined?
These ordinations were performed by the "power of the Holy Ghost, which was in them" (ibid.). There is no mention of priesthood here. Why does Moroni not say instead, that these ordinations were performed "by the power of the priesthood, which was in them"? Does ordination to church office require priesthood? Are the offices of priest and teacher offices of the priesthood, or offices in the church? Is this manner of ordination of priests and teachers consistent with earlier ordinations in the Book of Mormon to those same offices?
Though the reader may assume these priests and teachers were given priesthood before or at the time of their ordination, there is no mention of conferral of priesthood authority prior to their ordination. They are merely "ordained" to be a priest or teacher.
Our practice is to first confer the authority of the priesthood, and then ordain to an office therein, the two being connected. Wholly removed from our tradition is that the offices to which men are ordained are actually offices within the Church, not priesthood offices. D&C 20 makes the original intent clear, though there is quickly thereafter conflation of church office and priesthood (this also makes me think on the early disputes between Heber J. Grant, Joseph F. Smith, and others about whether or not men needed to have priesthood "conferred" as a part of their ordination to offices. Once Heber J. Grant became president of the Church he changed the manner of ordination. That change remained in place for decades before being changed back).
Here then is the dilemma we find in the text. If you choose to interpret Moroni's words through the lens of Mormon tradition, and you think you thereby understand what is going on in this ancient church, you of necessity have to choose to ignore the specifics of the verses. You must look at it as a whole and assume it is all just the same today as it was then, even though the wording and manner are different. You convince yourself that, "even though the wording is a little strange, I know exactly what was going on back then." You can take that approach, OR you can read the text exactly as it stands and ask yourself whether or not you're able to discover the truth about how things were done anciently.
We will get a more accurate look into the past taking the text at its word, than by insisting it looks and sounds exactly like modern Mormonism while ignoring the details. This idea will be continued in the next post.
The first thing about which he wrote was the manner in which Christ gave his disciples power to give the Holy Ghost. He explains that Christ called them by name and said the following words as he laid hands upon them:
"Ye shall call on the Father in my name, in mighty prayer; and after ye have done this ye shall have power that to him upon whom ye shall lay your hands, ye shall give the Holy Ghost; and in my name shall ye give it, for thus do mine apostles" (Moro. 2:2).
These were instructions specific to the disciples and not heard by the multitude who had gathered to view the Savior. Before the disciples went about giving the Holy Ghost, they were to call upon the Father in mighty prayer, in order that they may receive "power." Is "mighty prayer" a part of the receipt of this power in our day? If not, why does it seem it was of primary importance anciently? Are we to understand the phrase "for thus do mine apostles" as also applying to our day, or just the ancient apostles?
Moroni then gives the manner in which ordination was performed in that ancient church. He explained how those disciples, who where called "elders of the church," ordained both priests and teachers. They first prayed unto the Father in the name of Christ, and laying their hands upon them, said:
"In the name of Jesus Christ I ordain you to be a priest, (or, if he be a teacher) I ordain you to be a teacher, to preach repentance and remission of sins through Jesus Christ, by the endurance of faith on his name to the end. Amen" (Moro. 3:3).
This was the manner of ordination. Moroni makes the point that those ordained were done so "according to the gifts and callings of God unto men" (Moro. 3:4). The offices of priest and teacher were given to men, not according to age or duration of church activity, but according to the gifts and callings of God unto men. How do you suppose that was determined?
These ordinations were performed by the "power of the Holy Ghost, which was in them" (ibid.). There is no mention of priesthood here. Why does Moroni not say instead, that these ordinations were performed "by the power of the priesthood, which was in them"? Does ordination to church office require priesthood? Are the offices of priest and teacher offices of the priesthood, or offices in the church? Is this manner of ordination of priests and teachers consistent with earlier ordinations in the Book of Mormon to those same offices?
Though the reader may assume these priests and teachers were given priesthood before or at the time of their ordination, there is no mention of conferral of priesthood authority prior to their ordination. They are merely "ordained" to be a priest or teacher.
Our practice is to first confer the authority of the priesthood, and then ordain to an office therein, the two being connected. Wholly removed from our tradition is that the offices to which men are ordained are actually offices within the Church, not priesthood offices. D&C 20 makes the original intent clear, though there is quickly thereafter conflation of church office and priesthood (this also makes me think on the early disputes between Heber J. Grant, Joseph F. Smith, and others about whether or not men needed to have priesthood "conferred" as a part of their ordination to offices. Once Heber J. Grant became president of the Church he changed the manner of ordination. That change remained in place for decades before being changed back).
Here then is the dilemma we find in the text. If you choose to interpret Moroni's words through the lens of Mormon tradition, and you think you thereby understand what is going on in this ancient church, you of necessity have to choose to ignore the specifics of the verses. You must look at it as a whole and assume it is all just the same today as it was then, even though the wording and manner are different. You convince yourself that, "even though the wording is a little strange, I know exactly what was going on back then." You can take that approach, OR you can read the text exactly as it stands and ask yourself whether or not you're able to discover the truth about how things were done anciently.
We will get a more accurate look into the past taking the text at its word, than by insisting it looks and sounds exactly like modern Mormonism while ignoring the details. This idea will be continued in the next post.
Monday, November 5, 2012
His Hand Is Stretched Out Still
The pre-eminent doctrine of the Book of Mormon is that only Christ can save you and that you must repent and seek his face for redemption from the fall. It is the message of all the major prophet-writers. It is the message of all true prophets. It is the message of the Book of Mormon over and over again. The Lord works with individuals to prepare them in all things to be presented at the veil and enter his presence. In spite of that persistent message we, as a people, fail to see that book as an invitation to us personally. We have no hope that this opportunity is available to us (Ether 12:32).
This is an indictment of how sick our culture is, and how misleading our traditions are. To bring up these ideas stirs up contention and discomfort among some of our best people. Satan has great hold upon our hearts because we wrest the scriptures and do not understand these things (D&C 10:63). Our misunderstanding, and non-acceptance of these ideas is the overarching reason we are condemned of God (D&C 84:54-57). In these, if in no other principles set forth in the Book of Mormon, we are guilty of unbelief. We must do according to that which is written (ibid.).
Our temple rites should inform our interpretation of the Book of Mormon message. If you consider yourself the individual to whom the temple drama is aiming its instruction, it is clear that your commission is to persist on the path that leads back to the presence of the Lord. That path will ultimately require you to consecrate your whole soul to God (Omni 1:26). True messengers will come to instruct you how this is to be done. When you fully comply, you will be prepared in all things and the Lord will make his abode with you (John 14:23).
Christ was commanded by the Father to prophesy concerning the rejection of the fulness of the gospel in the last days (3 Ne. 16:10). To interpret this prophecy as somehow referring to those Gentiles who refuse to be baptized members of the Church is at best incomplete. Rather, the way in which the Gentiles have rejected "the fulness of my gospel" is by a rejection of the doctrines that we must repent and seek the face of the Lord. It is because of unbelief that the fulness is being rejected. And yet strangely, the Gentiles "shall be lifted up in the pride of their hearts above all nations, and above all the people of the whole earth" (ibid.).
What is it about our heritage that has discouraged such a search for God? Of all the people on the earth, we who have a knowledge of the restoration and the Book of Mormon should be seeking the face of God. When in our history did our present mentality begin robbing us of truth? Why have we somehow been conditioned to believe such a search is inappropriate or fanatical? 3 Ne. 16:10 contains some helpful ideas. Satan surely looks with pleasure upon our traditions and laughs.
God be praised for extending to the Gentiles another opportunity to receive the fulness of the gospel (D&C 45:28-30). If it will not be accepted, it will be because men remain blinded by the traditions of men (ibid.). For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still.
This is an indictment of how sick our culture is, and how misleading our traditions are. To bring up these ideas stirs up contention and discomfort among some of our best people. Satan has great hold upon our hearts because we wrest the scriptures and do not understand these things (D&C 10:63). Our misunderstanding, and non-acceptance of these ideas is the overarching reason we are condemned of God (D&C 84:54-57). In these, if in no other principles set forth in the Book of Mormon, we are guilty of unbelief. We must do according to that which is written (ibid.).
Our temple rites should inform our interpretation of the Book of Mormon message. If you consider yourself the individual to whom the temple drama is aiming its instruction, it is clear that your commission is to persist on the path that leads back to the presence of the Lord. That path will ultimately require you to consecrate your whole soul to God (Omni 1:26). True messengers will come to instruct you how this is to be done. When you fully comply, you will be prepared in all things and the Lord will make his abode with you (John 14:23).
Christ was commanded by the Father to prophesy concerning the rejection of the fulness of the gospel in the last days (3 Ne. 16:10). To interpret this prophecy as somehow referring to those Gentiles who refuse to be baptized members of the Church is at best incomplete. Rather, the way in which the Gentiles have rejected "the fulness of my gospel" is by a rejection of the doctrines that we must repent and seek the face of the Lord. It is because of unbelief that the fulness is being rejected. And yet strangely, the Gentiles "shall be lifted up in the pride of their hearts above all nations, and above all the people of the whole earth" (ibid.).
What is it about our heritage that has discouraged such a search for God? Of all the people on the earth, we who have a knowledge of the restoration and the Book of Mormon should be seeking the face of God. When in our history did our present mentality begin robbing us of truth? Why have we somehow been conditioned to believe such a search is inappropriate or fanatical? 3 Ne. 16:10 contains some helpful ideas. Satan surely looks with pleasure upon our traditions and laughs.
God be praised for extending to the Gentiles another opportunity to receive the fulness of the gospel (D&C 45:28-30). If it will not be accepted, it will be because men remain blinded by the traditions of men (ibid.). For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)