Thoughts this morning

Whenever truth is spoken with anger, it becomes less true.  Whenever truth is spoken with clarity and inclusion, it is magnified.

You have been freely given life, time, strength as well as power to act.  Choose in turn, to freely give what you have been given, and what you have created with those gifts.

The saying is, “Judge righteous judgement”.  The problem is this: each and every one of us is convinced that the judgments we make about others are the righteous judgments. So we judge and condemn with impunity.

Always assume that you don’t know the whole story.  Seek to find truth.  And also, remembering that you will be judged as you are judged, do not fail to include the truths about yourself and others that enable compassion and concern for, and a willingness to assist, each person involved.

I Believe, #5

I believe that "all are alike unto God" (2 Nephi 6:23). I believe that when Jesus tells his disciples to go into all nations (Matthew 28:19) He is telling us to serve and teach with love, equality, respect, concern and value for those of every nation.

Just as God loves the whole world and its inhabitants so much that He gave His Son, who in turn, gave his life for us so that we might become enlightened, made new, and change our hearts and minds to love and doing good, so we are called to love and give of ourselves to and be concerned for the inhabitants of the whole world.

Therefore, I am opposed to the political climate, in my country, of politicians seeking primarily to focus solely upon narrow, nationalistic prerogatives that further nationalistic tendencies, or political power simply for the sake of power, or the use of political office for personal objectives, paying attention to the rest of the world only as it serves those prerogatives.

Many say, "That's just the way politics is. Every country is that way."

But that does not have to be the way it is. And there have been times when our country has had excellent leaders who have not been that way. So, I am not required to accept the status quo. Serving our own communities is essential, but the global connections between us are undeniable.

Poverty, environmental damage, violent conflict, and deadly diseases in any place ultimately affects all of us and those we love.

John Donne wrote it well as he wrote about the tradition of ringing church bells when someone was dying:

"Perchance he for whom this bell tolls may be so ill, as that he knows not it tolls for him; and perchance I may think myself so much better than I am, as that they who are about me, and see my state, may have caused it to toll for me, and I know not...

"Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee."

Embracing Vaaprastha and preparing for Sannyasa. Study of, and training in, enlightenment through increased devotion to spirituality, service and wisdom.

-->

"I was there to meet the guru Sri Nochur Venkataraman, known as Acharya (“Teacher”) to his disciples. Acharya is a quiet, humble man dedicated to helping people attain enlightenment; he has no interest in Western techies looking for fresh start-up ideas or burnouts trying to escape the religious traditions they were raised in. Satisfied that I was neither of those things, he agreed to talk with me.

"I told him my conundrum: Many people of achievement suffer as they age, because they lose their abilities, gained over many years of hard work. Is this suffering inescapable, like a cosmic joke on the proud? Or is there a loophole somewhere—a way around the suffering?

"Acharya answered elliptically, explaining an ancient Hindu teaching about the stages of life, or ashramas. The first is Brahmacharya, the period of youth and young adulthood dedicated to learning. The second is Grihastha, when a person builds a career, accumulates wealth, and creates a family. In this second stage, the philosophers find one of life’s most common traps: People become attached to earthly rewards—money, power, sex, prestige—and thus try to make this stage last a lifetime.

"The antidote to these worldly temptations is Vanaprastha, the third ashrama, whose name comes from two Sanskrit words meaning “retiring” and “into the forest.” This is the stage, usually starting around age 50, in which we purposefully focus less on professional ambition, and become more and more devoted to spirituality, service, and wisdom. This doesn’t mean that you need to stop working when you turn 50—something few people can afford to do—only that your life goals should adjust.

"Vanaprastha is a time for study and training for the last stage of life, Sannyasa, which should be totally dedicated to the fruits of enlightenment. In times past, some Hindu men would leave their family in old age, take holy vows, and spend the rest of their life at the feet of masters, praying and studying. Even if sitting in a cave at age 75 isn’t your ambition, the point should still be clear: As we age, we should resist the conventional lures of success in order to focus on more transcendentally important things.

"I told Acharya the story about the man on the plane. He listened carefully, and thought for a minute. “He failed to leave Grihastha,” he told me. “He was addicted to the rewards of the world.” He explained that the man’s self-worth was probably still anchored in the memories of professional successes many years earlier, his ongoing recognition purely derivative of long-lost skills. Any glory today was a mere shadow of past glories. Meanwhile, he’d completely skipped the spiritual development of Vanaprastha, and was now missing out on the bliss of Sannyasa.

"There is a message in this for those of us suffering from the Principle of Psychoprofessional Gravitation. Say you are a hard-charging, type-A lawyer, executive, entrepreneur, or—hypothetically, of course—president of a think tank. [see note below]  From early adulthood to middle age, your foot is on the gas, professionally. Living by your wits—by your fluid intelligence—you seek the material rewards of success, you attain a lot of them, and you are deeply attached to them. But the wisdom of Hindu philosophy—and indeed the wisdom of many philosophical traditions—suggests that you should be prepared to walk away from these rewards before you feel ready. Even if you’re at the height of your professional prestige, you probably need to scale back your career ambitions in order to scale up your metaphysical ones."

~ Arthur C Brooks, "Your Professional Decline is Coming (Much) Sooner Than You Think: Here's how to make the most of it.", Atlantic Monthly, July 2019

You can read it here.

nb: note: Not just the people who have such highly visible and lucrative successful careers. Happens to a high powered full time momma or tutor, a dedicated maintainer of a house or lifestyle, or a respected volunteer church or community leader as well.  

1st Timothy, chapter 1: Fables, longsuffering, warfare, hope, charity, and shipwrecks

So, reading through Timothy 1, I hear Paul speak of Jesus as “our hope”.  And he speaks of Timothy’s responsibility in Ephesus: to “charge” members who teach things that are not doctrine, but who instead teach “fables” and complicated genealogies which generally just serve to make people start digging for answers to questions that are based upon stories, or conjecture or tradition and who feel like they are accessing higher understanding. when, actually, they are being seriously sidetracked.

And he then, in verse 5, gives a way to be able to recognize this error.  Does what is being taught create a desire to be more full of charity, simply for the sake of the virtue of charity, without guile, and motivated by faith?  If so, it is good.  If not, it may well fall into the “fables” category.

And then later, in verse 12, Paul talks about the time in his life when he, himself, was involved in the kind of teaching he is warning against.  Like most who do that, he did it because he thought it was a good thing to do.  It felt energizing and right. And he talks of the great grace of God that came to him to change and enlighten and heal and forgive him.

And then this: “that in me first Jesus Christ might show forth all longsuffering for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting”.

Some might think that this could be a message to those of us who are fable teachers that, when we realize what we’ve been doing, we need not fear wrath, but instead be grateful for God’s longsuffering with our erroneous assumptions and find hope in His forgiveness.

I am struck that it is also a message for those of us who recognize those fables or false beliefs taught by members of our faith, that we should also remember God’s longsuffering and knowledge of purveyors of “fables”, and refrain from abandoning charity towards those who teach such, and not lose hope due to our dismay, sorrow or pain over the results of the spread of those fables and the neglect of charity that it entices people to engage in.

So my question to myself is this: Is my truth-speaking, my “good warfare” (verse 18) response to “fable teaching” as full of longsuffering, charity, and grace as the Father’s is?  Is that charity, longsuffering and grace what enables us to connect with God in such a way that we do not lose hope?

Because, for sure, sometimes that fable preaching can feel like it creates a veritable “shipwreck” (verse 19) among us.

“The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation.
"They honestly think there is no choice left. But alert and healthy natures remember that the sun rose clear. It is never too late to give up our prejudices."

Henry David Thoreau, Waldon

Living the Word, Seasoned by the Salt of Wit

Colossians 4:5-6

Behave yourselves wisely to those who are outside the church, using your time wisely and helpfully.

Let your speech always be with gracious charm, seasoned with the salt of wit, so that you will know the right answer to be given in every case.

William Barclay on Colossians 4:6.

“The Christian must behave himself with wisdom and with tact...He must of necessity be a missionary;, but he must know when and when not to speak to others about his religion and theirs. He must never give the impression of superiority and of censorious criticism. Few people have ever been argued into Christianity. The Christian, therefore, must remember that it not so much by his words as by his life that he will attract people to, or repel them from Christianity. On the Christian there is laid the great responsibility of showing men Christ in his daily life.”

Seasoned with the salt of wit. Good to remember.

Strength: a team effort

"Be strong!", they say. "Stay strong", we tell ourselves.

But for each of us there are or will be times when we find that, in spite of it all, we are not as strong as we desire to be, or that our efforts to stay strong are, in reality, actually wearing our souls thin. 

Not being as strong as we desire to be is not failure. It is to be expected. It is to be human. That is life.  For we are created to find and develop strength not just in our own souls, by ourselves as we seek to do good, but also to find strength in the good lives that others share with us, and, most reliably, to find strength in our God,

"...the source of all true strength--the Savior.  Come unto him. He loves you...Make him your strength, your daily companion, your rod and your staff... There is no burden we need bear alone." **

Being strong enough to deal with all that our life entails is not a solo performance.  It is divinely created to be a team effort.  Welcome to the team.

**quote: Cheiko Okazaki, Ensign, Nov. 1993, p. 96

Reunion

I have a very clear memory of a specific evening when my little brothers and I joyfully shouted our greetings to our father when he came home one evening.    I remember it because of what I learned from my mother.

And why did she feel the need to teach me something?   Well, I was greeting him with my favorite welcome home phrase:  "What did you bring me?!  What did you bring me?!"  I must have been about 6 years old at the time.

Mom's gentle and clear explanation of how that greeting reflected a rather selfish mindset and how to recognize the real and far more satisfying joy of reunion instead, is something that has stayed clear in my mind for over 50 years.  It was a good lesson for me to learn.

I don't yell that anymore when I greet him.

Recently I read a piece written by a woman who talked about wanting to buy a fun souvenir for her daughter in order to share with her the pleasant experience she had had while she was away, and the consumerism mindset that she wrestled with as she decided how to act upon that desire to add to the pleasure of their reunion.  So that's what brought that memory to mind again.
You can read the piece she wrote here.

I appreciated and enjoyed the candy bars that my father would occasionally bring home to share with us. They were a delightful treat.  But it was my mother who taught me what the best thing about Dad coming home really was, and how to fully understand and find recognize the greater, instrinsic joy in reunion.  And I am grateful.

A black belt

We have been working on improving our budgeting of our resources.

And we have been considering ways to give more to those in need.

And we have been thinking about how to tell the difference between what we need and what we have.  (Like many people, we have more than we actually need.)

Recently, as I dressed, I was reminded that my black leather belt had finally broken beyond repair the week before.  Before it broke, I owned three belts: that black one, one brown one, and one multi-colored one.

So, I considered again how to go about replacing that black belt that I wear to hold up my black pants.  I have money in my budget to purchase one.  Salvation Army might have one that fit me.  Or one of the local department stores might have one that fits the bill.

But then this morning I read a telling “widows mite” story in the newsletter I occasionally get from a local charitable organization which I respect and to which I have donated.  And it made me review, in my mind, budgeting, giving. and needs versus wants.

What if, instead of replacing the belt, or saving money by not replacing the belt, I instead lived with two belts instead of three and donated the cost of a belt to a charitable cause?

What if, every time some personal or household item wore out, I not only thought about whether or not it was actually needful that I replace it, but also, if it was not in fact needful,  whether or not forgoing replacing it, and then sending the replacement cost to a good cause instead, might not be a good idea?

Do I NEED to wear a black belt with black pants?  How important to me is saving those $10?   How important is either one to me on my scale of priorities?  Is there something I might consider doing instead?

Meekness reviewed

An excerpt from

A Gentle Spirit Is Very Precious to God

Written by Martin G. Collins

In English, "meek" comes from the Old Norse word mjuker, meaning soft. You see there where the English of meekness has come to mean soft or weak.

In modern English the terms meekness and mildness, which are commonly used for this Greek word, suggest weakness and cowardliness to a greater or lesser extent. But, the Greek word prautes does not express this.

The meekness manifested by God and given to the saints, is the fruit of power. It is enduring injury with patience and without resentment. Resentment is a feeling of indignant displeasure or persistent ill will at something regarded as a wrong, an insult, or an injury. The spirit of God cannot dwell in the heart of someone who is harsh or resentful.

Meekness and gentleness are to be "put on" with other Christian virtues such as compassion, lowliness, and patience as Paul taught the saints and faithful brethren of the church in Colossae.

Even though there were arrogant people in the church at Corinth, gentleness was Paul's preferred means of dealing with them.

I Corinthians 4:21 What do you want? Shall I come to you with a rod, or in love and a spirit of gentleness?

Paul had a tremendous love for the faithful in all the congregations of God, but his love was not mere blind sentimentality. He knew they sometimes needed discipline, and he was prepared to use it. But, he wanted to see them respond in repentance so he could show them the meekness and gentleness of Christ in his approach. That was always his preferred approach.

In speaking of his ministry among the Thessalonians, Paul's gentleness takes on a maternal image.

I Thessalonians 2:7 But we were gentle among you, just as a nursing mother cherishes her own children.

You see there an indication of how the ministry should deal with the members of the church. Just as a mother who cherishes her own children does.

Remember where Paul's, and our, meekness and gentleness originated. We already read the answer in II Corinthians.

II Corinthians 10:1 "Now I, Paul, myself am pleading with you by the meekness [Greek prauteetos] and gentleness [Greek epieikeias] of Christ."

Then he goes on to talk about the weapons of the world. On the contrary, we have divine power to tear down evil strongholds. We are not carried away by rage, personal vindictiveness, greed, or pride. But, with the gentleness of Christ we can triumph powerfully. Gentleness is one of the spiritual weapons that we use against those sins of the world that are so harsh.

Meekness and gentleness appear in the Bible among lists of virtues, and two corresponding themes are associated with them. God commands us to behave that way and rewards are promised to people who display these virtues of meekness and gentleness.

How do meekness and gentleness relate to one another? Meekness is both internal and external in its execution in one's life. Gentleness is one of the best English words to express the outward operation of meekness.

II Corinthians 10:1 refers to Christ's meekness (prauteetos) and gentleness (epieikeia). They are indicated as separate virtues that Christ has and that we should desire. Meekness describes a condition of the mind and heart—an internal attitude—whereas gentleness describes mildness combined with tenderness. It refers to actions, that is, external behavior. They go hand in hand, they work together.

Described negatively, meekness is the opposite of self-assertiveness and self-interest; it is evenness of mind that is neither elated nor cast down, simply because it is not occupied with self at all.

Gentleness is never a false modesty, a self-depreciation, or a spineless refusal to stand for anything. It is never a cowardly retreat from reality that substitutes a passive selfishness for true gentleness and avoids trouble in ways that allow even greater trouble to develop. Neither is it a false humility that refuses to recognize that God has given us talents and abilities, or that refuses to use them for His glory.

Full text here:  https://www.cgg.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Audio.details/ID/1494/Meekness-Gentleness-Christ.htm

A

The same right to blessings as if they had been born in...the covenant

I believe that the phrase “the same right to blessings as if they had been born in the covenant” refers to the blessings (long-term support, teaching, love, caring, loyalty, etc.) that a child receives if they have been born into a family in which both the parents are alive long enough to raise their children and, while doing so, lovingly keep and live all of the gospel covenants they had made leading up to and including the commitment they made to each other when they were pronounced husband and wife (ie. the parents were there and they lived the new and everlasting covenant of marriage in the way God designs: in love, kindness, godliness and every other way that is good and helpful to each other and their children).

Early death of a parent will cause pain and suffering for a child, and abandonment, divorce, abuse, enouragement of wickedness, uncaring etc.,etc. do so as well. For me this pronounced blessing is a reiteration of the thorough and complete power of Christ’s Atonement to heal that pain and suffering: heal it so thoroughly that the child ultimately will not only experience the sense of being bouyed up and carried and settled and landed in the arms of God’s love in a way that erases all that pain…as if their suffering had not only not happened, but also to the extent that it is AS IF ALL the nurturing and attendant blessings that were not experienced, and should have happened, did happen.

As such, I find that this blessing is a cause for hope and a source of comfort for children who grow up experiencing the above very difficult things and for those who love and are trying to help them in the face of these various sorrows, injustices and tragedies that befall way too many children and cause them such grief and emotional pain.

For me it is a reminder of the promise of Jesus’ Atonement, his compassion, and his power to ultimately and completely heal all wounds.

Follow the Prophet—playing with additional verses.

Jonah was a prophet, called to Ninevah.
He said, “I won’t go, no way Jose, uh uh.
I will go to Tarshish.  On a ship I’ll sail.”
God said, “That’s what you think. I have got a whale.”

Deborah was a prophetess. And she was a judge.
Told Barak to free the land, but he wouldn’t budge.
He said, “You come with me.  I’m not sure just how.”
Deborah said, “I’ll come, for the Lord is with us now.”

Huldah was a prophetess.  Thoughtful, good and true.
King Josiah was not sure what he should do.
He sent men to ask her what she would advise
Huldah said, “Keep being humble, good and wise.”


Just indulging in making up extra verses for the song, “Follow the Prophet”, which was written and composed by Duane E. Hiatt

Ephesians 4:12

I think that evangelist is not another word for patriarch.

This idea that evangelist = patriarch comes from something reputed to have been said by  Joseph Smith with is recorded in History of the Church, volume 3, page 381.

That is:

AN EVENGELIST (sic) is a Patriarch, even the oldest man of the blood of Joseph or of the seed of Abraham. Wherever the Church of Christ is established in the earth, there should be a Patriarch for the benefit of the posterity of the Saints, as it was with Jacob in giving his patriarchal blessing unto his sons, etc.

In other words,
1. A patriarch is, as noted,  the oldest father in a family and in ancient times we can see that pattern in the Old Testament in the families of Joseph and Abraham (as well as in the family of Adam in the earlier sections of the Book  of Genesis)
2. In the Old Testament, if he was doing his job, he not only taught his children, but also pronounced blessings upon them, as did Joseph and Abraham and Jacob
3. Where the church is established, there should be a patriarch, who could similarly bless the “posterity of the Saints”.
4. An evangelist is a patriarch.

Or is a patriarch an evangelist?  I think that that is actually far  more likely.  Here’s why.

In Doctrine and Covenants 107: 39-41 we read:

“It is the duty of the Twelve, in all large branches of the church, to ordain evangelical ministers, as they shall be designated unto them by revelation--
 The order of this priesthood was confirmed to be handed down from father to son, and rightly belongs to the literal descendants of the chosen seed, to whom the promises were made.
This order was instituted in the days of Adam, and came down by lineage in the following manner:”
(What follows is an accounting of Adam ordaining various of his posterity to priesthood)

In other words, in an ideal world, a father is a godly man, exercising priesthood responsibilities wisely,  including the responsibility to be an evangelist, teaching of the gospel to his posterity (and others) along with helping to maintain the blessing of gospel teaching and and heavenly priesthood power  in his family by preparing and ordaining the future fathers therein. This responsibility to teach is part and parcel of a father’s (patriarch’s) calling to being an evangelist within his own family.


This passage from Doctrine and Covenants 107, above, is cross-referenced in footnotes with Doctrine and Covenants 124:91 which reads:

“And again, verily I say unto you, let my servant William be appointed, ordained, and anointed, as counselor unto my servant Joseph, in the room of my servant Hyrum, that my servant Hyrum may take the office of Priesthood and Patriarch, which was appointed unto him by his father, by blessing and also by right;”

It looks to me like the reference maker decided that Hyrum, who was being released as a counselor in order for him to take up the office of “patriarch” was, in other words, being released in order for him to take up the office of “evangelist” and that these two words mean the same thing.

I think, rather, that the second word (evangelist) describes one of the major duties of the first (patriarch).   The Lord calls many people to be evangelists (preachers of the word or messengers of good tidings) and evangelical work within his own family is a major component of the work of a godly patriarch.  Abraham, Jacob and Joseph all understood that.

So, why a separate priesthood office called “patriarch”.  Actually, the calling title is actually “Patriarch  to the Church” in Hyrum’s case,  or “stake patriarch” in the case of thousands of subsequent callings.  The vast majority of the adult members of the early modern church did not have fathers who felt prepared or ordained to be “evangelists” to their posterity ie: teach them the gospel and lay their hands upon their children as had Abraham, Jacob and Joseph, and with priesthood power, pronounce blessings upon them.  Ordaining Joseph Smith, Sr., and later, his son, Hyrum, to the priesthood office of Patriarch to the Church gave the “posterity of the Saints” the opportunity to receive those blessings that their own fathers were not in a position to give them.  i

In the early days of the modern church, blessings, that are remarkably similar in style to the ones given by Joseph Smith Sr. and Hyrum Smith, were, in that same era,  being given by some faithful priesthood fathers and grandfathers to their adult posterity.  These blessings were  also titled “patriarchal blessings”, were a one-time occasion, and were written down in order to be referred to in the years that followed.  Two of my husband’s ancestors, a husband and wife who had lived through the Kirtland, Missouri, and Nauvoo eras of the church, treasured the  “patriarchal blessings” they received in that latter era from their father and father-in-law respectively, who, as the oldest living father in the family, was their family’s patriarch.   Though they lived not far from Hyrum Smith, loved him, and were his cousins, there is no indication or record of them having ever requested or received a patriarchal blessing from him.  It seems that they felt that they were blessed to have a patriarch in their own family, as Abraham, Jacob and Joseph’s children had, who could give them their patriarchal blessings without them having to request them from the Patriarch to the Church, leaving Hyrum with more time available to respond to requests from saints who did not have patriarchs in their families who could do that for them.

In the ensuing decades stake patriarchs continued to give such blessings, and, because they were specially called men, gradually the unique, once in a lifetime blessings they gave came to not only be a gift to those who did not have family patriarchs to teach and bless them, but also came to be regarded by members of the church as even more special than a faithful father’s blessing, just because a stake patriarch’s blessings  were only available, usually, once.

But I digress.  Back to the topic at hand.

So, why go to all the trouble of teasing out this relationship between “patriarchs” and “evangelists”.

Because it is pretty clear that the term “evangelist” in the New Testament, is a term that refers to a person who preaches the gospel.  All four writers of the Gospels are called “evangelists”.  Paul urges Timothy to be prepared to continue to preach the word of God as an evangelist as Paul realizes that his own missionary travels and  ministry are drawing to a close.  And Philip, “one of the seven”, who preached the gospel in Samaria and is the one who taught the Ethiopian in Gaza, is called “an evangelist”.  The Greek word used means “messenger of good tidings” and all of the above mentioned men were people who traveled, preaching the gospel.

When latter-day saints who have read that opening sentence in that one unusual History of the Church statement, jump immediately to the conclusion that “evangelists” in Ephesians 4:12 means “patriarchs” and try to show that because our church has “patriarchs” that is evidence that our church has elements of the primitive church, they are, very unnecessarily, standing on pretty thin ice.

Does our church have evangelists?  Of course.  We call these messengers of good tidings “missionaries”.  We have tons of them.

If the only reason we are insisting  that “evangelists” in Ephesians 4 are “patriarchs” is because of that one non-primary sourced statement attributed Joseph Smith (much of this section of the book is taken from peoples memories or notes, not actual texts), and we have absolutely nothing to lose by deciding that all the other evidence points to the notion that “evangelist” means “messenger of good tidings” (of which we have many among our membership), then I think we should re-think this.

In our faith, a godly patriarch, the godly father of his family, teaches his family the gospel and blesses them with priesthood blessings.  A godly patriarch is many things, and one of the things he is is an evangelist; a messenger of good tidings.

The gift of the Holy Ghost

"The gift of the Holy Ghost . . . quickens all the intellectual faculties, increases, enlarges, expands, and purifies all the natural passions and affections, and adapts them, by the gift of wisdom, to their lawful use. It inspires, develops, cultivates, and matures all the fine-toned sympathies, joys, tastes, kindred feelings, and affections of our nature. It inspires virtue, kindness, goodness, tenderness, gentleness, and charity. It develops beauty of person, form, and features. It tends to health, vigor, animation, and social feeling. It invigorates all the faculties of the physical and intellectual man. It strengthens and gives tone to the nerves. In short, it is, as it were, marrow to the bone, joy to the heart, light to the eyes, music to the ears, and life to the whole being."

Parley P. Pratt, Key to the Science of Theology and a Voice of Warning, p.61.

Bringing Humanity to the Gospel

In April 1932, apostle Stephen L Richards gave a conference address titled “Bringing Humanity to the Gospel.”

“I fear dictatorial dogmatism, rigidity of procedure and intolerance even more than I fear cigarettes, cards and other devices the adversary may use to nullify faith and kill religion... Fanaticism and bigotry have been the deadly enemies of true religion in the long past. … They have garbed it in black and then in white, when in truth it is neither black nor white, any more than life is black or white, for religion is life abundant, glowing life, with all its shades, colors and hues, as the children of men reflect in the patterns of their lives the radiance of the Holy Spirit in varying degrees.”

For the natural man is an enemy to God, Mosiah 3:17-21

I woke up thinking about some of the things that “so easily beset” us in general and, of course, me in particular, thwarting our personal discipleship.

When, as a teenager, I first read “For the natural man is an enemy to God...unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, full of love....” I thought about the temptations that I, personally, was most aware of amongst myself and my peers: judgmentalism, arrogance, unkindness, cliquishness, sexual promiscuity, foul language, substance abuse, dishonesty, etc.

Today I woke up mulling over the questions of what are some of the temptations that thwart some of us who have been attempting discipleship for a much longer period of time than I had been back then.  And then reviewing my own life identify some of those at play in my own daily interactions and decisions.

Some of the pitfalls that I think we face at this stage of discipleship:

Focus on screens, audio-visual media, or the printed word instead of on the people around us

Valuing efficiency more than taking careful time to accomodate requests, requirements, or others’ needs

Retreat into solitude when there is good work to be done

Self-consciousness instead of other-consciousness in formal and informal meetings

Focus on results instead of process

Measuring our worth by how well we are listened to or how insightful we are perceived to be

Giving answers more than we ask questions

Finding greater satisfaction and sense of worth in leadership than in serving in less noticed capacities

Fear

Placing our trust in financial gain

Listening to those in power or in leadership roles more than we do to those who are not

Focusing on failures in our own performance rather than on gratitude for grace

Again, the scriptural admonition to seek to become “submissive, meek, humble, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict” by coming “to a [better] knowledge of the Savior” seems like a good way for me to start making better headway against those.

Revised third verse for Hymn #19

We’ll sing the Lord’s goodness and mercy.

We’ll praise Him by day and by night,

Rejoice in His glorious gospel, 

And bask in His life-giving light.

Thus, grateful and seeking to serve Him,

The honest and faithful may go

Rejoicing and speaking His gospel, 

That all people their Savior may know.

Faith, Repentance, Baptism, the Gift of the Holy Ghost

from the Introduction to First Principles and Ordinances by Samuel M. Brown

"The principles and ordinances of the fourth article of faith are familiar to most traditional Christians. Among Latter-day Saints, though, these concepts have dramatically expanded meanings.  I believe that the first principles and ordinances are much more about relationships--among humans and between humans and [the Father, Son and Holy Ghost]--than is generally recognized  I feel that particularly in the last fifty years, many of us Latter-day Saints have tended toward traditionally American views on faith, repentance, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost.  These traditional American Protestant views have emphasized individuals over their relationships.  Faith, repentance, baptism and confirmation have sometimes been about an individual making her often lonely way toward God.  In this book I describe an approach to the first principles and ordinances of the  gospel that acknowledges the relationships that stand at the core of the gospel and the meaning of life...For each principle, emphasizing relationships transforms a familiar concept.  As markers of relationships, the elements of the fourth article of faith point toward the temple and the grand story of connection that the temple contains.  Put another way, the revelation of temple ordinances was built line upon line, precept upon precept, from the very simplest of our doctrines--the first principles and ordinances of the fourth article of faith."

I'm interested.