An Action is Worth a Thousand Words

For a little bit of local flavor from here at Texas A&M University:  My generation of Aggies seem to constantly be finding new things to whine about.  Whether it is tuition, administrative policies, dining options, the football team, diversity, you name it.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for complaining, but I see few willing to do anything about the issue in question.

For example, the Memorial Student Center [MSC] is a beloved piece of A&M tradition.  Hats off, don’t walk on the grass, all that good stuff.  Recently, the University has been moving to renovate the building.  For heaven sakes, the women’s restroom downstairs has urinals in it.  Many students seem to feel quite passionate about altering this piece of Aggie tradition.  Animosity has surfaced as the work for renovation has begun.

However, when an open forum was scheduled to air out concerns on the subject, student attendance was poor.  As I have read in The Battalion [Because I don’t use online social websites], thousands have joined Facebook groups in protest against the MSC renovation.  Why weren’t these thousands of Aggies at the forum the administration held?  Is it perhaps because sitting at your computer and clicking your mouse to “join a Facebook group” is comparably easier than actually doing something?

Many cry about what they see as wrong, but few seek any change.

This issue has caught my attention because I feel it is a political and religious problem as well.  How many punched their ticket for Obama because he’s promised change?  How many went with McCain because he promised he’s not like George Bush?  Anyone can vote for a candidate on Tuesday and then return to business as usual on Wednesday.  The test is:

What are you doing to redistribute your wealth,
What are you doing to protect an embryo’s right to life,
What are you doing to uphold our Constitution,
What are you doing to change the way Washington is run?

It is religious as well.  How many take a backset approach to their religion – allowing the pastor to do all the scripture study and formulate all the lessons, giving God only one day [or even a few minutes or hours out of one day] out of the week, expressing words only for the consolation of the poor or persecuted?  Have we told Christ we wish to serve Him, or are we serving Him?  Are we doers of the Word, or merely deceiving ourselves?

Would we rather talk about the joy of the Christmas season, or trample a man to death to spend some holiday cash?

Whether it is a renovation of a landmark building on campus, choosing a President, or becoming a Christian:  It is when the rubber hits the road, that those who can are separated from those who do.

Supervisor Dufty’s Comment

Proposition 8 has been a controversial issue for this country over the last few months.  The measure passed with an affirmative vote of 52%, or by a little over 722,000 votes.  It has been well publicized that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has taken a lot of heat from the gay community for its support of Proposition 8.  I’m curious how a Church that comprises 2% of California’s population would be taking the brunt of the attack from gays for this Proposition being passed.

Of more interest to me was a comment I read in the Oakland Tribune online.  San Francisco City Supervisor Bevan Dufty said at a protest rally:
“The time has come to take it out there to the people who voted for this awful thing.  The Mormon church has had to rely on our tolerance in the past, to be able to express their beliefs… This is a huge mistake for them. It looks like they’ve forgotten some lessons.” 
I was troubled about how he planned on “taking it” to the Church, about how a Church needed to “rely” on their tolerance to express anything, and about what lessons he fells the Church has “forgotten”.

 I love the Internet-Age.  After reading the previous quote and being troubled by it, I did an Ask.com search [Don't use Google anymore] for Supervisor Dufty and easily found his e-mail address.  I sent him an e-mail and asked him what he meant by his comment that I quoted above.  He replied the same day and this his is response:
“Separation of Church and State protected Mormon Church from Government/State harassment and intrusion.
It’s a mistake, in my opinion, for the Mormon Church to forget this and seek to deny individuals the constitutionally-established right to civil marriage.
I respect the rights to freedom of religious expression and the separation of Church and State.”

I was first off pleased by his timely response, and was mildly enlightened by what he meant.  It seems he wants the main interpretation of his comment to be that the Government, for the most part, leaves the Church alone [because it is a church], and that the Church has crossed that line and entered into the political arena.  I still don’t know what lessons we have forgot and how he is going to “take it out” to the Church.  Does he plan to drive the Church from California just like they were driven from Missouri? 

The following is the First Presidency’s statement put out in regards to Proposition 8.  This is what the controversy is all about:
“In March 2000 California voters overwhelmingly approved a state law providing that “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” The California Supreme Court recently reversed this vote of the people. On November 4, 2 008, Californians will vote on a proposed amendment to the California state constitution that will now restore the March 2000 definition of marriage approved by the voters.
The Church’s teachings and position on this moral issue are unequivocal. Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God, and the formation of families is central to the Creator’s plan for His children. Children are entitled to be born within this bond of marriage.
A broad-based coalition of churches and other organizations placed the proposed amendment on the ballot. The Church will participate with this coalition in seeking its passage. Local Church leaders will provide information about how you may become involved in this important cause.
We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman. Our best efforts are required to preserve the sacred institution of marriage.”

I, as an active Latter-day Saint, see nothing wrong with this position.  The people of California [not the Mormons of California] have spoken twice – marriage is to be between and man and a woman only.  It was ordained of God for the purposes of making an eternal family unit.  It is the institution whereby children should be brought into the world.

Were Not Ten Cleansed?

In Luke chapter 17, there is a story about ten lepers.

All 10 lifted up their voice and called out to Christ for help,
He commanded all 10 of them to go and preform the prescribed formalities of the Church,
He cleansed all 10 of them.

However, only 1 of the 10, a Samaritan, returned, fell at Jesus’ feet, and “with a loud voice” thanked Him.  All were cleansed, but only to 1 did Christ say “thy faith hath made thee whole“.

I recently read this story in light of how we read the Ten Virgins.  The Virgins have been interpreted to be the members of the Church.  President Woodruff said that when the Lord comes again, He would be happy as to find 50% of the Church members with oil in their lamps.

How about this story?  Are not all of the members of the Church cleansed from spiritual leprosy – i.e. sin?  Has Christ not commanded us all to be actively engaged in the work of the Kingdom of God on the earth — i.e. the Church?  All Church members are indeed cleansed, but how many have humble gratitude in their hearts and have returned to thank Jesus Christ and been made whole?  Is Christ saying He’d be happy to have 10% return and be thankful to Him for being cleansed?

 

Perhaps this story would lend merit to the Evangelicals’ criticism that LDS don’t have a good “personal relationship with the Savior”.  Ninety percent have been baptized and are active in the Church, but only ten percent have humbly thanked Christ for what His Atonement has accomplished for us.  

There is a difference between being cleansed and being made whole.  We all can be cleansed, but only the faithful can be made whole.  Only “he who receiveth all things with thankfulness shall be made glorious.”  

The following is under the section gratitude in For the Strength of Youth:

“The Lord wants you to have a spirit of gratitude in all you do and say. Live with a spirit of thanksgiving and you will have greater happiness and satisfaction in life. Even in your most difficult times, you can find much to be grateful for. Doing so will strengthen and bless you.
In your prayers, before you ask for blessings, pour out your heart to God in thanks for the blessings you have already received. Thank Him for your family, for friends and loved ones, for leaders and teachers, for the gospel, and for His Son, Jesus Christ.
You can also express gratitude to the Lord by the way you live. When you keep His commandments and serve others, you show that you love Him and are grateful to Him. Express appreciation to everyone who helps you in any way.“

To What do we Give Thanks?

“How could anything as trivial as human politics subvert our minds from the gospel? The danger lies in the fact that nothing is easier than to identify one’s own political, economic, dietary, cosmological, aesthetic, etc., ideas with the gospel, both to please one’s own vanity and to flatten the opposition. Therefore, our prophet was truly inspired when he told the priesthood at the last General Conference to avoid “even the implication” associating the Church with any political party, policy, or name.”

387 years ago, in autumn of 1621, the settlers of this country held what we refer to as “The First Thanksgiving”.  The harvest feasts of 1621 and 1622 left all bellies filled.  However, the relief during “Thanksgiving” was short lived – death and malnutrition continued.  The Governor of the colony, William Bradford, reported that people went hungry because they refused to work and preferred to steal.  In 1623, something changed.  During that year’s harvest time, Governor Bradford reported that:
“Instead of famine, now God gave them plenty, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many, for which they blessed God.”
Then by 1624, so much food was produced that the colony was able to export food.

It would seem that this 1623 event was the First Thanksgiving.

What was different from 1621 – where there was a Thanksgiving meal, but malnutrition continued, and from 1623 – where they were blessed with plenty?

Governor Bradford was fed up with laziness and stealing in his colony.  In 1623, he made a switch from putting all profits into a common stock of the colony.  Prior to 1623, all put into the stock whatever they were able to produce, and then would take out of it only what they needed.  An attractive idea indeed.  However, in practice, the colonists were supposing that any additional effort on their part would only compensate for a lack of industry in another.

This was when Governor Bradford substituted this system with private ownership.  Now the colonists could be sure that additional labor would benefit their own family.  The families were allowed to eat what they raised and to distribute, trade, or sell surplus as they saw fit. 

On this Thanksgiving, after a hotly debated Presidential election where words like “socialist” were thrown around, let us remember the history and spirit of this holiday.  Government mandated consecration does not work.  People must be just as free to hoard their wealth if they are to be free to redistribute it.

What was to stop those colonists, with their newly found freedom of production, to continue to provide from their surplus a common stock to care for the poor?  Nothing but their own limitations?

What stops us, in our capitalistic economy, from redistributing our wealth thru social charities, microloan organizations, and the functions of the Church?  What stops us from giving, today, what we would have given under the United Order?  The same – nothing but our own limitations.

The Law of Consecration is neither capitalistic nor is it communistic.  Both view the earth as merely a depository of resources, and the purpose of life as nothing but work, work, work.  Capitalism doesn’t address our requirement to redistribute our wealth above what is needed, and Communism doesn’t recognize the importance of the complete agency of the individual in making these decisions.  Neither recognizes God as the owner of all property, and man merely as stewards.

Modest is the Hottest

“Now therefore thus saith the Lord of Hosts; consider your ways…
ye clothe you, but there is none warm…”

How apt of a declaration by the prophet Haggai concerning the high level of immodesty we see in popular culture today. 

Modesty is an attitude of humility and decency – not only in what we wear, but also how we wear our hair, what we say, and how we act.  The council to be modest is shared by almost every religious denomination out there.  Modesty is founded on the truth that the human body is God’s sacred creation.  Our bodies are a gift from God – thru modesty, we show the Lord how precious our bodies are to us.  Since the days of Adam and Eve, the Lord has asked His children to cover their bodies.

The prophets and apostles have been saying for some time that it is apparent that the world is becoming increasingly casual and informal.  In the frameshop where I work, I’ve seen pictures come in from 50 – 150 years ago.  In these photos, everyone, from businessmen to farmers and oil-rig workers alike, all of them wear dress shirts and ties.  We are now 2 – 3 generations into wearing casual apparel.

Elder Robert D. Hales has spoken on what modesty says about us:
“Our outward appearance and behavior give a message.  What message are we sending?  Does it reflect that we are children of God?”

The Lord’s standards of modesty are not those of Babylon.  President Brigham Young proposed a standard for judging what we wear:
“Suppose that a female angel were to come to your house and you had the privilege of seeing her, how would she be dressed?  She would be neat and nice…None of the sisters believe that these useless, foolish fashions are followed in Heaven.  Well, then, patter your lives after good and heavenly things.”

The Church, regardless of the popularity of it, has been consistent in teaching that we are responsible for the effect our dress standards have on others.  Things that cause improper thoughts or set a poor example for others is not modest.  What we wear influences the way we, as well as others, think and act.  How we feel on the inside shows on the outside.  We show love and respect for others and ourselves by our attitude, speech, and dress.

The mini-version of For the Strength of Youth that I keep in my wallet says:
“Dress modestly to show respect for God and yourself.  Never lower your dress standards for any occasion.  Do not disfigure your body with tattoos and body piercings.”

If we cannot show that we respect ourselves enough to be modest – then how can we expect others to have respect for us?  Look at yourself today – what are you saying about yourself without using any words at all?

Keep the Change

I try to reserve my political opinions for another medium than my posts here.  However, I believe that sometimes the “good fight of faith” can bleed-over out of the religious arena.  
I’ve found 4 fundamental points that have kept me from supporting Barak Obama through the Primary process and the Presidential election.  I must also add, even though I do disagree with him, the man is my President.  In the same way that President Bush has been the President of all John Kerry supporters since 2004.  Regardless of party affiliation — I do not agree with biased criticism of the leader of this country [even if I didn't vote for him].

“When we grow the economy from the ground up, then everybody does better.”
Successful economies are not grown from the ground up.  They are grown as the government reduces the growth of government spending, reduces marginal tax rates on income from labor and capital, reduces government regulation of the economy, and controls the money supply to reduce inflation.
The problem is inherently with the economy.  As Thomas More recognized, “granted there are ways of improving the situation without abolishing private property, there remains no other cure for the evil.”  I must say, it is a vain attempt for President Obama to fix the game by shuffling the deck of cards, when the problem is in the deck of cards itself.

“I’m going to cut taxes for 95% of working Americans.”
It’s got to raise alarm bells when you claim you are going to cut taxes for 95 percent of working families when more than 40% of them pay no income taxes.
A true tax cut is a reduction in the taxes you’re paying.  In contrast, Obama’s plan is to provide payments even if you owe no taxes at all.  All of this is funded by an increase in the taxes collected on those paying income tax.
Top 5% currently pay [2007] 60% of all income tax.
Top 1% currently pays [2007] 40% of all income tax.
Bottom 50% currently pays [2007] 3% of all income tax.
When do the rich begin to pay their share?
What Obama means to say is that he is going to give me $1000, paid for by increasing the marginal income tax rates on the top 5%.

“When you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”
In my personal belief system, I do believe that if the wealth was spread around, then it would be better for everyone – I do not believe it is a function of our tax code to perform that function.  I firmly believe that the redistribution of my wealth, above that which I need, entirely rests upon my shoulders.  It is something I stand accountable before God for doing.
The same is true with the maxim, “From each according to his ability; to each according to his need.”  I believe my ability to earn should reflect my ability to give, and that which is retained by the individual should be retained by need.  I defer in that I don’t believe the Federal government has the primary role to play.

“The state government has three constructive roles to play:  The first is human capital development.  A true welfare system would provide for medical care, child care and job training.  Second, The state government can also play a role in redistribution, the allocation of wages and jobs.  Finally, setting an industrial strategy. How do we create more jobs for everyone?”
I believe the purpose of government is correctly stated as follows:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity…

Domestic tranquility is ensured and common defense is provided.  However, I notice that the general welfare is only promoted – not guaranteed, assured, or promised.
Human capital development should not on the shoulders of the government.  It should be on my own.  Gaining skills, knowledge, and experience that is valuable to my community, and responsibly using those skills is a constructive role of the individual.
The same holds true for redistribution.  Individuals all stand accountable before God for the discharge of those things placed in their stewardship.  More than you need is more than you need.  I personally believe that the individual should redistribute above that which is needed – I don’t believe it should be done by Federal government policy and tax code.
I firmly believe that Barak Obama has pure intentions.  As per his 1995 interview, I believe he is trying to work out his own salvation by helping to redistribute this country’s strongly disproportionate wealth.  I can relate to him.

I do still firmly believe, however, that he is a left-of-center Democrat – regardless of his campaign slogans of broad-based tax cuts, right to gun ownership, fiscal responsibility, insisting to black audiences that black men take more responsibility for their families, and aggressive military action in Pakistan to take out Bin Laden.

I am a right-of-center conservative – so much so that I did not support John McCain as the Republican nominee.  I believe that a moderate choice in candidate is part of the reason for Obama’s victory.  Over the last 8 years, the Republican Party has stopped being the party of strong conservative values, and then in 2008, picks a moderate candidate for the election.  This opened the gates for a man like Obama to come in.  People want to try something new.  I’ll give them that, he will be something new.

Carry-on Baggage

Two monks were traveling along a road.  They came upon a beautiful young girl who was unable to get across a stream.  The older monk offered to help.  He picked her up and carried her across.  Several miles down the road, the younger monk could no longer contain himself.  “Master, we aren’t supposed to associate with women, yet you actually touched that beautiful woman.  You picked her up!”  The master answered, “I put that woman down on the other side of the stream.  Are you still carrying her?” 

We carry more during our lives than we bear with our physical muscles.  We carry guilt, anger, grief, and responsibility.  The Atonement is meant to relieve these burdens and lighten these loads.  

Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest, said the Master.

Labor and grievous work are to be the name of the game in this lone and dreary world.  Adam and Eve were told that heavy labors were to be their lot in this fallen world.  Christ has told us that He was sent from the presence of the Father to take these heavy loads on His back.  To bear our iniquities for us.  

We all have some Missouri days — some Liberty Jail days.  Paul calls it the Fellowship of Suffering.  The old cliche is Easter Sundays always follow Good Fridays.  

We have no right to hold a grudge against God, or anyone else, when we go thru a trial.  God likes broken things.  He uses broken clouds to make rain, broken earth to grow wheat, broken grains to make bread, and broken bread to restore the soul of a broken man.  The Atonement will restore the soul of someone who has been carrying a heavy load just as surely as it will restore our bodies in the Resurrection.

The road to salvation has always gone thru Gethsemane.  You’ll have to say, “Please let this cup pass”, but it won’t.  So then you have got to square your shoulders, bow your head and say “Yes”.  We have got to prove who we are and who He is.

“Master, I know we aren’t supposed to associate with sin, yet I have sinned many times.  The Master will answer, ‘I put down your sin on the other side of that Garden, are you still carrying it?”

Faith in Jesus Christ

 

I find the confusion about what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes to be quite fascinating.  We’ve been spending upwards of 170 years and sent over 1 million missionaries around the world to teach the same message.  We don’t have tracts or lessons telling anyone what is wrong with other faiths — only what is right about ours.

The following quote is from Mormon.org:

“The gospel of Jesus Christ is simple. It begins with faith in Jesus Christ. Faith in Jesus Christ is believing in Him, trusting Him, and depending on Him. Faith in Jesus Christ leads you to want to change your life for the better. Through repentance, you change those thoughts, desires, habits, and actions that are not in harmony with God’s teachings. Heavenly Father promises that when you repent, He will forgive your sins.

Faith in Jesus Christ and repentance prepare you for baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. Jesus Christ taught that everyone must be baptized of water and of the Spirit for the forgiveness of sins. Through baptism by one who holds God’s priesthood authority and through receiving the Holy Ghost, you will be spiritually reborn. After baptism, God promises to give you the gift of the Holy Ghost, who will guide, comfort, and help you know and recognize truth.”

Quotes by early Church leaders can be taken out of context, our position can be skewed, but here it is.  Is there anything un-Christian about the above quote?

I think all Christians can agree on these 2 propositions:
If you have faith, then you’ll be saved.
F –> S
If you are saved, then you’ll have good works.
S –> W

The above one is logically equivalent to:
Either you are not saved, or you have good works –  ~S v W
It is not possible to be saved and to not have good works –  ~(S  ·  ~W).

Works are a necessary condition for salvation.  However, Faith is the sufficient condition for being saved.
Therefore, if you have faith, then you’ll have good works.
F –> W

But James already told us that.  And as the Mormon.org quote says, “It begins with faith in Jesus Christ.”

Doctrine as a Venn Diagram

An oft proposed problem with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that we believe in scripture that is comparable with the Bible.  We don’t hold the Bible to be the only revelation God has given to mankind.  We believe the Bible is the Word of God, as well as the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price.  These latter three books don’t supersede the Bible any more than having the New Testament of the Bible supersedes the Old Testament.

To my understanding, there exists a whole body of teachings of a church.  This would be their Doctrine, or as I like to term it, the Canon of that church.

Within a church’s canon, there exists some teachings which are written down.  That is what the definition of the word “scripture” is –writings.  For the Catholic Church, there exists the Bible and Deuterocanonical books, as well as the traditions of the Apostolic Fathers.  For Protestants, there is the Bible, as well as different creeds, writings by certain reformers, and interpretations by certain ministers.  For the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we have the Standard Works and certain Official Declarations, as well as our oral canon of what is taught in the Temple.

What I’ve been saying may be formulated visually as follows:

Where the outer circle is the sum total of all doctrine of a church — its Canon.

The next inner ring is the portion of that Canon that is written down — the Scriptures.

For Latter-day Saints, the Bible exists as the inner-most circle.  It is a portion of the doctrine of our Church that written down.  

When viewed objectively in this manner, our position becomes much less controversial.  

Potentiality

Aristotle said we live in a world of Becoming.  In other words, in this life — we are solely in the act of becoming one thing or the other.  Life cannot be static.  It is dynamic or it is dead.

As I’ve said before, you cannot die.  You must either become one thing or another.  You will go on existing for eternity whether you would like to or not.  It is this life that will determine what you are to become.

On the principle of what we are becoming, C.S. Lewis wrote:

“It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you may talk to, may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and corruption such as you now meet if at all only in a nightmare.

All day long we are in some degree helping each other to one or the other of these destinations. It is in light of these overwhelming possibilities it is with awe and the circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics. There are no ordinary people. You have never met a mere mortal, Nations, cultures, arts, civilizations, these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit — immortal horrors or everlasting splendors.”

In Plato’s world, what is real exists as what he called Forms.  Forms are the real, spiritual things that this material world is just a shadow of.  To Plato, when I see a beautiful woman, the reason she looks beautiful to me is because the Form of Beauty is floating around casting its shadow on her.  What I’m seeing is the flickering image of Beauty closely resembled by the woman.  

There exists only one Form called Chair.  Many things can look like a chair to me because all of them resemble, to varying degrees, the Form of Chair.

Things here are in similitude or in the image of the spiritual Forms, but as long as they are in this fallen world — they can never fully resemble their true Image.

Aristotle defined the term Potentiality.  It means that within everything there exists a natural evolution toward fulfilling its own potential – in essence becoming its own Form.  A movement from imperfection to perfection is inherent in all things as a natural process.

The world of the spiritual Forms is in a state of Being.  The Forms of Beauty, Love, Chair, etc. are eternal and unchanging.

This fallen world is in a state of Becoming.  All things are seeking to fulfill the measure of their creation.  The Laws of Thermodynamics have full sway over this world – all things degrade and breakdown.

The Atonement is what bridges the chasm between Becoming and Being.  We can only “become” like our Father in Heaven so much.  We are fallen humans after all, and we will therefore always fall short of His Glory.  The Atonement of Jesus Christ not only reverses, but fully takes us out of the power of, the Law of Thermodynamics.  The power of Christ takes us from “all we can do” to reconciled unto God our Father.

This power of Atonement makes us “at one” with the Form of God.  We become partakers of the Divine Nature, Heirs of God [Joint-heirs with/through Christ], conformed to His image, partakers of His Glory, etc.

C.S. Lewis says that the human potentiality [the Weight of Glory] is the burden that will break the backs of the proud.  It is a burden that only the humble can bear.