In October 2015 General Conference, Elder Perry gave a talk entitled, "Why Marriage and Family Matter--Everywhere in the World".
Let me comment on the talk title: this suggests both the importance of marriage and family, but also a global, even universal power to common interests in marriage and family that Elder Perry shares.
Elder Perry mentions an invitation to attend a colloquium on marriage and family at the Vatican. Religious, geographic, and presumably ethnic diversity is immediately brought up: "In attendance were religious representatives from 14 different faiths and from six of the seven continents, all of whom had been invited to express their beliefs on what is happening to the family in today's world."
Elder Perry starts his summary of the colloquium by quoting the Pope's remarks, speaking against the prevailing "culture of the temporary" and its attendant fruits of "spiritual and material devastation to countless human beings, especially the poorest and most vulnerable." He quotes the Pope's statement of hope that "the rising generation" will "'seek true and lasting love, going against the common pattern'", becoming "'revolutionaries'" by so doing.
There is a tone of unity and hope as Elder Perry hears "the widest imaginable variety of worldwide religious leaders...agree completely with each other...on the sanctity of the institution of marriage and of the importance of families as the basic unit of society." He continues optimistically, "I felt a powerful sense of commonality and unity with them....It was remarkable for me to see how marriage and family-centered priorities cut across and superseded any political, economic, or religious differences. When it comes to love of spouse and hopes, worries, and dreams for children, we are all the same."
I found the ecumenical tone of the first part of this talk very uplifting and edifying. As brothers and sisters of varying religious traditions, we can support each other in basic beliefs and perspectives on marriage and family.
Of course the religious world is not one monolithic whole. Differences exist. Only members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, says Elder Perry, "Have the eternal perspective of the restored Gospel." Specifically, "The entire theology of our restored Gospel centers of families and on the nea and everlasting covenant of marriage." Distinctive LDS beliefs, doctrines, rituals, and cultural practices reflect this.
Elder Perry returns to the theme of working with others to strengthen marriage and family, even making this somewhat surprising assertion, "We know that it is not only those who are actively religious who share common values and priorities of lasting marriages and strong family relationships. A great number of secular people have concluded that a committed marriage and family lifestyle is the most sensible, the economical, and the happiest way to live."
I struggle to think of any General Conference talk that speaks praise to consensus from "the widest imaginable variety of worldwide religious leaders" and even "secular people," those not "actively religious." And yet Elder Perry here does so.
The above only makes the popular backlash against this inspired Apostle and his wonderful talk equally parts befuddling and tragic.
Towards the end, Elder Perry martials the Saints, "We want our voice to be heard against all of the counterfeit and alternative lifestyles that try to replace the family organization that God Himself established. We also want our voice to be heard in sustaining the joy and fulfillment that traditional families bring. We must continue to project that voice throughout the world in declaring why marriage and family are so important, why marriage and family really do matter, and why they always will."
Unfortunately, many LGBT activitists felt that Elder Perry was speaking accusingly at them as if from a Rameumptom.
However, in the context of the talk, I find it difficult to believe that this is what Elder Perry was referring to. What does he mean by "counterfeit and alternative lifestyles"? I suggest that the best clue is from several paragraphs earlier:
"Much of the media and entertainment that the world shares does not reflect the priorities and values of the majority. For whatever reasons, too much of our television, movies, music, and Internet present a classic case of a minority masquerading as a majority. Immorality and amorality, ranging from graphic violence to recreational sex, is portrayed as the norm and can cause those who have mainstream values to feel like we are out of ate or from a bygone era."
In this paragraph, I see no mention or even a hint of same-sex marriage or same-sex relationships. Only condemnations of "Immorality and amorality, ranging from graphic violence to recreational sex" are specifically called out.
To me it seems far more likely that Elder Perry is referring to a whole host of enemies to marriage and family. He is not referring to LGBT individuals, even obliquely, as opponents or fence sitters. LGBT Latter-day Saints are not called to task or taken to the mat in this talk from what I can see. And I see no reason why any LGBT Latter-day Saint cannot see the wisdom in Elder Perry's condemnation of "graphic violence", "recreational sex", "immorality", and "amorality".
Elder Perry closes the talk with his testimony, with expressions of gratitude for family members, and with a call to unite with "other faiths", stating that "It is around marriage and family that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has the greatest opportunity to be a light on the hill."
So ends a classic talk by and the final talk of Elder L. Tom Perry.
Tuesday, August 16, 2016
President Eyring "Where Two or Three Are Gathered"
President Eyring gave a conference talk April 2016 entitled, "Where Two or Three are Gathered".
I like his supposition made early in the talk: "I am grateful that you have come to the conference to feel inspiration from heaven and to feel closer to our Heavenly Father and to the Lord Jesus Christ." There are other reasons to participate in conference, or to seek something spiritually, but President Eyring picked these two: to feel inspiration from heaven and to feel closer to God.
There are at least a few probable implications from this statement:
1. These are commonly held needs by the conference audience, specifically, Latter-day Saints and friends.
2. We are self-aware that we have these needs.
3. The proceedings in General Conference are able to meet these needs.
4. We have a hope that in Conference, or through Conference, we may have these needs met.
5. Perhaps these are the two most important reasons for General Conference.
I like how these needs apply almost universally to everyone, no matter age or stage: married, widowed, divorced, single, very young, very old, lonely, overwhelmed, frustrated, seeking, in crisis, etc.
I also like how President Eyring is not saying something about learning what we are doing wrong, or being filled with guilt, or rejoicing in our own superiority, or finding some reason to leave or be angry at the Church. Of course, if someone is listening in that mindset, they are free to see thoughts and expressions from that perspective. But that is certainly not in either the tenor nor the explicit content of President Eyring's remarks.
He turns to the parable of the sower as the text to address the needs of his audience, those who are spiritually disillusioned, but with a spiritual past.
"The survival of the seed and its growth depended on the condition of the soil."
"Again, the seed is the word of God. The soil is the heart of the person who receives the seed."
Parables can be read many ways; that is one of their strengths. Here, President Eyring frames the parable in a certain way, similarly to how Jesus frames it in the Gospels. In a sermon or a talk, this sort of framework is valuable, perhaps even essential for putting the parable in the desired context of the speaker.
"We have all had seeds, or the word of God, planted in our hearts at one time....Each felt that the seed was good, even felt the swelling in our hearts, and experienced joy as our hearts and mind seemed to expand."
President Eyring is making a supposition that all of those in the audience have not only received the word of God, and have acknowledged it as such, but that the word of God, at least at one time, has had a positive impact. He is appealing to bright memories of spiritual peaks in our personal past.
"All of us have had our faith tested" by various ways.
This is a frank acknowledgment that the relationship between our spiritual lives and the parable of the sower is not a straightforward, linear relationship. Discipleship is not fatalistic; nor is it a one-time event or even a one-time process. We need to be constantly aware of the health of our faith and our testimony, and take steps to see that the seed is nourished and strengthened. An implication is that our faith, our testimony, our spiritual life can ebb and flow like the tide or an economic cycle.
"There will be a precious opportunity in the next few days to have our hearts softened and to receive and nourish the seed....They have prayed to have the power to encourage you to make the choices that will create in your heart a more fertile ground for the good word of God to grow and be fruitful. If you listen with the Spirit, you will find your heart softened, your faith strengthened, and your capacity to love the Lord increased."
This a dramatic turning inward of the condition of soil: it is our responsibility to make the choices that may create in my heart a more fertile ground. And the Church offers opportunities for our heart to be softened. Members of the Church at all levels are invested in your spiritual development, in the condition of your heart, and want to provide opportunities for growth and development.
President Eyring makes a promise of sorts that if we listen to Conference with the Spirit,
1. We will find our heart softened.
2. We will find our faith strengthened.
3. We will find our capacity to love the Lord increased.
I like his supposition made early in the talk: "I am grateful that you have come to the conference to feel inspiration from heaven and to feel closer to our Heavenly Father and to the Lord Jesus Christ." There are other reasons to participate in conference, or to seek something spiritually, but President Eyring picked these two: to feel inspiration from heaven and to feel closer to God.
There are at least a few probable implications from this statement:
1. These are commonly held needs by the conference audience, specifically, Latter-day Saints and friends.
2. We are self-aware that we have these needs.
3. The proceedings in General Conference are able to meet these needs.
4. We have a hope that in Conference, or through Conference, we may have these needs met.
5. Perhaps these are the two most important reasons for General Conference.
I like how these needs apply almost universally to everyone, no matter age or stage: married, widowed, divorced, single, very young, very old, lonely, overwhelmed, frustrated, seeking, in crisis, etc.
I also like how President Eyring is not saying something about learning what we are doing wrong, or being filled with guilt, or rejoicing in our own superiority, or finding some reason to leave or be angry at the Church. Of course, if someone is listening in that mindset, they are free to see thoughts and expressions from that perspective. But that is certainly not in either the tenor nor the explicit content of President Eyring's remarks.
He turns to the parable of the sower as the text to address the needs of his audience, those who are spiritually disillusioned, but with a spiritual past.
"The survival of the seed and its growth depended on the condition of the soil."
"Again, the seed is the word of God. The soil is the heart of the person who receives the seed."
Parables can be read many ways; that is one of their strengths. Here, President Eyring frames the parable in a certain way, similarly to how Jesus frames it in the Gospels. In a sermon or a talk, this sort of framework is valuable, perhaps even essential for putting the parable in the desired context of the speaker.
"We have all had seeds, or the word of God, planted in our hearts at one time....Each felt that the seed was good, even felt the swelling in our hearts, and experienced joy as our hearts and mind seemed to expand."
President Eyring is making a supposition that all of those in the audience have not only received the word of God, and have acknowledged it as such, but that the word of God, at least at one time, has had a positive impact. He is appealing to bright memories of spiritual peaks in our personal past.
"All of us have had our faith tested" by various ways.
This is a frank acknowledgment that the relationship between our spiritual lives and the parable of the sower is not a straightforward, linear relationship. Discipleship is not fatalistic; nor is it a one-time event or even a one-time process. We need to be constantly aware of the health of our faith and our testimony, and take steps to see that the seed is nourished and strengthened. An implication is that our faith, our testimony, our spiritual life can ebb and flow like the tide or an economic cycle.
"There will be a precious opportunity in the next few days to have our hearts softened and to receive and nourish the seed....They have prayed to have the power to encourage you to make the choices that will create in your heart a more fertile ground for the good word of God to grow and be fruitful. If you listen with the Spirit, you will find your heart softened, your faith strengthened, and your capacity to love the Lord increased."
This a dramatic turning inward of the condition of soil: it is our responsibility to make the choices that may create in my heart a more fertile ground. And the Church offers opportunities for our heart to be softened. Members of the Church at all levels are invested in your spiritual development, in the condition of your heart, and want to provide opportunities for growth and development.
President Eyring makes a promise of sorts that if we listen to Conference with the Spirit,
1. We will find our heart softened.
2. We will find our faith strengthened.
3. We will find our capacity to love the Lord increased.
Thursday, August 4, 2016
Elder Oaks and Opposition
In April 2016, Elder Dallin H. Oaks gave a talk called, "Opposition in All Things".
Elder Oaks opens the talk by quoting from The Family: A Proclamation to the World: "The purpose of mortal life for the children of God is to provide the experiences needed 'to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny as heirs of eternal life.'"
There are a couple of phrases to note:
1. "Progress toward perfection" is not "achieve perfection" or "reach perfection." This is something we are moving towards, as an end destination on a long journey, as if getting on the highway are the first steps on a long road trip.
2. "Ultimately realize their divine destiny as heirs of eternal life".
2a. In this phrase, the word "ultimately" suggests the possibility of a long time frame before this is realized. Also, the use of the term "realized" is different than "achieved." The wording could refer to something given or something earned, but is ambiguous, perhaps intentionally.
2b. The term "heirs of eternal life" hearkens back to New Testament teachings in Romans 8:17 and Revelation 3:21, that of reigning with God as joint-heirs with Christ, or sitting with God on His throne. Such sitting does not refer to just taking a relaxing break, but refers to inheriting the rich reward of living God's life and participating in the divine work to bring about the eternal life and immortality of God's children.
This quotation further suggests that life is not a static nor passive experience; it is for progression, movement. Elder Oaks refers to President Monson in teaching that, "We progress by making choices, by which we are tested to show that we will keep God's commandments."
In other words, how do we move forward? By making choices which show (or are a type of test to show) that we will keep God's commandments.
Elder Oaks continues: "To be tested, we must have the agency to choose between alternatives. To provide alternatives on which to exercise our agency, we must have opposition."
We can consider that agency is a necessary prerequisite for choice; if we are not able to choose, and either have only one option, or have only two options, one of which seems so repulsive as to be unthinkable, agency is not possible. A world of only one choice, would annihilate agency. Similarly, a world of pairs of choices, where one was always unthinkably bad, would also annihilate agency, as there would be only one legitimate choice.
And so Elder Oaks' final point in this paragraph is that to provide alternatives on which to exercise our agency (to make choices), we must have opposition.
If opposition is removed, our actions are no longer defined by agency. Life takes on a completely different tone.
Consider a few examples:
1. What would it look like, for instance, if we only had one style of shirt or shoes to wear?
2. What if a restaurant menu had only one option? What would be the point of a menu?
3. What if we had only one possible career path for us?
As our world includes agency, it includes choices and the opposition to make those choices real. Often, perhaps almost always, we are faced with more than two or three choices, and the choices are not typically good vs. bad, but are often between multiple good things, or multiple ambiguous things.
None of this is to excuse sin or destructive behavior, but we could take some comfort in knowing that choices are designed to be difficult, and that agency requires the best of us. Part of the structural conditions of mortality are that we will make poor choices, we will make mistakes and sin and fall, but that such has not only been foreseen and had provisions made, but that such negative experiences are part of God's plan. There must be contrasts for light, joy, peace, goodness, reconciliation, and truth to mean anything.
Elder Oaks opens the talk by quoting from The Family: A Proclamation to the World: "The purpose of mortal life for the children of God is to provide the experiences needed 'to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny as heirs of eternal life.'"
There are a couple of phrases to note:
1. "Progress toward perfection" is not "achieve perfection" or "reach perfection." This is something we are moving towards, as an end destination on a long journey, as if getting on the highway are the first steps on a long road trip.
2. "Ultimately realize their divine destiny as heirs of eternal life".
2a. In this phrase, the word "ultimately" suggests the possibility of a long time frame before this is realized. Also, the use of the term "realized" is different than "achieved." The wording could refer to something given or something earned, but is ambiguous, perhaps intentionally.
2b. The term "heirs of eternal life" hearkens back to New Testament teachings in Romans 8:17 and Revelation 3:21, that of reigning with God as joint-heirs with Christ, or sitting with God on His throne. Such sitting does not refer to just taking a relaxing break, but refers to inheriting the rich reward of living God's life and participating in the divine work to bring about the eternal life and immortality of God's children.
This quotation further suggests that life is not a static nor passive experience; it is for progression, movement. Elder Oaks refers to President Monson in teaching that, "We progress by making choices, by which we are tested to show that we will keep God's commandments."
In other words, how do we move forward? By making choices which show (or are a type of test to show) that we will keep God's commandments.
Elder Oaks continues: "To be tested, we must have the agency to choose between alternatives. To provide alternatives on which to exercise our agency, we must have opposition."
We can consider that agency is a necessary prerequisite for choice; if we are not able to choose, and either have only one option, or have only two options, one of which seems so repulsive as to be unthinkable, agency is not possible. A world of only one choice, would annihilate agency. Similarly, a world of pairs of choices, where one was always unthinkably bad, would also annihilate agency, as there would be only one legitimate choice.
And so Elder Oaks' final point in this paragraph is that to provide alternatives on which to exercise our agency (to make choices), we must have opposition.
If opposition is removed, our actions are no longer defined by agency. Life takes on a completely different tone.
Consider a few examples:
1. What would it look like, for instance, if we only had one style of shirt or shoes to wear?
2. What if a restaurant menu had only one option? What would be the point of a menu?
3. What if we had only one possible career path for us?
As our world includes agency, it includes choices and the opposition to make those choices real. Often, perhaps almost always, we are faced with more than two or three choices, and the choices are not typically good vs. bad, but are often between multiple good things, or multiple ambiguous things.
None of this is to excuse sin or destructive behavior, but we could take some comfort in knowing that choices are designed to be difficult, and that agency requires the best of us. Part of the structural conditions of mortality are that we will make poor choices, we will make mistakes and sin and fall, but that such has not only been foreseen and had provisions made, but that such negative experiences are part of God's plan. There must be contrasts for light, joy, peace, goodness, reconciliation, and truth to mean anything.
Be Thou Humble, Part II
In Elder Steven E. Snow's talk on Humility given in April 2016 General Conference, he recounts a challenge where his 15 year-old son had a serious head injury, spent a week in a coma, and had some serious side effects, including short term memory loss. This blindsided the family.
"Honestly, we wondered how such a thing could happen. We had always strived to do the right things. Living the gospel had been a high priority for our family. We couldn't understand how something so painful could happen to us."
I like this honest admission of befuddlement, of bafflement, of not understanding why God would let something like this happen. There appear in these words an almost confession in the mistaken notion that in striving to keep the commandments and live righteously, we avoid pain, suffering, and hardship.
In the talk, Elder Snow sees at least one purpose for this experience, which seems to be that he and his wife, as well as his son, became more humble.
Mosiah 2:41 we read that "those that keep the commandments of God" are in a "blessed and happy state," and that "They are blessed in all things, both temporal and spiritual."
Perhaps sometimes we misread this scripture as if it reads, "They are blessed in all things, according to all of their desires, and avoid any hardship, trials, or difficulties, both temporal and spiritual."
What is the difference between the two readings? While King Benjamin is clear people are blessed temporally and spiritually, it is unclear exactly what type of blessings, temporal and spiritual, are offered.
In my expanded second reading, the blessed received according to all of their desires, which blessings preclude difficulty, hardship, or trials. King Benjamin teaches no such principle. He frankly admits to the physical frailties of old age, for instance.
Perhaps sometimes we miss the blessings that we do receive temporally and spiritually because of our fidelity and obedience to God and His Church. This could be further complicated by seeing other blessings (physical objects, mental states of mind, circumstances, etc.) that we may want but which are as yet unrealized, and perhaps may never be realized in the way that we would like. But Mosiah 2:41 does not say that God gives every blessing to every righteous person. The scripture merely states that the obedient are blessed in all things. It does not say anything about the type and manner of blessings the blessed receive.
Similarly, the Book of Mormon includes the promise, even the covenant, that those who keep the commandments prosper in the land. But this is often contrasted with those who do not obey God, and are cast out of His presence (see, for instance, 1 Nephi 2:20-21). Much more could and perhaps should be said on this, but for now, suffice it to say that prospering in the Book of Mormon is not just an increase in material wealth, nor an avoidance of pain, suffering and trial. It does appear to be about God being with us, to strengthen and bless us in God's way, and not ours.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)