Week 15 - 20 March 2016: "Beauty for Ashes"

Dear Luke,

I am going to postpone the series on Lesson 1 again.  Yesterday was a very special Sunday. The Provo City Center Temple was dedicated, and I wanted to share with you a little bit of its history.

On December 16, 2010, the Millennium Choir, accompanied by an orchestra and some other singers from the University of Utah and Utah Valley University, performed their dress rehearsal of the masterpice Gloria by Lex de Azevedo in the Provo Tabernacle. They were to have a Christmas concert the following day, but the dress rehearsal would be the final performance within the walls of the tabernacle.  It burned that night.  The final words of the piece repeatedly echo "Gloria in excelsis deo" which means "Glory to God in the highest."

The fire was devastating. Attempts were made to distinguish the fire, but to no avail.  All the fire crews could do was cool the outer walls. Everything within was burned.

Embers remained smoldering two days after the fire, even in the cold of winter.

But the miraculous history of the now Provo City Center Temple would begin within these smoldering ashes. Shortly after the fire, President Richards (I believe he was the stake president of the area but I could be mistaken) peered through a window of the demolished tabernacle.  He said he could "clearly see the image of the Savior among the charred rubble. The wall that had supported the picture was even destroyed. Nearly all of the material goods, some of significant cost, were destroyed, but that image stood as a clear reminder that we should remember the Savior. It didn't make it through the ordeal without damage - but left us with a perfect reminder of whose house this was... And why there remains great reason to hope, even in the midst of smoking rubble," (Provo's Two Temples by Richard O. Cowan and Justin R. Bray).

The painting was Harry Anderson's The Second Coming.

The depth of hope which was laid in store for the Provo Tabernacle was surely unbeknownst to President Richards as he said those words. In October General Conference of the following year, President Monson announced, "Late last year the Provo Tabernacle in Utah County was seriously damaged by a terrible fire. This wonderful building, much beloved by generations of Latter-day Saints, was left with only the exterior walls standing. After careful study, we have decided to rebuild it with full preservation and restoration of the exterior, to become the second temple of the Church in the city of Provo."  The demolished tabernacle was to become the most sacred of buildings, a bridge between heaven and earth, a temple.

The Groundbreaking Ceremony took place on May 12, 2012.  Sister Holland (Elder Holland's wife) and Elder Whitney Clayton of the Seventy spoke that day.  They quoted Isaiah 33:20 and Psalms 30:5 respectively.  Together they read, "Look upon Zion, the city of our solemnities: thine eyes shall see Jerusalem a quiet habitation, a tabernacle that shall not be taken down... weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning." 

Under the direction of the First Presidency, the interior was constructed to reflect the original architecture, thus adding to the already rich symbolism within the temple's history.  

Now the Provo City Center Temple stands as a symbol of hope. I was able to walk through it during the open house.  It is gorgeous.  Every inch reflects the hopeful words of Sister Holland and Elder Clayton.

Yesterday, the Provo City Center Temple was dedicated.  I do not believe it to be coincidence that the Hosanna Shout which christens the temple's dedication was performed on Palm Sunday; the very day that we celebrate Christ's triumphal entry into Jerusalem midst shouts of "Hosanna; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the Highest" (Mark 11:9-10).  

The story of the Provo City Center Temple is a magnificent one and full of hope.  From the last sung words which echoed through its halls, "Gloria, gloria in excelsis deo, Glory to God in the Highest!" to  the fire, despair, and destruction, to the hopeful image of Christ's Second Coming within the ashes, President Monson's triumphant announcement, the Ground Breaking Ceremony, the restoration, the Dedication and Hosanna Shout. In the words of Elder Wirthlin, it makes me "think of how dark that Friday was when Christ was lifted up on the cross.

"On that terrible Friday the earth shook and grew dark. Frightful storms lashed at the earth.
Those evil men who sought His life rejoiced. Now that Jesus was no more, surely those who followed Him would disperse. On that day they stood triumphant.

"On that day the veil of the temple was rent in twain.

"Mary Magdalene and Mary, the mother of Jesus, were both overcome with grief and despair. The superb man they had loved and honored hung lifeless upon the cross.

"On that Friday the Apostles were devastated. Jesus, their Savior—the man who had walked on water and raised the dead—was Himself at the mercy of wicked men. They watched helplessly as He was overcome by His enemies.

"On that Friday the Savior of mankind was humiliated and bruised, abused and reviled.

"It was a Friday filled with devastating, consuming sorrow that gnawed at the souls of those who loved and honored the Son of God.

"I think that of all the days since the beginning of this world’s history, that Friday was the darkest.

"But the doom of that day did not endure.

"The despair did not linger because on Sunday, the resurrected Lord burst the bonds of death. He ascended from the grave and appeared gloriously triumphant as the Savior of all mankind.

"And in an instant the eyes that had been filled with ever-flowing tears dried. The lips that had whispered prayers of distress and grief now filled the air with wondrous praise, for Jesus the Christ, the Son of the living God, stood before them as the firstfruits of the Resurrection, the proof that death is merely the beginning of a new and wondrous existence.

"Each of us will have our own Fridays—those days when the universe itself seems shattered and the shards of our world lie littered about us in pieces. We all will experience those broken times when it seems we can never be put together again. We will all have our Fridays.

"But I testify to you in the name of the One who conquered death—Sunday will come. In the darkness of our sorrow, Sunday will come."

I echo Elder Wirthlin's powerful testimony. I know that "in Christ shall all be made alive," (1 Corinthians 15:22).  I know that "there is a resurrection, therefore the grave hath no victory, and the sting of death is swallowed up in Christ... Even this mortal shall put on immortality, and this corruption shall put on incorruption... to the resurrection of endless life and happiness," (Mosiah 16:8, 10-11).  I know that we can be restored through Him.  We often speak of the restoration of all things. Through the resurrecting power of Atonement of Jesus Christ we may experience a restoration of hope, a restoration of souls, and a restoration of families.

This is the message that you share every day to those you teach.  It is also the message taught within the Holy Temples and symbolized by the Provo City Center Temple's unique and marvelous history. What greater reason have we to rejoice? "Hosanna! Hosanna to God and the Lamb! Let glory to them in the highest be given henceforth and forever, amen and amen!" (The Spirit of God).

I'd like to finish up with this scripture:

"The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound... To give unto them beauty for ashes," (Isaiah 61:1, 3).

I love you, Luke! Keep spreading the good news.

Week 14 - 06 March 2016: An Ultra-liberal, Far Left, Sanders-Supporting Democrat Mormon

Luke responded to my letter about religious harmony a couple weeks ago:

"I actually had a some bad experiences concerning the subject you wrote about last week.  First, everyone in my apartment called every other religion the church of the devil in reference to  1 Nephi 13-14.  I would like to know more about [what Nephi refers to as] church of the devil... if you have time someday because I protested by saying it was just a representation of people that knowingly preached false doctrine, false doctrine in itself, and people that work iniquity, not a specific church such as the catholic church or any other religion in itself.  I would like to know what scholars and the apostles and prophets have said concerning the church of the devil.  Thank you!! Love you have a great week!

I also had a member rip a JW pamphlet (more like a big pass along card) out of my hands and tear it up saying: "I'm of the church of Christ not the church of the devil like them,"... and I also got called apostate a lot this week.  I'm beginning to think that I should not share my views because they just cause tension."

Dear Luke,

I anticipated continuing with my series of letters about Lesson 1 this week, but I think a good response to this email is much more important.  Misinterpretations of 1 Nephi 13-14 and Joseph Smith - History are largely at the root of discord between Mormonism and other churches.  That's very unfortunate.  I think you did a fantastic job explaining what the "church of the devil" refers to in 1 Nephi 13-14. I know dad sent you a link to an article titled, "Warring against the Saints of God." That's about the best answer I can give as well.  You could look at Fair Mormon's site if you want.  They make it clear that there has been a great diversity of opinions among leaders on the subject throughout the history of the Church.  That's the best I've got since I have not been able to find any official statement.  I'll include a little bit about the abominable creeds mentioned in Joseph Smith - History next week.

But I am much more interested in the final sentence of your response, "I'm beginning to think that I should not share my views because they just cause tension."  I felt that way many times on my mission, and, for the record, I was also called apostate many, many times on my mission.  I'm not apostate and neither are you. Take it with a grain of salt.

I wrote you about large scale harmony between religions a couple weeks ago.  Let's call that inter-religious harmony.  There's also a smaller scale of intra-religious harmony.  The same principles apply.  Diversity and cooperation are key. Without diversity, we have a boring piece, indeed. Without cooperation, we have an ugly piece to listen to as the dissonance of notes pain our ears.

In fact, Elder Wirthlin's quote, which I adapted in the other email, originally referred to intra-religious harmony. This time I'll include a paragraph of context. Elder Wirthlin said, "Some are lost because they are different. They feel as though they don’t belong. Perhaps because they are different, they find themselves slipping away from the flock. They may look, act, think, and speak differently than those around them and that sometimes causes them to assume they don’t fit in. They conclude that they are not needed.

Tied to this misconception is the erroneous belief that all members of the Church should look, talk, and be alike. The Lord did not people the earth with a vibrant orchestra of personalities only to value the piccolos of the world. Every instrument is precious and adds to the complex beauty of the symphony. All of Heavenly Father’s children are different in some degree, yet each has his own beautiful sound that adds depth and richness to the whole."

I included the context because it expresses the danger of anything that is not intra-religious harmony.  For the purpose of this letter, I'll generalize the diversity in two camps.  One camp is liberal, questioning, and progressive.  The other camp is conservative, unquestioning, and traditionalist. But instead of harmonious diversity, we often see a culture of mutual exclusivity and authoritarianism between the camps.  It is a culture that says, "I am right and righteous, and you are wrong and apostate."  I feel very strongly that this is a big contributing factor of the "faith crisis" among millennials that the Brethren are so concerned about.  It is no secret that our generation is more liberal than preceding generations. It is also no secret that it is most often the liberal minority camp which ends up being falsely labeled as apostate by those who hold no authority to make such judgments.  Feelings of being ostracized and loneliness and discomfort and rejection, drive liberal millennial Mormons away, and I sympathize with them. They are in large part victims of an ugly and persisting culture. Perhaps you felt something similar.

There is no need to argue about your specific viewpoints. There's no need to try to convince people that you are right. You don't need to share your ideas if you don't want to.  But you must stand up for diversity of opinion and against labels and exclusivity!  The lack of diversity brought on by exclusivity is more than just boring.  I fear that it could lead to the demise of the Church that we love.  Let it be known that it is OK to be a Mormon and support gay marriage, just as much as it is OK to be a Mormon that opposes gay marriage.  It is OK to be a Mormon and be pro-choice. It is OK to be a Mormon who doesn't believe abortion is right under any circumstances.  It is OK to be in-between. It is OK to be a Mormon and support the legalization of marijuana. It is OK to oppose the legalization of marijuana.  It is OK to be a Mormon and believe in Socialism. It is OK to oppose Socialism. It is OK to be a Mormon and a feminist.  It is OK to be a Mormon and support traditional gender roles in family. In short, it is OK to be an ultra-liberal, far left, Sanders-supporting democrat Mormon, and it's just as OK to be an ultra-conservative, far right, Trump-supporting republican Mormon.  It's OK to believe in evolution.  It's OK to believe that other Churches lead to salvation.  It's OK to disagree with the new policy concerning the children of gay marriages. It's OK to not "know" everything.  It's OK to doubt. It's OK to believe that prophets make mistakes.  It's OK to believe that the priesthood ban was a mistake.  It's OK to believe polygamy was a mistake.  Here's a kicker: it's OK to believe that the Book of Mormon is not historically true.  There is room for diversity in the great tent of Zion!

Joseph Smith famously said, "By proving contraries, the truth is made manifest," (History of the Church 6:428). My fear of the great detriment that lack of diversity can have on the Church is born from this concept.  If one "camp" is driven out, one of the contraries will no longer be represented, and it will be difficult for truth to be made manifest.  Joseph Smith also said, "The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it." Agree on those things.  Let the appendages give rise to beautifully diverse schools of thought.  I like to visualize it like this.

This is known as "The Tree of Forty Fruit." Sam Van Aken, conceptualized this tree and brought his goal to quite literal fruition. He said of it, "There are hundreds if not thousands of individual stone fruit varieties or cultivars within the family of stone fruits including peach, plum, apricot, nectarine, cherry, and almond. Within each of these species of fruit there is extraordinary variation in color of blossom, bloom time, leaf pattern, fruit size, form, color, texture, and taste. Due to the similarity of their chromosomal structure it is possible to “graft” these varieties together to form a single tree." The trunk is built of the fundamental principles of the Atonement, the Godhead, and love. These principles are comparable to the chromosomal similarity which allow the limbs to be grafted in and contribute to the beauty of the whole. The limbs are the appendages, which produce the magnificent diversity of foliage, fruit and blossom which Van Aken described. 

Now, even if one doesn't agree on the core doctrines, there's no reason to ostracize him for it.  For many years, my only testimony was simply that the Church taught good principles.  I wasn't sure about Joseph Smith or even the existence of God.  Let those with doubts grow, and support them.  As long as we are all honestly seeking the truth, and seeking to do good, it's OK.

I want to to conclude with several disclaimers. I want to make it clear that I was not professing my personal views in the perspectives I listed above. I agree with some and disagree with others, but I know that there are upstanding, worthy, temple recommend holding members which hold each one of those views.  That needs to be known. I have friends who I love which have drifted away from the Church because they have views which they feel are not compatible with the Church's doctrine.  I respect them, and I respect their decision to leave the Church, but I also respectfully disagree with them in one regard. Their views are, in fact, compatible with the Church's doctrine.  Their views are not, however, compatible with the ugly and persisting culture of authoritarian exclusivity.

From my experience in South America, the liberal, questioning, progressive camp is virtually non-existent.  They seem to have a very conservative culture in the Church.  I imagine it is somewhat like the Church's general culture during the mid to late 1900's.  I don't believe they have the same type of faith crisis among millennials that we have in the United States.  It is still important to help them to open their minds to other opinions.  As I said in my last letter, it is only after one has opened his mind to new ideas that his heart can explore with real intent, and eventually find truth. It just might be wise to understand and consider the cultural background of your audience. Be careful and sensitive about how you approach things.

If sharing your viewpoints causes tension, consider that maybe you are being arrogant.  I understand that it can be frustrating.  I've been there.  But understand that an enlightened mind is in no way superior to a believing heart.  Never seek to instill doubt in others.  If you feel that sharing a certain viewpoint might instill doubt in a companion's heart, maybe it would be better not to share that viewpoint.  Just focus on helping to open minds to new ideas, helping others to be more tolerant of conflicting ideas, building faith in others and yourself, and helping to promote a culture of harmonious diversity.

I also realize that I am biased.  The very title of this letter witnesses that.  I have two reasons for expressing bias in this letter.  The first is that I do, in fact, have my own opinions as surprising as that might be.  The other is simply because conservative, unquestioning, traditional views are already widely accepted within the Church, while liberal, questioning, progressive views are not so widely accepted.  I want to reiterate that I am not in any way trying to downplay the value of conservative, unquestioning, traditionalist members.  They are just as valuable and needed.  Diversity is essential.

As you gain experience in your mission, you will gain the respect of your peers.  Whether called to leadership positions or not, you can have the influence of a leader. Use your influence to teach your fellow missionaries to love unconditionally in the truest sense of the word, which is to say, regardless of differences of opinion.  Use your influence to teach your peers never to judge the spiritual standing of another. If you have to, use your influence to teach other missionaries that they have no authority to label others as apostate.* Use your influence to promote a culture of faith, and harmonious diversity.  All of these things echo the teachings of Christ in an environment dominated by the authoritative and exclusive culture of the Pharisees.  You might consider studying the four gospels through that lens in your personal study.

I love you, Luke! Stay strong! Endure to the end.



*The irony is actually kind of funny because the way they use the word, they themselves are apostate since they are labeling others as apostate without the authority to label others as apostate. That authority is given to disciplinary councils under the keys of judges of Israel, that is, either a stake president or a bishop.  But you probably shouldn't call them out on that because it will only escalate the tension.

Week 13 - 27 February 2016: The Convincing of an Atheist

Dear Luke,

This week I am going to begin a series of letters about Lesson 1, The Message of the Restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  I'll write at least one letter per section.  I'll probably write two for most of them, including the first section, which is titled, "God Is Our Loving Heavenly Father."

I thought it might be appropriate to begin with some ideas about teaching this lesson to a person who does not believe in God.  I assume Brazil is similar to Chile in that most people are Christian, and mostly Catholic and Evangelical, but even in Chile, we would occasionally have to opportunity to share our message with  person who does not believe in God at all.  If other missionaries are like I was, many don't feel very well prepared for such teaching situations, and it is difficult for them to develop a teaching strategy.

Before developing a strategy, the missionary first has to understand a fallacy that exists among some atheists; they proclaim that God cannot exist because science proves it to be so.  Science is used as a sort of superficial excuse to hide a deeper issue.  Doctor Christian Smith of Notre Dame University pointed out this fallacy very effectively a few weeks ago in his BYU Forum speech.  He said, "I think that when we get down to it, a good part of what motivates [many of the scientists which pretend to have proven God does not exist] to reject God, religion, and other non-naturalistic, metaphysical views, are not actually the findings of science, but instead personal, moral, and emotional objections... Years of discussion and observation have suggested to me that in many cases if one scratches just below the surface of many allegedly scientific objections to religion one finds not real scientific problems, but instead personal, moral, and emotional concerns." Dr. Smith goes on to cite one of these scientists, "Maybe at the very bottom of it,.. I really don't like God. You know, it's silly to say I don't like God because I don't believe in God, but in the same sense that I don't like lago... or any of the other villains of literature, the God of traditional Judaism and Christianity and Islam seems to me a terrible character.  He is a god who [is] obsessed [with] the degree to which people worship him and anxious to punish with the most awful torments those who don't worship him in the right way. The traditional god [is] a terrible character.  I don't like him."

Is that not the case of the people of Ammonihah who said to Alma, "We will not believe thy words if thou shouldst prophesy that this great city should be destroyed in one day," (Alma 9:4)?  It can be difficult to believe in a loving God who allows suffering.  Quite honestly, I sympathize with atheists who feel that a loving God would not allow for the suffering caused by natural disasters, disease, and starvation in some areas of the world. Except to say that these calamities promote a sense of community over ego-centrism, courage over cowardice, and humility over pride, I have no theory as to why God allows these things to happen, and I understand that my answer may not be satisfactory most.  I do not pretend to understand the will of God.  For now, the best answer I can give is a quotation of Isaiah, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.  For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts," (Isaiah 55:8-9).  Which is, in a way, a glorified way of saying, "I don't have the answer."

So once the missionary has understood that there is very possibly a deeper question to be answered, he might understand that leading off with trying to convince the atheist that God does exist, might not be the best strategy.  An atheist who has made the conscious decision to not believe in God, has at least at one time accepted the possibility that there is a God.  If you can convince an atheist that there is a possibility that God exists, you have done most of your part, and as the existence of God can be neither proven nor disproven, this shouldn't be very difficult.  Once minds are opened to possibilities, hearts can explore with real intent.

The next step might be to convince the atheist that the notion of God can be good.  C. S. Lewis illustrated this idea in his book, The Screwtape Letters.  Something you have to understand about the book is that all of the teachings about Christianity are presented from the perspective of demons, so the principles should be applied in reverse.  One demon wrote to another, "Man has been accustomed, ever since he was a boy, to having a dozen incompatible philosophies dancing about together inside his head. He doesn't think of doctrines as primarily "true" or "false," but as "academic" or "practical," "outworn" or "contemporary," "conventional" or "ruthless." Jargon, not argument, is your best ally in keeping him from the Church. Don't waste time trying to make him think that materialism is true! Make him think it is strong or stark or courageous—that it is the philosophy of the future. That's the sort of thing he cares about." The message in the context of my letter to you is, don't waste your time trying to convince an atheist that God is real.  Convince him first that God can be associated with good things which may be valuable to the atheist such as rational thought, academia, practicality, and logic.

The philosopher mathematician Blaise Pascal achieved this with his famous wager. According to Wikipedia, the basic outline of Pascal's Wager is the following:

1. God is, or God is not. Reason cannot decide between the two alternatives.
2. A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.
3. You must wager (it is not optional).
4. Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.
5. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.

The basic logic of his decision theory is that the possibility of infinite gain is of more value than the possibility of a finite loss (such as not participating in immoral activity) and so choosing to believe in God is a more rational choice.

A third step is to remind.  In the premortal existence, we all chose to follow Christ.  Perhaps some vestiges of that experience remain within the souls of men.  Perhaps Elder Packer's words refer to such vestiges, "A teacher of gospel truths is not planting something foreign or even new into an adult or a child. Rather, the missionary or teacher is making contact with the Spirit of Christ already there. The gospel will have a familiar ‘ring’ to them," (quoted in Preach My Gospel Chapter 4).  B. H. Roberts said, "To be known, the truth must be stated and the clearer and more complete the statement is, the better the opportunity will the Holy Spirit have for testifying to the souls of men that the work is true," (Quoted in Preach My Gospel Chapter 10).  As you teach the purest of truths, even to an atheist with an open mind, the Holy Spirit can make contact with the Spirit of Christ within the man you teach, and testify with convincing power to his soul.  He will be reminded in a way.  The truth will have a familiar ring to it.

When I speak of these purest truths, I make reference to those truths found in the first section of Lesson 1. "God is our loving Heavenly Father.  We are His children... We can communicate with Him through sincere prayer... We can show our love for Him through our choices and our obedience to His commandments...  Central to our Father's plan is Jesus Christ's Atonement...Through the Atonement we can be freed from the burden of our sins and develop faith and strength to face our trials."  These are the convincing truths of which the Spirit can most powerfully testify.

There is one other tool which can be very effective in convincing an atheist because it communicates the purest of truths.  Joseph Smith described it as "the most correct of any book on earth," (Introduction to the Book of Mormon).  The book itself was written "to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God," (Title Page of the Book of Mormon).  The book is, of course, the Book of Mormon.  For some reason, missionaries are so often afraid to give away a Book of Mormon before teaching Lesson 1 in its entirety.  Quite frankly, I think the very worst place for the book to be is on the shelf of your apartment.  At least if it has been given to someone, there is some chance, that someday, someone might read it.  Don't be afraid to give away a Book of Mormon even though you haven't even taught about prophets and Joseph's vision.  It is more important that the Book of Mormon be a witness of Christ than a witness of Joseph Smith's role as prophet.  A brief introduction is all that is necessary.

But I'll write more about the Book of Mormon later.  I love you Luke! Have a great week!