Posted on 04/21/2004 9:40:18 PM PDT by restornu
An honest man was being tailgated by a stressed-out woman on a busy boulevard. Suddenly, the light turned yellow, just in front of him. He did the right thing, stopping at the crosswalk, even though he could have beaten the red light by accelerating through the intersection. The tailgating woman hit the roof, and the horn, screaming in frustration as she missed her chance to get through the intersection with him.
As she was still in mid-rant, she heard a tap on her window and looked up into the face of a very serious police officer. The officer ordered her to exit her car with her hands up. He took her to the police station where she was searched, fingerprinted, photographed, and placed in a cell.
After a couple of hours, a policeman approached the cell and opened the door. The woman was escorted back to the booking desk where the arresting officer was waiting with her personal effects. He said, "I'm very sorry for this mistake. You see, I pulled up behind your car while you were blowing your horn and cussing a blue streak at the guy in front of you. I noticed the 'Choose Life' license plate holder, the 'What Would Jesus Do' bumper sticker and the chrome-plated Christian fish emblem on the trunk. Naturally, I assumed you had stolen the car.”
The story may or may not be apocryphal. But it illustrates the challenge we all face: making sure that our behavior squares with our professed values.
Personal Responsibility
Personal responsibility is a virtue we all want in others, and most of us claim as a defining characteristic of ourselves.
That’s not a casual statement. I have hard data on it. Over the years I’ve interviewed and surveyed hundreds of thousands of people regarding the culture in their organizations. I always ask questions about performance – the performance of the respondent and the performance of others. Virtually without exception, individuals regard themselves as reliable and responsible. They believe they are held accountable to high standards. But when the same questions are applied to others, respondents usually have a different story. They believe that at least some of their colleagues provide less than robust performance.
For example, in one company where I recently did a culture diagnostic, 76% of employees agreed with the statement “I am always held accountable for performing at a high level.” Among the same employee force, however, only 9% agreed with the statement “At (name of company), people who don’t pull their fair share of the load are promptly held accountable.”
Aside from the logical incongruity of that finding, it underscores a common malady: a blind spot for one’s own foibles or mistakes.
Years ago we kept the following note on the family bulletin board:
That’s Not My Job
This is the story about four people. Their names were Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody.
There was an important job to be done and Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it.
Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did. Somebody got upset about that, because it was Everybody’s job.
Everybody thought Anybody could do it, but Nobody realized that Everybody didn’t do it.
It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could have.
The behavior described in that little ditty is painfully common. It reminds me of when I was growing up as a kid. We kept a water bottle in the refrigerator. The rules, of course, were that (1) you never drank out of the bottle, and (2) you always filled it up after using it.
In reality, of course, my brothers and I often violated the rules. It was not unusual to open the frig and find the bottle not only with just a quarter inch of water in it but with bread crumbs floating on the top. Everybody blamed Somebody when … well, you get the idea.
Living What We Profess
In a recent Gospel Doctrine class, we discussed a number of scriptures that directly apply to the notion of living what we profess:
· Nephi’s admonition that we “must press forward with a steadfastness in Christ.” (2 Nephi 31:20)
· The importance of asking God, in the name of Christ, to consecrate our performance. (2 Nephi 32:9)
· Jacob’s wonderful teachings on magnifying our callings. (Jacob 1:17-19)
Regarding that last point, we gain further insight and instruction in D&C 58:26-28. In this revelation we’re reminded that we should not need to be commanded in all things (a heavenly twist on “That’s Not My Job”), and that by our own free will we should be anxiously engaged in good causes.
In Jacob 4:10 we’re reminded that we should “seek not to counsel the Lord” but rather to “take counsel from his hand.” In an intellectual sense, that doctrine is easy to grasp. In actual practice, however, it’s sometimes a challenge. On occasion we ask the Lord to guide us, then we grab the steering wheel.
In Jacob 5 we read of Zenos’ allegory of the olive tree. A central theme in the allegory is stewardship. A stewardship is a job with a purpose. (See an earlier column, “Think Like a Steward, Perform Like a Patriot.”)
When we are faithful in our stewardships, we magnify our callings. We don’t need to be commanded in all things. We are proactive. We go the second mile. And, of course, faithfulness in our own callings is an integral part of our genuine sustaining of others in their callings. Ask any bishop how important good home teaching and visiting teaching are to the effectiveness of his service as the ward’s shepherd.
Then we studied the Book of Enos. Here we see one of the finest examples of personal religion in the scriptures. The fervent prayer offered up by Enos illustrates the expanding concern of a righteous person – first for himself, next for his own people, and finally for his enemies. Enos provides a model of humility and openness to the Lord’s teaching.
Doctrines Pure and Simple
These doctrines are pure and they are simple. So pure and simple, in fact, that they can easily be missed.
Years ago while serving as a stake president I sought out a high priest who had been completely inactive in the Church for more than a decade. I asked him why he had chosen that path. He said he was called to serve as stake mission president and he developed a plan for the calling. His stake president had a different vision for missionary efforts in the stake, and asked him to adjust his plan.
“I felt really strongly about the plan I had developed, and I resisted the stake president’s instruction,” the man told me. “When it because obvious that my approach would not be followed, I asked to be released. Then I just drifted away from the Church.”
“Well, I guess you really showed him, didn’t you?” I said. “To demonstrate your independence, you’ve estranged yourself from the faith you once defended. Meanwhile, your wife and children have been denied the benefits of your participation, and your temple blessings are held in suspension while you ignore your covenants.”
It was very straight talk, and fortunately the man came to his senses and returned to activity.
Living what we profess requires a special kind of commitment. The doctrines of the Restoration are not always easy, and the natural man frequently gets in the way. Our challenge, of course, is to emulate the strength and faith of people like Nephi and Jacob and Enos.
Sorry Alex Murphy this is not the-
O'k Corral Shoot'em Out!
Not interested in notches, another reminder of this thread is "Living What We Profess!"
First of all, I didn't know I had a "group"; actually, if you preview a # of my posts, I have directly discussed Mr. Duncan or what he wrote: I addressed his point about engaging in good causes of our own free will (#71); I addressed the break in fulfilling the biological commission in his family (#77); and I addressed the following the previous section of posts:
"So how does this fully relate to living responsibly? LDS apostle says 'we are responsible by conduct and by covenants to live the standards of the gospel.' (Full quote: 'Our critics' belief, based on the Bible, holds that man is saved by grace alone. Theirs is by far the easier way. Our position, also based on the Bible but strengthened by other scriptures, holds that we are saved by grace 'after all we can do,' (2 Ne. 25:23.) and we are responsible by conduct and by covenants to live the standards of the gospel.' - Boyd K. Packer, "The Peaceable Followers of Christ," Ensign, Apr. 1998, p. 65). But the gospel literally means "good news." News is not a standard, a law, a precept, an ordinance, to obey, it's news. Jesus dying on the cross is front-page news, a historical event; you ARE forgiven is front-page news, not another "thou shalt"; Jesus rising from the dead is good news, not more sweaty merit badges you have notch on your spiritual belt."
I agree, and I'm glad you pointed this out for Rising Tide to hear. In an on-line setting, there's no way for anyone to verify personal claims anyway. Case in point - I myself am 6'3", in my thirties, and have sun-bleached bronze colored hair. I can bench press more than 250 pounds. I drive a truck for a living, and I wear my father's dogtags from the military.
But you have no way of verifying that sort of information. You're just going to have to accept my word on it, like you'd have to accept my word (and likewise I'd have to accept yours) on what my "walk" entails and whether you or I are "Living What We Profess". Being obedient is a good thing. What we are obedient to, and why, and with what results are issues that you will simply have to accept my disagreements over.
Baptism to obey? Baptism is an act of God, not of man (Acts 2:38; Titus 3:5). God clearly assumes the initiative with His grace. Man, being dead in sin (Eph. 2:1), cannot assume the initiative anymore than Lazarus could have requested to have Jesus raise him from the dead (John 11). No one can even say that the real Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:3). God receives 100% credit for it is 100% His work (John 6:28-29); for Christ Himself chose us--we did not choose Him (John 15:16).
Repentance to obey? Repentance merely means "to do a u-turn" (like the prodigal son). If you call the prodigal son wandering back home some great feat or accomplishment, then you're barking up the wrong spiritual tree. It was the Father who ran to him; it was the Father who royally clothed his pig-sty presence; it was the Father's 100% acceptance despite the son's betrayal; it was the Father's provision fully, feast and all, that signified full restoration.
Too many of us identify ourselves with the other brother who had been with the Lord always, when relationally with the Father, we've been just as far off as the prodigal son.
Commandments to obey? Is keeping free from adultery a commandment? Indeed. So, is simply obeying God's commandment the real motivation & purpose behind me adhering to that? No! Keeping this commandment is a by-product of my life by way of fully loving my spouse. I want and desire to keep this commandment for lifetime relational commitment reasons--not because I haveto commandment-wise.
Likewise, the Bible continually describes our relationship with Christ in Bride-bridegroom terms (2 Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5; Rev. 19:7-9, etc.). We want to please our beloved bridegroom, for our marriage is relationally and covenant-focused, not rules & regulations, principles and ordinances-based.
As the Holy Spirit bears witness, and as I bear witness, that book (the Doctrine and Covenants) contains the words of Jesus Christ in the first person, spoken to His modern-day apostle, written down and canonized by His Restored Church, whose members are Christians.
If that does not have authority with some other Christians, what can I say? It certainly should.
I think that the American church needs to repent for having created the fertile ground that led to the likes of Joseph Smith. Someone once said that the "cults are the unpaid bills of the Church."
In part, it was because Joseph Smith observed doctrinal disagreements within Christendom and because too many folks' walk didn't match their talk that was at least part of the factor for him to reject what they adhered to.
Biblically, to obey comes from the literal meaning "to hear." In other words, hearing=obeying. To folks in the West, we have compartmentalized hearing God's Word from obeying it. Hence, we get into typical doctrinal disputes with Mormons where those folks emphasize the works (coupled with faith) while Protestants stress faith (coupled with works).
Faith works. Works are a natural outgrowth of a vital faith. You cannot divorce the two, anymore than we can separate mutual submission from marriage (Eph. 5:22-33). Faithfulness in marriage = servanthood to one another.
I once had an opportunity to compare apples to apples with about 13 Institute directors (those who lead Standard Works' studies @ LDS facilities located near college campuses) in an unusual dialogue.
We were discussing the BoM's use of the terms "eternal" and "everlasting" as applied to the afterlife. Now why is such a study of those words so fascinating?
Simple. In the BoM, those words are often the adjectives used to describe heaven. Guess what? Those same exact words are used to describe hell in the BoM, too. So what? you may say.
The "so what" is this: The entire genealogical/baptism for the dead enterprise w/in the LDS church is built upon the premise that hell won't be eternal or everlasting for just about everybody. Just about everybody is going to go to at least the third degree of heaven; baptism for the dead is founded upon the idea that folks can get out of (temporary) spirit prison by baptizing them by proxy.
But if hell is temporary and not eternal or everlasting, you can't play with words. That means heaven is temporary, too.
The bottom line? Let's go with what Jesus said: "Wide is the road that leads to destruction, narrow is the way to life" (Matthew 7:13)
Much is made in LDS doctrine (almost as a trump card, "We have a living prophet, youuuuu don't!") about how important it is to have a living prophet...LDS constantly cite the one passage from the book of Amos on this. Can you tell me exactly how many words your "living prophet" has passed on the direct words of Jesus or Elohim since 1890? (A rough round # will do).
As individuals, this is an admirable trait that I've observed many devout Mormons seeking to attain. However, like Colofornian observed, I would have expected an LDS hierarchy that professes to be led by Living Prophets, would likewise have received, announced, and canonized modern revelations on a more consistent basis. As an outsider, I observe a huge disconnect between their "living" and their "professing", and this is one of the reasons I disagree with those professions and doctrines they do make. Like the cop in the joke, I have reasons to believe the vehicle is stolen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.