Kirby: Wrestling with doctrine no match for me

Salt Lake Tribune ^ | Nov. 5, 2010 | Robert Kirby

[Colofornian]

In sacrament meeting last week, the bishop got up and announced he had received a letter from the First Presidency. As he prepared to read it, the congregation perked up.

Moments like this are always attention-getters for Mormons. Normally, we get direction from the top during General Conference.

Occasionally something can’t wait and it comes in the form of an official letter from the brethren telling us to start (or stop) doing something.

Because it’s important enough to warrant pronouncement from the top, the subject could be anything from a formal declaration of the Second Coming to an admonishment regarding inappropriate Sabbath footwear.

“This is it,” my brain hollered as the bishop got ready to read. “We’re going back to Jackson County. I told you to change the oil in the truck. C’mon, let’s go find a map!”

“Shut up,” I said.

Apparently that last part was out loud because the last two rows of worshippers turned and looked at me.

The letter turned out to be something of no real concern to me. Basically, it told/counseled rank-and-file Mormons to stop pestering church headquarters for clarification of church doctrine.

Apparently some members get so stressed about the finer points of doctrine that they’ll fire off a letter asking for the final word. Church HQ can’t handle the demand.

I’ve never done this, but a letter calling for doctrinal clarification probably goes something like this:

“Dear President/Elder [Pick One]:

“When is it appropriate for worthy Latter-day Saints to burn a witch?”

“Please settle a bet. I say Neanderthal man could never hold the priesthood.”

“After much prayer and thought, I can’t decide if the Holy Ghost could beat up Optimus Prime.”

“May I use Chapstick on Fast Sunday and still hold a temple recommend?”

Disclaimer: I’m probably wasting my breath here, but I made up all of those doctrinal questions. Do not forward this column to church HQ. The answers (in corresponding order) are: never; maybe; our money’s on H.G.; and get a grip.

According to the First Presidency’s letter, members with real doctrinal concerns were to seek the counsel of our local leaders — stake president, bishop, Scoutmaster, building custodian, etc.

I’m blessedly free from this mandate because I don’t wrestle with any huge doctrinal questions. I divide church into two distinct categories: stuff I’ll do and stuff I won’t. In both cases I rely on the counsel of my brain, keeping in mind that it isn’t always right.

For example, after sacrament meeting I ran into my stake president in the hallway. When my brain saw him, it immediately began shouting for us to run away.

“Calm down,” I told it.

Apparently that part was out loud as well, because President Russ Davey said, “Robert, I’m always calm when I see you in church.”

Robert Kirby can be reached at rkirby@sltrib.com.

[Colofornian]

From the commentary written by this Lds columnist: In sacrament meeting last week, the bishop got up and announced he had received a letter from the First Presidency. As he prepared to read it, the congregation perked up. Moments like this are always attention-getters for Mormons. Normally, we get direction from the top during General Conference. Occasionally something can’t wait and it comes in the form of an official letter from the brethren telling us to start (or stop) doing something.“This is it,” my brain hollered as the bishop got ready to read. “We’re going back to Jackson County. I told you to change the oil in the truck. C’mon, let’s go find a map!”

From the column: The letter...told/counseled rank-and-file Mormons to stop pestering church headquarters for clarification of church doctrine. Apparently some members get so stressed about the finer points of doctrine that they’ll fire off a letter asking for the final word. Church HQ can’t handle the demand...According to the First Presidency’s letter, members with real doctrinal concerns were to seek the counsel of our local leaders — stake president, bishop, Scoutmaster, building custodian, etc.

Ah, the Internet is doing its job. So many questions are being raised by non-Mormons of Mormons, that the answers aren't there. Non-Mormons want answers. Grassroots Mormons are being deluged with such questions; hence, they, in turn seek answers from their authorities.

Yet when non-Mormons ask these same kind of doctrinal questions, what do some online lds apologists do? Why, they send them to lds.org and the First Presidency of the lds church.

Then what happens when the First Presidency of the church gets besieged by these doctrinal questions -- whether they come indirectly through their own members or more directly from inquirers?

Why, the First Presidency sends a Fall, 2010 missive to all their sacrament meetings around the world, telling them to stop sending their doctrinal questions to them because they can't handle most of them!

Ah, the "catch-22" of Mormonism! Ask a question. Get a redirect. Go to the redirected source. They send you back to the local level. Go to the local level. Oh, yeah, Lds keep their doors locked during the week. The bishop works his full-time job PLUS is a "bishop" during his off-hours. So he's "real" available. [/s ]

I guess Robert Kirby is right. Ask the building custodian!

Ah, such perfect irony...especially in light of daily posted links to lds.org as the answer to questions about Lds doctrine! ROTFL!

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Dear Mr. LDS President,

I am personally, deeply wrestling with am important
question. Please provide me with the official
LDS position.

I’m participating online at a conservative
website called FreeRepublic. I’ve tried to stand
up for my faith by posting links to our official
sites, but as you know, they are pretty vague.

I’ve tried to tell the anti-mormons there that
our links address any possible question they
can raise about our true faith. They rightly
point out that every question is addressed,
but never answered! I hate it when they are
right!

Anyway, here is my personal question...

If God is ALL-POWERFUL, meaning that He is
more powerful than any other thing that
exists, how can there be more than one God?

Please do not tell me to look at the
official links.

I’ve tried looking at the official links
that I post on FreeRepublic all the time,
but I can’t find any answer that is logical.

Please help me. They even make fun of my
lack of answers. I will keep up my non-defense
of our true faith, but I just need an answer
for myself. How can this be?

Your faithful and worthy member,

Paragonia Non-Defender

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Dear Mr. LDS President,

I have a personal question that I need
an official answer for please, sir.

I, of course, believe that the exalted
Joseph Smith was a prophet and now a
mormon god, guarding the very gates of
heaven.

I believe this because I have had the
burning bosoms. At times, they really
burned and I am SURE it was a message
from God that Joseph Smith told the truth.

Unfortunately, I participate online at
the FreeRepublic. There is a group of
anti-mormons there and some of them -
in fact many - are former mormons who
have fallen away from Joseph Smith.

They point out that other than my feelings
alone, there are no facts, evidence or even
a logical argument that supports my faith.

In fact, they even pointed out that I don’t
know if my feelings are from God or a demon.
Deep down, I know they are right. I don’t have
any way to know.

Can you tell me if there are any facts, evidence
or even give me a logical argument I can use
to try to prop up my belief in the Prophet Smith
or anything else we believe?

I am running on feelings alone and they are
mean to point it out.

Your worthy member,
Norma Andy

[newheart]

According to the First Presidency’s letter, members with real doctrinal concerns were to seek the counsel of our local leaders

I spent nearly a year living in Utah. (In the interest of full disclosure, it was something like a week a month for around 4 years, so cumulatively it was about a year.)

During that time I had dozens of conversations with my LDS friends and hundreds of questions. To a person, when they got frustrated trying to answer my questions their fall back was, "We don't have to worry about these kinds of questions. If we have a concern we simply ask the bishop, (stake pres, custodian, etc.). Tthey give us the answer and we're good with that.

For me that has always been the same as suggesting that I ignore the brain God gave me. With all due respect to my Mormon friends and the LDS Freeper contingent, being spoon-fed theology is not what we are called to do. Ask, seek, knock. To simply ask and accept that on faith alone, subverts the next two steps.

And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this [is] the first commandment. (Mark 12:30, KJV)

[Colofornian]

Dear PND,

In response to your letter, hey, stop pestering church headquarters for clarification of church doctrine.

If you’re asking with sincerity and real intent, and if you’re a member that has real doctrinal concerns, please seek the counsel of your bishop or stake president.

Signed

LDS, Inc.

[Colofornian]

Dear Insert Here,

In response to your letter, hey, stop pestering church headquarters for clarification of church doctrine.

If you’re asking with sincerity and real intent, and if you’re a member that has real doctrinal concerns, please seek the counsel of your bishop or stake president.

Signed

LDS, Inc.

[greyfoxx39]

I just need an answer for myself. How can this be?

From: The office of the President of the mormon corporation in Salt Lake City:

Dear Brother Paragonia Non-Defender:

The official answer to your question is: Read the Book of Mormon and then pray about it. You will then have a burning in the bosom which will indicate that it is either a true message from Our God, or that you have GERD.

Google search: GERD About 17,100,000 results (0.09 seconds

Google search: Book of Mormon is True 510,000 results (0.11 seconds)

Google IS an official source, as is The Writings of C. S. Lewis

Feel free to query your local ward custodian if you have any further questions.....oh wait....EVERY member is now a ward custodian.

Oh well...

Sincerely,

Secretary to the President of the mormon corporation.

[Zakeet]

This is a rather amazing admission when you think about it

Almost all Christian denominations have stock answers to most questions of faith.

All Christian denominations have enough staff (e.g. Pastors) and volunteers to further explain these answers to anybody who has questions.

All Christian denominations relish the opportunity to minister to their members.

---

I know that the Saints have loads of their own standard responses ... think FARMS and FAIR.

I also know that the Saints have numerous Bishops who are supposed to be consulted and are supposedly qualified to handle questions of faith.

I also know that the vast financial resources of the LDS Church are more than enough to enable them to hire and train thousands of persons, if necessary, to answer questions.

---

You don't suppose this letter is a tacit admission that the Saint's standard replies do not stand up well to scrutiny?

And surely, you can't possibly think that the Mormon Church is having trouble keeping employees after they start thinking about some of the questions raised by their fellow members?

Can you?

[Godzilla]

To a person, when they got frustrated trying to answer my questions their fall back was, "We don't have to worry about these kinds of questions. If we have a concern we simply ask the bishop, (stake pres, custodian, etc.). Tthey give us the answer and we're good with that.

Good observation, as we see this almost to a "T" here. Getting clarity on mormon doctrine is much like nailing jello to the wall. The 'living' prophet is only useful so far - then they throw them under the bus. Furthermore, they have to wade through the clear contradictions within their 'doctrine' (standard works).

[newheart]

Good observation, as we see this almost to a "T" here.

Thanks, but I do have to ad this. My experience leads me to believe that the average Mormon congregant believes that Jesus Christ on the cross has provided for his salvation and is no more or less informed about his church's theology than the average mainstream Christian believer.

[Godzilla]

My experience leads me to believe that the average Mormon congregant believes that Jesus Christ on the cross has provided for his salvation and is no more or less informed about his church's theology than the average mainstream Christian believer.

Are you also aware of the semantics of mormonism? Within mormon doctrine the term 'salvation' has two definitions. The first is a universal resurrection of all with a physical body at the end. That definition is foreign to Christianity. The second is more foreign, that is their progression to godhood. Both have significant challenges as well. Check their doctrine on the sufficiency of that sacrifice. You will find that abundant works are required before any benefit from that sacrifice can be applied.

[greyfoxx39]

My experience leads me to believe that the average Mormon congregant believes that Jesus Christ on the cross has provided for his salvation and is no more or less informed about his church's theology than the average mainstream Christian believer.

The theology of the average mainstream? Christian believer?

Since when is an adjective needed to describe "Christian"?

That is a ploy by non-Christians to attempt to coerce people to see these unBiblical cults as part of the Christian community, which is false.

As to the "being informed" statement...the average Christian finds his theology in the Holy Bible. The average mormon finds his in the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, The Pearl of Great Price, and in the statements and doctrines handed down over the years by various mormon leaders, many of which statements are in direct conflict with those of earlier leaders.

Those of us who are former mormons can attest that the "average" mormon has a very slight acquaintance with the more arcane beliefs such as the "Calling and Election Made Sure" for only the elites among the sect.

Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 305:

Calling & Election To Be Made Sure

Contend earnestly for the like precious faith with the Apostle Peter, "and add to you faith, virtue," knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness, charity [D&C 4]; "for if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ."

Another point, after having all these qualifications, he lays this injunction upon the people "to make your calling and election sure." He is emphatic upon this subject--after adding all this virtue, knowledge, etc., "Make your calling and election sure." What is the secret--the starting point? "According as His divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness." How did he obtain all things? Through the knowledge of Him who hath called him. There could not anything be given, pertaining to life and godliness, without knowledge. Woe! woe! Woe to Christendom!--especially the divines and priests if this be true.

Salvation is for a man to be saved from all his enemies; for until a man can triumph over death, he is not saved. A knowledge of the priesthood alone will do this.

Bruce R. McConkie, Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 3:325-353.

But in the most express and proper usage of the terms, "The elect of God comprise a very select group, an inner circle of faithful members of the Church.... They are the portion of church members who are striving with all their hearts to keep the fulness of the gospel law in this life so that they can become inheritors of the fulness of the gospel rewards in the life to come.

"As far as the male sex is concerned, they are the ones, the Lord says, who have the Melchizedek Priesthood conferred upon them and who thereafter magnify their callings and are sanctified by the Spirit. In this way, 'They become the sons of Moses and of Aaron and the seed of Abraham, and the church and kingdom, and the elect of God.' " (Mormon Doctrine, 2nd ed., 217.) See Commentary 2: 267-269, 271-278, 283-285.

[4] What is meant by making an election sure?

It is with election as with calling: the chosen of the Lord are offered all of the blessings of the gospel on condition of obedience to the Lord's laws; and they, having been tried and tested and found worthy in all things, eventually have a seal placed on their election which guarantees the receipt of the promised blessing.

[5] What is meant by having one's calling and election made sure?

To have one's calling and election made sure is to be sealed up unto eternal life; it is to have the unconditional guarantee of exaltation in the highest heaven of the celestial world; it is to receive the assurance of godhood; it is, in effect, to have the day of judgment advanced, so that an inheritance of all the glory and honor of the Father's kingdom is assured prior to the day when the faithful actually enter into the divine presence to sit with Christ in his throne, even as he is "set down" with his "Father in his throne." (Rev 3:21.)

 

Link from BYU

[Colofornian]

You don't suppose this letter is a tacit admission that the Saint's standard replies do not stand up well to scrutiny? And surely, you can't possibly think that the Mormon Church is having trouble keeping employees after they start thinking about some of the questions raised by their fellow members?

Bingo on #1 -- not standing up to scrutiny.

But it's actually worse than that.

What you have is some of these replies getting into broader circulation.

IOW, a poorly thought out or even slightly controversial response that simply expands the debate.

Lds Inc. is desperately fearful that if they weigh in on specific controversies, those responses will get circulated and get into the hands of their critics. They want that minimized.

Now does that sound like the Old Testament prophets of old?

The other related facet with this is that they don't have unanimity of agreement even at the top on some of these issues. If they can't themselves agree, how can they export that?

[Colofornian]

You don't suppose this letter is a tacit admission that the Saint's standard replies do not stand up well to scrutiny?

Well, ya also have to wonder why they chose sacrament meetings to make that announcement.

I mean, didn't they just have a General Conference in Utah beamed world-wide earlier in October? Couldn't they have made the announcement then? And why a Sacrament meeting vs. other meetings held at the local level?

Well...guess what? They weren't counting on Lds journalists like Robert Kirby to blab this information internationally. They didn't want the announcement to go to all Mormons...just the most faithful ones...the ones who would more likely be there for a sacrament meeting.

[Elsie]

Basically, it told/counseled rank-and-file Mormons to stop pestering church headquarters for clarification of church doctrine.

I got a response back!

It told me to use Paragon Defenders List o' Links for the answer to my question.

ALL truth will be found there.

--MormonDude(I looked, and sure enough, there was enough material to last a lifetime!)

[Elsie]

My experience leads me to believe that the average Mormon congregant believes that Jesus Christ on the cross has provided for his salvation and is no more or less informed about his church's theology than the average mainstream Christian believer.<>You've nailed it!

---

But the MORMMON expert is about as informed as a Christian neophyte.

[Elsie]

My experience leads me to believe that the average Mormon congregant believes that Jesus Christ on the cross has provided for his salvation and is no more or less informed about his church's theology than the average mainstream Christian believer.

But it's the GARDEN; don't you know?

[Elsie]

Your Truth needed here.

ANTIs are ganging up!

   

 

 I don't know why they are SO hateful to us: what did we EVER do to THEM?)

[newheart]

Thank you both for your responses. I trust that our differences are as members of the same family and not overly contentious. But we do have differences.

I would never encourage someone to become Mormon. In its theology I absolutely believe it is ‘another Gospel.’ But I have found that very few Mormons are that familiar with the details of their theology in much the same way that most Christians would be very hard pressed to explain the difference between homoiousion and homoousion. Few Christians can enumerate the details of the presumed conflicts between predestination, foreordination and free will. The average Christian cannot tell you whether they are pre-trib, post-trib, amillenialist, postmillenialist, or nunc-millenialist.

Can the average Christian intelligently discuss the niceties of transubstantiation? How many Christians can adequately explain what Paul meant in Colossians 1:24 when he said, “Now I rejoice in what I am suffering for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church” and how that squares with the sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross. How about working out one’s salvation with ‘fear and trembling’ Philippians 2:12? Or how about transubstantiation and consubstantiation, or ‘real presence’ or symbolism? Open or closed communion?

No, the average Christian believes, correctly I think, along with Karl Barth who answered the question of how he would summarize the millions of words he had published in the area of theology by saying, “Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so.” In my experience, most of the Mormons I know, subscribe to that.

Yes, I am familiar with the semantics of Mormonism and I may be more conversant with their theology than many Mormons are. Most of my LDS friends accept Jesus Christ as their Savior and unless they are deliberately lying to me it is on the same basis that I do.

We quickly part ways in belief after that as so much of their doctrine immediately plunges in to works righteousness, exaltation, celestial marriage, eternal preexistence of matter, polytheistic interpretations of the Trinity, etc., etc. etc.. I believe they share in the foolishness of the Galatians. There is much of Mormon theology, as you both have pointed out, that is heretical; that elevates the status of their belief system to a cult. I differ in the extreme with those who would fancy themselves Mormon theologians and who uncritically buy into the heresies, fantasies and inconsistencies foisted upon them by Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and their entire line of ‘Prophets.’ So yes I always advise Mormons to seek out an orthodox Christian church, as difficult as that can be in their culture.

But I also part ways with those who want to argue over immersion vs. sprinkling, or, those who want to tell me — as a good friend pointed argued when I invited him to my baptism (by immersion) some 30 odd years ago — that I was going to Hell because the pastor used the wrong words. “In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit,” instead of “In the Name of Jesus.”

As Paul puts it in Romans 14, “Each... should be fully convinced in their own mind.” You may have answered all of these questions with enough certainty to be able to separate the sheep from the goats, though I would argue that there is only one who will do that because he is the only one who is qualified. Yes we are to exercise discernment and be wise. But we should fight the natural human tendency to vote people off the island. To demand that someone share my doctrinal understanding down to the last ‘iota’ is gnosticism and the last time I checked, that, too, is heresy.

I try not to spend too much time figuring out who should be tossed out of the lifeboat because of their theology. I am convinced that all of us will have much wrong theology to repent of in that moment when we see him face to face. Fortunately, we are not saved by our theology, but by the blood of God’s own son.

[RnMomof7]

Thank God, people are questioning .... and searching ....