Pending Disciplinary Council

Today, this envelope was handed to me.


Here's what was inside:

My wife Susie received an identical envelope and letter addressed to her.
I will post follow up as events unfold.

RWW - This one's for you!

... and for the rest of those who have been wanting to hear from me again. Thank you all for your concern, your prayers, and your support. For better or for worse, I have found that blogging specifically to a Mormon audience is utterly not worthwhile. The Mormonism of today has its truth already, and is not looking for any innovation whatsoever. Innovation would separate it from mainstream Christianity, and favor with mainstream Christianity is that which the Saints of today most deeply covet. Strong words, perhaps, but true: If not individually, then collectively.

I am forever the heretic because I believe that Jehovah is the Father, as Joseph Smith did, and because I side with Brigham Young and Wilford Woodruff on certain issues which, according to Bruce R. McConkie, implies that I "have the intellect of an ant and the understanding of a clod of miry clay in a primordial swamp" and that I "do not deserve to be saved." Why won't "our" apologists apologize for statements such as this?

(Side note: 2,555,000,000 years old. Hmm.)

And yet I believe! Well, I believe in something, and my beliefs are deeply intertwined with Mormonism. They may not be the Orthodox religion, but they are Godly, or, if they are not, then I have been deceived. But, I choose to believe that the Holy Ghost I have felt is real, that the answers to prayer I received about Joseph Smith are true. But I am not part of mainstream Mormon culture. They look at me funny. I scare some of them. They just don't know how to deal with me. And the more I endure, the more sick I feel when I hear their teachings. I mean their pet teachings, their naive teachings, not the truth. When they preach the truth it is still sweet, but the other things, the naive assumptions and philosophies of some of their most prominent men which they have blended with the gospel offends my spirit in subtle ways, and I would rather be in an environment more facilitative of my spiritual growth.

Is this selfish of me? I'd like to help them grow. I'd like to pitch in and teach, but I can't. My teachings are not permitted. So I feel saddened by it all.

If you like my posts, my thoughts, and want to hear more from me, or speak with me, please consider reading and commenting on my Masonic blog: Lodgical. Nearly everything I write there and elsewhere has personal religious significance to me. Even the articles I write for other organizations. If you have comments or questions to share with me of an overtly Mormon nature, or just want to chat, please contact me directly by email at jeffREMOVE_THIS_PART@storago.com

I want to talk. I have very little religious fellowship now. I am currently accepted as a sort of sojourner ("on the path") in the Jewish community, but that is not a place to deeply discuss my Latter-day Saint beliefs.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

The Return of Mormon Gnostics

My new Bishop has informed me, and this is almost verbatim, that he couldn't care less whether or not I post on the Internet, that I can continue to do so if I want to, that I know what is right and wrong, that I can use my own judgment, and that he doesn't have the time nor desire to bother reading the things I write.

God bless his soul. I feel comfortable enough now to bring back my blog. I will be more careful about what I say. I don't think I'll ever feel completely comfortable blogging my feelings again. But I will blog, nonetheless.

Disciplinary Council

There is a disciplinary council scheduled for me tomorrow evening. My bishop asked me to keep confidential some things (I'm a little vague on identifying precisely what, probably specifics of how things proceed until such time as they might become a faith promoting experience.) but I wanted to let everyone reading know that is why there are some changes in the blog here and the type of subjects I'm posting about.

The charge brought against me has been "behavior that is consistent with apostasy and is unbecoming a member of the Church and Melchizedek Priesthood Holder," and it has been a result, as far as I can tell, entirely derived from this very blog (and various other postings around the web.) The lesson? If you don't want to have a disciplinary council, don't write the things I've written. Let this be a learning experience.

I will try to share here as much of the upcoming events as possible without violating any confidence that has been made in me, because, upon much thought I believe these things should not be kept in the dark — I certainly did not realize how serious and drastic these things would crop up to be (or that they would crop up at all), and others could inadvertantly step into the same circumstances.

In my experience, the formal notice of a council always includes a quote from the Church Handbook of Instructions indicating that the purpose of Church Discipline is to "save the souls of the transgressors by helping them repent." That statement would seem to reflect the idea that anyone being put subject to Church Discipline has somehow trangressed the law.

I have not to my knowledge transgressed. So I looked up the word Transgression on wikipedia, and found this:

In Latter-day Saint theology, transgression is an action that breaks a law, with or without the perpetrator's understanding. A transgression is not necessarily a sin. (See full article.)

So I guess I don't need to be able to understand what I've done to be wrong, and it doesn't even need to be a sin, in order to be considered a transgression. After reading this, I realize I already knew it, as Adam's transgression was done in a state of innocence, without knowledge of good and evil. (Although, interestingly, He knew the commandment not to eat of the tree.)

David O McKay

"Ours is the responsibility ... to proclaim the truth that each individual is ... entitled to freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly; that he has the right to worship God according to the dictates of his conscience. ... organizations or churches which deprive the individual of these inherent rights are not in harmony with God's will nor with his revealed word."
--David O. McKay

Under President McKay, the Church approximately tripled the number of members and stakes (1.1 million to 2.8 million members, and 184 to 500 stakes)

President McKay spoke against communism due to its atheist underpinnings and the denial of freedom of choice inherent in such a system.

Here are a couple more important quotes from David O. McKay:

"If you will give your class a thought, even one new thought during your recitation period you will find that they will go away satisfied. But it is your obligation to be prepared to give that new thought" (1953)

And...

"True education seeks ... to make men and women not only good mathematicians, proficient linguists, profound scientists, or brilliant literary lights, but also honest men, combined with virtue, temperance, and brotherly love ... men and women who prize truth, justice, wisdom, benevolence, and self-control as the choicest acquisitions of a successful life" (1953)

President McKay was also instrumental in making the Temple rituals available to people in foreign languages, and in expanding and clarifying some portions of the Temple endowment.

According to Daniel W. Bachman, "David O. McKay, we learn, first explained the symbolism associated with the temple clothing by faithful Latter-day Saints."

Being a Freemason myself, I am familiar with several explanations of this symbolism, and for the benefit of those reading, I'd like to share the typical Masonic wording similar to what President McKay adopted, this being available openly on many Masonic websites (i.e. not considered part of the secret work):

The Square reminds us symbolically to square our actions, and the Compasses teach us to circumscribe our desires and keep our passions within due bounds toward all mankind.

The moral lessons associated with these emblems are deep and important, and what a blessing and demonstration of Divine Providence that the Latter-day Saints after going so many years without the majority of their men knowing the definition finally received a suitable one and removed some of the obscurity of these historic items.

Authoritative Statements on Trusting Church Leaders

President Joseph F. Smith said, "We talk of obedience, but do we require any man or woman to ignorantly obey the counsels that are given? Do the First Presidency require it? No, never." (Journal of Discources (JD) 16:248)

Apostle Charles W. Penrose, who would later serve as counselor to President Smith, declared: "President Wilford Woodruff is a man of wisdom and experience, and we respect him, but we do not believe his personal views or utterances are revelations from God; and when 'Thus saith the Lord', comes from him, the saints investigate it: they do not shut their eyes and take it down like a pill." (Millennial Star 54:191)

"And none are required to tamely and blindly submit to a man because he has a portion of the priesthood. We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark, that they would do anything they were told to do by those who presided over them, if they knew it was wrong; but such obedience as this is worse than folly to us; it is slavery in the extreme; and the man who would thus willingly degrade himself should not claim a rank among intelligent beings, until he turns from his folly. A man of God... would despise the idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without asking any questions. When Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their minds to do wrong themselves." (Millennial Star, vol.14 #38, pp. 593-95)

Brigham Young said:

"What a pity it would be, if we were led by one man to utter destruction! Are you afraid of this? I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken the influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually." (JD 9:150)

"How easy it would be for your leaders to lead you to destruction, unless you actually know the mind and will of the spirit yourselves." (JD 4:368)

"I do not wish any Latter-day Saint in this world, nor in heaven, to be satisfied with anything I do, unless the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, the spirit of revelation, makes them satisfied...Suppose that the people were heedless, that they manifested no concern with regard to the things of the kingdom of God, but threw the whole burden upon the leaders of the people, saying, 'If the brethren who take charge of matters are satisfied, we are,' this is not pleasing in the sight of the Lord." (JD 3:45)

"...Now those men, or those women, who know no more about the power of God, and the influences of the Holy Spirit, than to be led entirely by another person, suspending their own understanding, and pinning their faith upon another's sleeve, will never be capable of entering into the celestial glory, to be crowned as they anticipate; they will never be capable of becoming Gods. They cannot rule themselves, to say nothing of ruling others, but they must be dictated to in every trifle, like a child. They cannot control themselves in the least, but James, Peter, or somebody else must control them. They never can become Gods, nor be crowned as rulers with glory, immortality, and eternal lives. They never can hold sceptres of glory, majesty, and power in the celestial kingdom. Who will? Those who are valiant and inspired with the true independence of heaven, who will go forth boldly in the service of their God, leaving others to do as they please, determined to do right, though all mankind besides should take the opposite course. Will this apply to any of you? Your own hearts can answer." (JD 1:312)

"President Joseph Smith read the 14th chapter of Ezekiel [see, for example, verses 9-10: 'If the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing...the punishment of the prophet shall be even as the punishment of him that seeketh unto him.']...said the Lord had declared by the Prophet [Ezekiel], that the people should each one stand for himself, and depend on no man or men in that state of corruption of the Jewish church -- that righteous persons could only deliver their own souls -- applied it to the present state [1842] of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints -- said if the people departed from the Lord, they must fall -- that they were depending on the Prophet, hence were darkened in their minds, in consequence of neglecting the duties devolving upon themselves..." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith pp. 237-38)

George Q. Cannon, Counselor to three Church Presidents, expressed it thus: "Do not, brethren, put your trust in man though he be a bishop, an apostle, or a president. If you do, they will fail you at some time or place; they will do wrong or seem to, and your support be gone;" (Millennial Star 53:658-59, quoted in Gospel Truth, 1:319)

-

I have distinct feelings that I have been counseled in a manner incompatible with these many quotes. Either I am seriously misunderstanding my brethren, or they are themselves in the very error here spoken of.

Freedom

I read this over at a Masonic Blog, and found it inspiring:

"Freedom dies under dogma. In a free society, no person or group or policy can be permitted to exist beyond scrutiny, criticism, even ridicule. When dogma gains enough power to punish those who oppose it, it becomes fanaticism. When dogma is invested with enough power to suppress opposition, it becomes tyranny. And when men are afraid to say what they think — however cockeyed or unpopular it may be – freedom has been violated, for it has been corrupted by fear."

I am proud to be a Mormon because our doctrine has such strong foundational principles relating to Freedom, especially Free Agency and religious freedom. For a religion to have support for religious freedom present at its core is very refreshing and makes a beautiful statement about its own security and self-confidence. I just hope we don't continue to lose sight of it!

The Bloggernacle Inquisition

It is bound to happen sooner or later. Somewhere in the Church, someone will be placed subject to disciplinary action due to things they've blogged about or commented about on other blogs, either directly or indirectly (complaint by one of their personal acquaintences, for example.) Actually, I'd be surprised if it hasn't already happened. Due to the personal nature of blogging, the variety of subjects covered, and the interconnectedness of the Bloggernacle or the greater Blogosphere, it seems ripe for digging up dirt on people. Also, I know at least for me, that I am likely to comment on almost any subject that piques my fancy, whether or not it is something I strongly believe in. (Although I often post on things I have deep convictions about.)

When this happens, or begins to happen in noticable numbers, what will become of the Bloggernacle? Will it befall the same fate as local stake and ward websites? (A move by the Church that, although some people disagree strongly with, I think was well within their rights and best interests to make.)

I believe that I am willing to own up to everything I've said on the blogs. But due to the persistent nature of things, and the constant learning process, I may not always agree in the present with my opinions of the past.

This problem has already been discussed elsewhere in relation to blogs belonging to "Professionals" or Business Blogging. How your blogging might influence your chances of future employment, or continued employment.

Since a blog IS very personal, it is often times used as a journal of thought, and is not necessarily an accurate depiction of our "creedal" or accepted beliefs. It more often documents our curiosities -- the things we don't have a solid handle on, because if we did, we might not have much left to say about it.

I'm not personally scared of the inquisition, but I am concerned about the time I've already spent explaining the reasons for my interests in various topics to the satisfaction of any who feel it their business to monitor and try to standardize/correlate my thoughts, and I can see this becoming a large scale pre-occupation of leaders as blogging gets more and more recognized by the Church, and Blogs get cited more frequently as sources in Sacrament talks.

Good Medicine for Scholars

I just read a post over at Feminist Mormon Housewives. Go and read it:

Forgiving the Church

The type of thought expressed in this post and it comments is good medicine for any scholars, gnostics or mystics struggling to survive within the Church structure, and will help keep them from apostasy or inactivity.

Truth and Liberty, Liberty and Truth

George A. Smith, July 24, 1852 (JD 1:45):

Young men, braves and warriors, who sit before you this day, let me admonish you, never to let the hand of tyranny or oppression rise in these mountains, but stand unflinchingly true by the constitution of the United States, which our fathers sealed with their blood; never suffer its provisions to be infringed upon; and if any man, or set of men form themselves into a mob in these mountains, to violate that sacred document, by taking away the civil or religious rights of any man, if he should be one of the most inferior beings that exist upon the face of the earth, be sure you crush it, or spend the last drop of blood in your veins with the words of--Truth and Liberty, Liberty and Truth, for ever!

A Few Concepts

I've wondered a few times, if there could be found the fewest number of concepts, which when expressed, are enough to deduce the entire Gospel from it more or less?

Candidates for consideration: Free Agency, Atonement, Exaltation.

Free Agency: Man can choose between Good and Evil. Removal of Free Agency is itself an utterly Evil act.
Atonement: Man can receive forgiveness for Evil that he has chosen.
Exaltation: Men have the potential for never-ending increase.

I would almost hesitate to add anything else to this list. What do you think?

The Fine Line Between Good and Evil

The pre-1990 Endowment contained the following exchange of dialogue (Don't worry, nothing under covenant not to be revealed is quoted here):

PETER: ... Do you know who that man is? He is Satan!

SECTARIAN MINISTER: What? The Devil?

PETER: That is one of his names.

SECTARIAN MINISTER: He is quite a different person from what he told me the devil is. He said the devil has claws like a bear's on his hands, horns on his head, and a cloven foot, and that when he speaks he has the roar of a lion!

PETER: He has said this to deceive you, and I would advise you to get out of his employ.

The lesson here is so important! Being beat into the minds of the Latter-day Saints for over a hundred years, it would be hard to believe that it could be forgotten in sixteen. Satan is subtle in his ways. In fact, he strives to appear completely Good and acceptable, and it is only his deception that allows him to gain any ground at all. Latter-day Saint scriptures are abound with revolutionary ideas of "Free Agency" and it is esteemed as one of God's greatest gifts to man.

In the scriptural accounts of the premortal council in heaven, we learn that Satan desired all to be saved. His idea was to enforce righteousness on all creation so that no piece of it could be lost.

Jesus Christ determined to carry out the plan of his Father, which included the great gift of Free Agency, and the fact that some individuals would not choose to return, and some would be lost and perish from their lack of faith and obedience.

The opposing forces here are: a tyranny of forced goodness - Lucifer's plan, against the allowed existence of both good and evil - God's plan.

If every human being could hold true to this idea, the Dark Ages would stay away. Ironically, it was this very concept, holy as it is, that permitted the Dark Ages to occur, and allowed all of the horror inflicted by the Church of Rome to come to pass. Yet, God values man's freedom to choose above all of those consequences.

In reality, no man gets more righteous by being forced to "Choose The Right", because a forced choice is not a choice at all.

Amongst the Saints themselves, removing temptations can be good, especially for the young and inexperienced, however, even that can have its dangers - Children grow up in a "sheltered" Utah culture, but when they step out into the real world, even if it is the warped sense of a real world that is BYU, suddenly they are faced with so much that they are utterly unprepared to cope with, it is overbearing and they cave in. This is why it is important to be in the world, but not of the world. Isolation is dangerous.

When setting standards and laws that affect people outside of the Church, we must be especially careful. We should not presume they hold the same values that we do. To put forth an extreme example, imagine completely removing drinks containing Alcohol of all forms from Utah. On the surface, this might seem like a good idea. After all, to the Mormon, alcoholic beverages are "sinful". However, putting this into effect as a law would prevent Catholic mass from taking place. It seems that one man's sin can be another man's virtue. We are absolutely and utterly not authorized to impose that decision on other people, and as a group who has Polygamy in our past, and in light of the reaction the rest of the western world had to it, it is the mark of complete hypocrisy for us to try to put an end to other people's practices, unless they are harming another person or hurting the freedom of others:

We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
--11th Article of Faith

Even then, we need to be careful. If we perceive someone taking away someone else's freedom we need to ask: Is it consentual? Outsiders may well view the Mormon church as taking away our Freedoms: To drink tea, to interpret the Bible for ourselves, or however they see it. But we have chosen this path. It is our will to submit to these restrictions, and therefore our freedom has not been revoked, but has actually been exercised. Making a decision ahead of time and then holding firm to it is a great example of Freedom of Choice.

I think taking away freedom ("unrighteous dominion") or permitting freedom to be taken away is just as bad as any sin it seeks to prevent, because it thwarts God's divine plan.

So, if each person can choose between Good or Evil that means we need to help teach and persuade others to choose Good, to choose Freedom: The course that allows true Good to exist at all (and Evil, as well).

Because "Choose the Right" seems to carry a political message with it and flirts too closely with Satan's plan, I call this "Choose the Light" -- indicating the way of enlightenment. Step out of the Dark Ages and allow man to think for himself.