Aug2012 Ensign Article Discussion

[Anonymous]

I’m interested in everyone’s response to the following article:

Keeping the Faith in a World of Confusion

By Bishop Gérald Caussé

First Counselor in the Presiding Bishopric

Ensign, Aug 2012

He starts by affirming his faith that Adam really existed, despite what his philosophy teacher was proposing.

Then states:

Quote:

Braving these trials of our faith helps us stand firm in a world that is falling more and more into the depths of confusion. This confusion is evident in the barrage of messages that surround us. With the advent of the Internet, for example, an uninterrupted avalanche of contradictory opinions and information invades our everyday lives. These contradictions can become disconcerting and paralyzing.

Is this article inspiring to you? If so Why?

Is it offensive? If so Why?

Is it…”meh, same old stuff”?

Here are some positive things I see:

Quote:

In our search for truth, we can be tempted to want to understand everything right away. However, the intelligence of God is so infinite that “it is impossible that man should find out all his ways” (Jacob 4:. We must accept living for a time without answers to all of our questions.

…followed by maybe something that sounds to me like we should not question some things:

Quote:

It is up to us to distinguish between questions that are truly essential to our eternal progress and those that result from intellectual curiosity, need for proof, or desire for personal satisfaction.

I like this part:

Quote:

Each of us may experience moments of personal doubt.

It is good to hear them recognize that we all have doubts sometimes…but then followed by:

Quote:

These doubts are rarely alleviated by the search for rational explanations. For example, some scientific or archaeological discoveries may reinforce our testimonies of scripture, but spiritual knowledge cannot be proven by logic or physical evidence.

Another positive:

Quote:

I recently had a discussion with a dignitary of another church. Desirous to determine if we were a Christian church, he suggested organizing a debate between the doctrinal experts of our two religions.

but followed by a negative:

Quote:

The strength and truth of the doctrine of Christ, however, rest not upon the debate of experts but upon the sacred testimonies of His chosen disciples. The Prophet Joseph Smith declared, “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.”

For the many long centuries of the Apostasy, the world did not lack experts, but it had lost the witnesses of Christ. As a result, human reason replaced the strength of divine revelation.

When we are troubled, our first reflex must be to search the scriptures and the words of the living prophets. Their writings are beacons that cannot deceive us: “Wherefore, we search the prophets, and we have many revelations and the spirit of prophecy; and having all these witnesses we obtain a hope, and our faith becometh unshaken” (Jacob 4:6).

What do you think about this article?

[Anonymous]

My first reaction: :thumbdown:

This is why I rarely read the Ensign any more. Equating questioning with confusion, and doubt with darkness is a favorite theme. I actually find hope and meaning in questioning, so for me it’s often a struggle to read these kinds of things. It sounds to me like the article in question was written for the benefit of those that have never seriously had to deal with doubt and need an easy answer as to why others do.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

I’m interested in everyone’s response to the following article:

By Bishop Gérald Caussé

First Counselor in the Presiding Bishopric

Ensign, Aug 2012

He starts by affirming his faith that Adam really existed, despite what his philosophy teacher was proposing.

Then states:

Quote:

Braving these trials of our faith helps us stand firm in a world that is falling more and more into the depths of confusion. This confusion is evident in the barrage of messages that surround us. With the advent of the Internet, for example, an uninterrupted avalanche of contradictory opinions and information invades our everyday lives. These contradictions can become disconcerting and paralyzing…When we are troubled, our first reflex must be to search the scriptures and the words of the living prophets. Their writings are beacons that cannot deceive us: “Wherefore, we search the prophets, and we have many revelations and the spirit of prophecy; and having all these witnesses we obtain a hope, and our faith becometh unshaken” (Jacob 4:6).

What do you think about this article?

I see this as a general cookie-cutter reaction to members that read “anti-Mormon” information on the internet or ask too many questions (for most Church leaders’ taste) and end up losing their testimonies and falling away from the Church permanently as a result. I appreciate the concern but I don’t think this response is very helpful at all. Calling it confusion and acting like there is no reason to even listen to outside opinions because we supposedly already know all the answers we really need to comes across as extremely arrogant and shows a complete lack of understanding of what most members struggling with this are really dealing with.

I also don’t like the standard suggestion to read the scriptures and words of LDS prophets if you have doubts because that’s where I actually ran into some of the most troubling contradictions of all. In my opinion, if you want to maintain your TBM testimony at all costs then my suggestion would be to read the scriptures as little as possible other than maybe a few selected verses and especially avoid reading the Old Testament and Pearl of Great Price. What I could have used instead is for someone to say it’s not the end of the world if you have doubts, you don’t need to take everything literally and dead seriously, and you are still welcome at church regardless of what you believe instead of all this pressure to try to go back inside the orthodox Mormon box ASAP after I already knew what was outside of this limited perspective and couldn’t unlearn it.

[Anonymous]

Growing up I loved the Ensign. I used to read the articles and cheer the people on ya, go, go JS tell them that god is real and in the flesh and there are all abominable, ya go! lol. Well I grew up very very TBM and very literalist community.

I have kept from any exposure to the outside world and my friends were chosen for me from a select few TBM only.

I relate that to this article. It helps in a certain way by maintaining a bubble of faith that equally encourages you to only stay in that bubble. Until one day you find out there is a whole world outside that box and much of it wasn’t what you were told it was(to keep you inside he bubble). I can’t read the ensign anymore. I would really love to. I hope one day it isn’t a bubble type of magazine(geared toward keeping you in the bubble). But I hope one day it will become inclusive of many different positions and thinking within the active supportive faith with LDS doctrine. I would eagerly buy it and read it if it was so and a more neutral magazine that was all about truth and inclusiveness.

I actually cherish the Internet. Certainly there is a lot of useless things on it, but that is true of anything.

Quote:

In our search for truth, we can be tempted to want to understand everything right away. However, the intelligence of God is so infinite that “it is impossible that man should find out all his ways” (Jacob 4:. We must accept living for a time without answers to all of our questions.

Excellent! I love that point and that is where I am in my faith journey. It’s ok to not know things and put them in hold for later times that there is more understanding or more evidence to weigh upon. That’s where my faith enters in and I suppend judgement.

But I will question within the confines of my own mind…. Everything. It’s how I grow. I stumble sometimes but I personally learn from it. My faith is established in certain principles chiefly. Love god and love thy neighbor followed by truth, integrity,honor, respect , courage and so forth. I do not place my absolute faith in any man, or in any book(experience has taught me this). So that point is invalid to me.

It’s a both good and bad article to me that highlights the negatives and positives to me.

Personally I find it interesting that weather Adam really existed or not does not affect my testimony or faith. While he seems to maintain it does. If it helps him to maintain faith then great! I’m all for that. If he wants to push that idea on others as if thier faith personally depended on it then I can’t go with that.

[Anonymous]

I think it was a very sincere approach that works for him and lots of people (which is important to recognize and admit openly) but is misugided for me and lots of other people (which is important to recognize and admit openly).

I wish there was another article about the same thing from the other perspective.

[Anonymous]

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

Heber13 wrote:

I’m interested in everyone’s response to the following article:

By Bishop Gérald Caussé

First Counselor in the Presiding Bishopric

Ensign, Aug 2012

He starts by affirming his faith that Adam really existed, despite what his philosophy teacher was proposing.

Then states:

Quote:

Braving these trials of our faith helps us stand firm in a world that is falling more and more into the depths of confusion. This confusion is evident in the barrage of messages that surround us. With the advent of the Internet, for example, an uninterrupted avalanche of contradictory opinions and information invades our everyday lives. These contradictions can become disconcerting and paralyzing…When we are troubled, our first reflex must be to search the scriptures and the words of the living prophets. Their writings are beacons that cannot deceive us: “Wherefore, we search the prophets, and we have many revelations and the spirit of prophecy; and having all these witnesses we obtain a hope, and our faith becometh unshaken” (Jacob 4:6).

What do you think about this article?

What I could have used instead is for someone to say it’s not the end of the world if you have doubts, you don’t need to take everything literally and dead seriously, and you are still welcome at church regardless of what you believe instead of all this pressure to try to go back inside the orthodox Mormon box ASAP after I already knew what was outside of this limited perspective and couldn’t unlearn it.

Amen!

[Anonymous]

Hmm…seems like a pretty negative reaction to it so far.

Anyone else?

[Anonymous]

I want to clarify that I am 50/50 on this. To parser that I see the good and negative in it. I like listening to talks or reading that are more dispassionate and calm in talking about beliefs but maintaining the values they believe in.

[Anonymous]

I also think there’s a lot of good in it – and even more for lots of people. I just happen to think there bad in it, as well – especially for lots of people.

[Anonymous]

I think it’s a generally good article, and I like that he is acknowledging this is all happening out there in the world (the internet, etc.).

I disagree that this is a sign of confusion. On the contrary, I think the internet and the processes of people questioning IS the process of sorting out confusion. We are already confused! The non-functional parts of the correlated story (which is a large portion IMO) is the confusion we are trying to resolve. It isn’t working right for a lot of members, especially the younger generations.

Which stories from our vast well of religious narrative is “true” and valuable? That may (and perhaps should) change over time. I thought it interesting he suggested holding on to the words of the “living prophets.” I wonder if that was intentional or just a subconscious nod to the fact that holding to the words of “the prophets” (past included) will lead one into a LOT of confusion… 😯

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

I’m interested in everyone’s response to the following article:

Keeping the Faith in a World of Confusion

By Bishop Gérald Caussé

First Counselor in the Presiding Bishopric

Ensign, Aug 2012

He starts by affirming his faith that Adam really existed, despite what his philosophy teacher was proposing.

Quick first comment: this was when he was younger, and took the position of faith when the teacher was trying to dispel faith. Whether “Adam” existed in the same way that the biblical scriptures point out is unlikely in the extreme, but in JS translation in Moses, he says a REALLY interesting comment:

Moses 1:34 wrote:

And the first man of all men have I called Adam, which is many.

And of course the term ‘Adam’ means mankind…

So, yeah, I believe “adam” existed, probably mated with mitochondrial eve…but then again, maybe not. It’s all so complicated.

As I read the article, I find a lot of good thoughts, but it falls just a little short of being ‘there’. For example, to say that we ‘Accept unanswered questions” almost means in his parlance, don’t ask. But in reality the scripture that he quotes reflects a maturity — I know that god loves his children but I don’t know the answer to all things. The gap between what we know and what we don’t know needs to b e a position of honesty — that there are questions that may or may not be answered. we should not just accept that there are questions, but openly ask them, recognizing that there may not be answers.

i have other comments, but I’m being ‘encouraged’ to go to the beach by my grandchildren…

[Anonymous]

I like the statement of Hugh B Brown

Quote:

“Preserve, then, the freedom of your mind in education and in religion, and be unafraid to express your thoughts and to insist upon your right to examine every proposition. We are not so much concerned with whether your thoughts are orthodox or heterodox as we are that you shall have thoughts.”

http://president.byu.edu/documents/brown.htm

I try very hard to not let TBM’ers opinions bother me. But sometimes it’s harder than others.

[Anonymous]

Dash…great quote! I’m putting that in my journal. :thumbup:

[Anonymous]

That is a great quote Dash, one of my many favorites. I think it aligns perfectly with the divine plan of agency. The other plan, the one that “guaranteed” not a soul would be lost was the simple and clean one – nobody would ask hard questions, nobody would doubt and stray. Of course there would also be very little if any learning and progress. Yes, the divine plan is messy. Everyone is encouraged to find things out for themselves, to search and test and learn, to ask the hard questions and seek the hard answers. The only thing worse than asking heretical questions is asking no questions at all. If the fear of cultivating a bad seed prevents the planting of any seeds then it is guaranteed there will be no good fruit.

[Anonymous]

I’m not a fan…

There are several things that could be cool in this article if taken out of context. To continually search for truth is good. But taken in context it seems to mean, “Filter out anything that doesn’t already conform to the truth you already have.”

To accept unanswered questions is good but in context it seems to mean that not everything makes linear sense but just ignore or put up on the shelf contradictory ideas/pieces of evidence. Stick to the linear worldview that you have and don’t pester the “loose ends” – they may just unravel.

I also don’t like the “Is this relevant to your salvation?” defense because there are many things that we teach as critical to salvation/exaltation that upon closer examination might not be. It may be that being LDS, baptism, priesthood, good works, faith, the atonement etc. is not relevant to my salvation.

I especially dislike terms like “Their writings are beacons that cannot deceive us.” or “protect ourselves from error.” And “Studying the word of God protects us from the influence of false doctrines.” I believe that these delineate truth and purity as anything that comes from within our schema, knowledge tree, or worldview and error or false doctrines as anything that contradicts our schema. Take for example the Priesthood ban: Would the writings of the brethren at the time of the ban have protected me from error or false doctrine or would they have led me to believe some things that weren’t true and in fact may have been harmful?

Finally, it is all wrapped up in a nice little “it is up to you” package. Opening: “It is up to us whether we remain firm in our testimonies.” Body: follow my 5 step formula. Closing: “I know by experience that when we apply them in our lives, they ensure our protection in a confused and disoriented world.” Happily ever after (and if not – you must have messed it up).

[Author]

Posts