The Culture of the Gospel

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

They see the church as the vehicle to get them to that destination [edit: Happiness?], and so they talk about it that way. They aren’t necessarily wrong.

But I have the same frustrations you seem to be expressing…it can seem to resort to “church activity” is all that matters…as in…church activity will translate to happiness, instead of living the gospel will translate to happiness.

I don’t even think fully living the gospel brings happiness. Sometimes the things they ask you to do cause untold stress and unhappiness. I know that staying in my marriage due to the temple covenant and promise I’d made was a massive source of unhappiness for many years until I learned to cope. Staying in my calling when I was burnt out caused misery. Exposure to toxic personalities in the church — moreso than any other place in my service realms — that plunged me into the depths of misery.

I do think the gospel helps with happiness to the extent it keeps you out of jail, out of doing stupid things that get you disabled or injured, from being saddled with child support due to out-of-wedlock children, etcetera. It helped my daughter emerge with strong values, and of course the presence of BYU as a low cost, wholesome place for the average traditional believing Mormon young adult has been a great boon.

But in terms of day to day service — I see the church as simply a place to put in — and not to “take out”. You know my story. When I’ve tried to “take out” on basic things like serving a mission, adopting a child, or reclaiming my personal service time due to physical and mental healthy issues, the leaders didn’t give a hoot. But as a place to serve with all your might, expecting nothing in return, it’s a good place to be. And when you assert yourself on those issues, and put yourself first, it’s not well received by the existing leaders. But want to put it with no expectation of accountability or reciprocity, it’s a great place to serve.

The problem is that the world at large is like that. The entire WORLD needs your service hours, and in my view, the church no longer provides an edge to make it the preferred place to dedicate those hours. Casual service — I’m all for it! Service in ways I enjoy! I’m in! But ask me to make sacrifices for the time being, and I’m not so sure.

[Anonymous]

Maté is strong stuff possibly more so than black tea.

[Anonymous]

Having a multi-generational family with whom you share certain traditions and characteristics is absolutely wonderful – except when it isn’t. I am sure Elder Oaks is happy and content with his own MGF – and so are most people he know in the Church. It also fits perfectly the Malachi / Elijah references. There should be no surprise in that part of what he said.

There also are terrible cultural aspects outside the Church. He just appears not to be able to see the ones within it – and that isn’t surprising, either.

Finally, in theory, there is a Gospel culture – but I am not aware of any point in history when people were able to live it (except for examples I see as allegorical) It is described in the scriptures as “Zion”.

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

Second, his last sentence…

Quote:

Make plans that will strengthen—not weaken—your future Church activity.

This bothers me. It’s not about your church activity — it’s about the happiness of your life. This means your family life, your personal life, your leisure time, your mental health, your professional life, your comfort level when financial calamity strikes, etcetera. Why does it have to be about the church all the time?????? Happiness is the object and design of our whole EXISTENCE, not church activity as the epicenter of happiness.

I went to LDS employment services after my mission to help me get a job. I remember being told to plan my career trajectory in a field where I would be assured of work free Sundays and that I could step away from to serve senior missions in my twilight years. Perhaps something in law or banking would fit the bill.

At the time I was already a few years into a hotel management degree and just looking for an after school job but I had to sit through the presentation before I could apply for their open listings.

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

Heber13 wrote:

They see the church as the vehicle to get them to that destination [edit: Happiness?], and so they talk about it that way. They aren’t necessarily wrong.

But I have the same frustrations you seem to be expressing…it can seem to resort to “church activity” is all that matters…as in…church activity will translate to happiness, instead of living the gospel will translate to happiness.

I don’t even think fully living the gospel brings happiness. [Emphasis added by H13] Sometimes the things they ask you to do cause untold stress and unhappiness. I know that staying in my marriage due to the temple covenant and promise I’d made was a massive source of unhappiness for many years until I learned to cope. Staying in my calling when I was burnt out caused misery. Exposure to toxic personalities in the church — moreso than any other place in my service realms — that plunged me into the depths of misery.

I just cannot disagree enough with the underlined statement above. I think it is because this point has become the center of MY journey, although I realize it does not makes sense or is not meaningful to other people, and I sound like an idiot to others.

Based on your experiences you’ve shared SD…you are not wrong in your view of how the church and church service shape your feelings. I just want to try to make that as clear as possible…you are completely 100% valid in feeling like you do…and so many others reading your posts identify with the feelings your express so well…and I learn a lot from your posts, so thanks for sharing your view.

But I think we both agree it is not the only valid view of things. From my own personal experiences, I do not see it that way at all, and actually see that living the gospel fully, the Gospel of Jesus Christ (if we can find out what that is separate and apart from church itself) is exactly the very thing that leads to complete and total happiness. It is the only way. Jesus is the only way. It is the very thing that gives us the strength and perspectives to know how to deal with pain and suffering that sometimes comes with church service, or our personal situations. It is the difference between Pharisees handling a situation, and Jesus Christ showing a better way to handle it. It is the difference between stress, and love. It is the paradox that I will suffer and have stress by doing the things asked of me at church while also at the same time have capacity to love. That is the gospel to me.

The root cause of my pain and suffering was NOT the gospel. While I had many frustrations and pains come from things at church, including burn out and how church people treated me or judged me…the GOSPEL or the gospel culture was not the source of any of that. At some point when I needed to be released from callings…I asked for it. Church culture may discourage that…or give me stress or give me pressures to try harder to take more on…but the gospel teaches me to handle those stresses and pressures in the most healthy and spiritual way. And I had loving church leaders who also understood the gospel enough to support me. And some didn’t. But some did.

I think it is important for me to share that, so that readers on this forum can know that there are multiple experiences. Even if mine differ from yours. That is OK. StayingLDS is not about tolerating the church so we don’t offend our families. StayingLDS (according to Heber13) is that I embrace the paradox and find meaning and value in the mormonism that has so many flaws but is pointing many people towards truth and the gospel of Jesus Christ. And that makes it worth it to stay and engage in it and have faith in it.

The Gospel may even help you stay long enough you are surprised at how well the church does in so many situations, despite itself.

[Anonymous]

Here is where it gets murky — what is the gospel then? Is it faith, repentance, baptism, gift of the holy host and endure to the end and that’s it? And can you live that fully without stepping foot inside an LDS church?

And how about the phrase “endure” to the end? To endure means to put up with in my view. We endure hardship, endure pain, endure adversity. None of that sounds very happiness-inducing to me. If the fifth element of the gospel was “enjoy to the end” it might be different.

In my experience, the idea of repentance has not delivered the joy that Enos once felt. Never have I felt forgiveness or burdens lifted as I’ve reprented. Once I fasted for 3 solid days (I kid you not) when I was in my early twenties and I felt nothing spiritual about it – in spite of prayer and thirsting for spirituality and forgiveness. What sticks out was what I ate to break the fast — a pita sandwich with lettuce, ham and cheese in it. With a glass of water. Best meal I ever ate in my life…

I guess I’m not even sure if I believe in Christ as a literal son of God who died for our sins either, although I love the symbolism of Justice and Mercy, and the perfect man. I accepted that idea when I was growing up out of the church, and then as a baptized Mormon. But if you don’t have a deep testimony of that, then it’s hard to embrace all that the gospel entails.

I do think that many of Christ’s principles — forgiveness, loving our neighbor, serving others, watching our thoughts etcetera does produce some happiness, but so much gets attached to “the gospel” that has nothing to do with the pure principles of happiness that it can drive you miserable if you follow some of those “enhancements”. And you can learn those principles by taking a secular course in how to be happy.

And its also hard to know what those accessories in the LDS version of the Gospel are, and its hard to know what are the core principles. I would suspect that if you asked 10 Mormons you’d get 10 different answers.

Shoring up my case is the temple marriage thing. If you believe that is part of the Gospel, (it IS a gospel ordinance) for some people it has kept them in marriages they should have otherwise left and been happier. I’m fortunate to have learned to cope to the point I’d rather stay married, but I’ll tell you, the first decade was sheer hades for me.

So, we can agree to disagree again. I do agree that living the LDS version of the gospel, with most of its trappings keeps some people out of jail (word of wisdom, for example), but it’s not been a recipe for happiness for me. Boundary setting, chasing service that speaks to my passions, sharing my talents with other people, achieving meaningful goals — those things bring me happiness. The “love God with all your heart might mind and soul, and love your neighbor as yourself” has helped, but those phrases don’t necessarily cascade into the first principles and ordinance of the gospel directly. Nor do they flow into so much of what the LDS church says must be done for salvation or happiness. The logical connections aren’t there for me.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

the Gospel of Jesus Christ (if we can find out what that is separate and apart from church itself) is exactly the very thing that leads to complete and total happiness.

Heber, I think you and SD are using different definitions of the word gospel. If you’ve defined the gospel to be the path that leads one to happiness, of course you’re happy living the gospel. It’s a tautology. However, if your definition of the gospel is the doctrine of the church, or even just what the GA would call core gospel principles it’s hardly surprising if living the gospel does not lead to happiness.

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

Here is where it gets murky — what is the gospel then? Is it faith, repentance, baptism, gift of the holy host and endure to the end and that’s it? And can you live that fully without stepping foot inside an LDS church?

And how about the phrase “endure” to the end? To endure means to put up with in my view. We endure hardship, endure pain, endure adversity. None of that sounds very happiness-inducing to me. If the fifth element of the gospel was “enjoy to the end” it might be different.

I’ve given some thought to this over time, and of late I have considered especially the “endure” part. I do believe the gospel is faith, repentance, and baptism. I’m not sure the GotHG as we teach it is actually a part of it, but I do believe there is a component that involves the Spirit (baptism of fire). I’m also not sure about “endure to the end,” again at least in the way it’s taught in the church. Frankly I think we may not really be using or understanding the word as it was meant, and the idea is more prevalent in the BoM than it is in the Bible. However, there is likely something to continuing in faith or belief in Christ and following Him. That may well be the endure part. I have considered enduring hardships as a part of what it could mean, but I am not at all sure (and doubt) it has anything to do with that. I have had other ponderings about enduring but I don’t wish to write a new gospel or epistle here.

That said, yes, I do believe one can fully live the gospel outside the CoJCoLDS.

Quote:

In my experience, the idea of repentance has not delivered the joy that Enos once felt. Never have I felt forgiveness or burdens lifted as I’ve reprented. Once I fasted for 3 solid days (I kid you not) when I was in my early twenties and I felt nothing spiritual about it – in spite of prayer and thirsting for spirituality and forgiveness. What sticks out was what I ate to break the fast — a pita sandwich with lettuce, ham and cheese in it. With a glass of water. Best meal I ever ate in my life…

I’m not sure repentance has much to do with sackcloth and ashes. I think it has much more to do with change or willingness to change. There was a pretty good BYU devotional in March by Elder Clayton of the Seventy (he also spoke in April GC). Rather than quote extensively from it here, I’ll just link it. I really like his view of what repentance is. https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/weatherford-t-clayton_the-rock-of-our-redeemer/” class=”bbcode_url”>https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/weatherford-t-clayton_the-rock-of-our-redeemer/

BTW, I don’t think not eating or drinking for three days was a good idea. I can see why you got no spiritual experience out of it.

Quote:

I guess I’m not even sure if I believe in Christ as a literal son of God who died for our sins either, although I love the symbolism of Justice and Mercy, and the perfect man. I accepted that idea when I was growing up out of the church, and then as a baptized Mormon. But if you don’t have a deep testimony of that, then it’s hard to embrace all that the gospel entails.

Me either, and I also love the symbolism. I simply choose to believe there is something to it, whether or not there was a literal Son or crucifixion and resurrection. I think believing is enough.

Quote:

I do think that many of Christ’s principles — forgiveness, loving our neighbor, serving others, watching our thoughts etcetera does produce some happiness, but so much gets attached to “the gospel” that has nothing to do with the pure principles of happiness that it can drive you miserable if you follow some of those “enhancements”. And you can learn those principles by taking a secular course in how to be happy.

I do believe the idea of loving one another is part of the gospel, especially as separate from the church. It was a main teaching of Christ but it’s also almost universally taught among all religions and belief systems. There has to be something to that, it didn’t just happen.

Quote:

And its also hard to know what those accessories in the LDS version of the Gospel are, and its hard to know what are the core principles. I would suspect that if you asked 10 Mormons you’d get 10 different answers.

This is related to the last one. I agree, sometimes it is hard to differentiate what’s gospel and what’s teachings of men or “the church.” Believing the gospel is simple on purpose I choose to keep it as simple as possible. Hence, faith, repentance and baptism. (I’m not contradicting myself here, I believe loving one another is part of faith and maybe enduring.)

Quote:

Shoring up my case is the temple marriage thing. If you believe that is part of the Gospel, (it IS a gospel ordinance) for some people it has kept them in marriages they should have otherwise left and been happier. I’m fortunate to have learned to cope to the point I’d rather stay married, but I’ll tell you, the first decade was sheer hades for me.

I don’t believe temple marriage is part of the gospel. It is a church ordinance.

Quote:

So, we can agree to disagree again. I do agree that living the LDS version of the gospel, with most of its trappings keeps some people out of jail (word of wisdom, for example), but it’s not been a recipe for happiness for me. Boundary setting, chasing service that speaks to my passions, sharing my talents with other people, achieving meaningful goals — those things bring me happiness. The “love God with all your heart might mind and soul, and love your neighbor as yourself” has helped, but those phrases don’t necessarily cascade into the first principles and ordinance of the gospel directly. Nor do they flow into so much of what the LDS church says must be done for salvation or happiness. The logical connections aren’t there for me.

I do agree that living the gospel according to the CoJCoLDS can bring happiness. It’s not the only way to find happiness, and living the gospel outside the CoJCoLDS can also bring happiness. I also believe other faiths and belief systems can bring happiness. Our church, like many others, tends to add to gospel and I do believe that God expects us to figure that out – but if we don’t it doesn’t hurt. We do not believe in killing our neighbors just because they believe differently after all.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

BTW, I don’t think not eating or drinking for three days was a good idea. I can see why you got no spiritual experience out of it.

I was 20 years old at the time. I now realize that was very extreme of me to do that. But you could argue that I might have got some kind of spiritual uplift on Day 1 or maybe part of Day 2. I only broke the fast on Day 3 when I got so weak I couldn’t function very well.

But I wasn’t talking about the behavior change component of repentence necessarily — I can point to specific things in my life from which I’ve repented, and have experienced a full behavior change. But I have never felt that “burdens lifted” sensation and “flip of a switch” experience that Enos reported in the BoM. That was the big disappointment I was talking about. The BoM raised expectations I could have that, and I never did, even after sincerely trying. It was as if I could change my behavior without any real connection or input or validation from God.

Quote:

I don’t believe temple marriage is part of the gospel. It is a church ordinance.

Ask a few other people that question, and you’ll get a different answer. Confusing is the BoM is supposed to contain the fullness of the gospel, but then the D&C adds Temple Marriage, without which we can’t go to the highest level of the celestial kingdom.

Quote:

I do agree that living the gospel according to the CoJCoLDS can bring happiness. It’s not the only way to find happiness, and living the gospel outside the CoJCoLDS can also bring happiness. I also believe other faiths and belief systems can bring happiness. Our church, like many others, tends to add to gospel and I do believe that God expects us to figure that out – but if we don’t it doesn’t hurt. We do not believe in killing our neighbors just because they believe differently after all.

And we have seen here that some people, in cutting the church out of their life, find it helped their mental health. I never recommend a complete severing of one’s relationship with the church, as I feel those are very small exceptions (the mental health thing). But I do think that one needs to decide the extent to which the LDS gospel, however defined, delivers on the happiness continuum, and make whatever adjustments are necessary to be happy when the LDS gospel fails to deliver…

I am reminded here of a quote from a management/leadership author I like. He tends to make short, disjointed statements that leave you thinking — a lot like some of the scripture you have. After a lot of thought, you come up with your own meaning and it lasts forever — becomes part of your psyche.

He made the comment that in our careers we should be careful the kinds of organizations we decide to work for. Then he says “What’s most important is what you become”.

Those two statements never made sense to me side by side. There was no logical connection. Then I reflected on my participation in the LDS church. How for a time, it encouraged anti-same sex marriage ideas, judgmentalism towards others who were not TR-holders, persistence in situations that were dead ends and should have been left behind years previously, poor mental and physical health, and general unhappiness. I started looking a selfless volunteers are simple entities to staff the church. How my association with the LDS church, while producing a number of positive attributes in me, also produced a lot of bad stuff in my character.

Then I understood what he meant — go to work for a mediocre company, and you’ll emerge at the end of your life with mediocre leadership skills. You may not be inspired and just end up cynical and doing the minimum — no joy from progression etecetera.

So, while the LDS church certainly has helped me become charitable, hardworking, a better teacher, stable in my marriage, and did give me some leadership experiences — as I got more and more experience, it also breeded a lot of negative things in my character . So, I think we all need to look at what our church experience is helping us “become” .

For some of us, it’s beautiful, for others, it’s not. Each has to choose a path that helps them become who they want to be.

[Anonymous]

ydeve wrote:

Heber, I think you and SD are using different definitions of the word gospel. If you’ve defined the gospel to be the path that leads one to happiness, of course you’re happy living the gospel. It’s a tautology. However, if your definition of the gospel is the doctrine of the church, or even just what the GA would call core gospel principles it’s hardly surprising if living the gospel does not lead to happiness.

Great point, ydeve. Let’s define it so it is clear what we are talking about.

This was the kind of definition I was working under…as taught by the church…

Quote:

The word gospel means “good news.” The good news is that Jesus Christ has made a perfect atonement for mankind that will redeem all mankind from the grave and reward each individual according to his or her works.

Bible Dictionary

Quote:

The gospel is our Heavenly Father’s plan of happiness. The central doctrine of the gospel is the Atonement of Jesus Christ.

LDS.org Gospel Topics

President Monson wrote:

Actually, love is the very essence of the gospel, and Jesus Christ is our Exemplar.

…

Dale Carnegie, a well-known American author and lecturer, believed that each person has within himself or herself the “power to increase the sum total of [the] world’s happiness … by giving a few words of sincere appreciation to someone who is lonely or discouraged.” Said he, “Perhaps you will forget tomorrow the kind words you say today, but the recipient may cherish them over a lifetime.”

May we begin now, this very day, to express love to all of God’s children, whether they be our family members, our friends, mere acquaintances, or total strangers. As we arise each morning, let us determine to respond with love and kindness to whatever might come our way. – TSM, April 2014

It is hard for me to understand how you can truly understand the gospel of Jesus Christ, and believe it does not lead to happiness, especially, as it is taught to us…the essence is about love. I do understand that some things in church that we think we “should” do can lead to disappointment, frustration, and suffering. To me, those negative feelings just indicate we have not yet captured the true meaning of Jesus’ teachings, and we need to return to align our will to the gospel principles lost to us. Therefore, greater study and seeking leads to true gospel principles and true happiness.

If you start from square 1, that the gospel of Jesus Christ is about LOVE, then you go from there and add the teachings of the church in proper light and understanding…it does not lead to true enduring unhappiness. There may be personal circumstance and variation and timing, but eventually…it is God’s plan for ultimate happiness, when it is properly understood. That’s not really tautology, it is religion.

The gospel is “good news” and love at it’s core. Some doctrines or principles taught by GAs may need clarification in my mind to fit into God’s plan of happiness, called the gospel. Not everything said at church is something I believe leads to happiness. The gospel is greater than the church. We should separate those two things out, right? But the core of Christ’s gospel is love, and that leads to happiness…for everyone, always.

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

Here is where it gets murky — what is the gospel then?

I shared some thoughts in response to ydeve. I believe it is at the core love.

Quote:

Is it faith, repentance, baptism, gift of the holy host and endure to the end

Yes.

Quote:

and that’s it?

No.

Quote:

And can you live that fully without stepping foot inside an LDS church?

Absolutely!

Quote:

And how about the phrase “endure” to the end? To endure means to put up with in my view. We endure hardship, endure pain, endure adversity. None of that sounds very happiness-inducing to me. If the fifth element of the gospel was “enjoy to the end” it might be different.

One of my all time favorite GC talks is from Neal A Maxwell on this topic…I recommend everyone read it …Endure it Well

In it, this apostle writes…

Quote:

Paul observed, “Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness.” (Heb. 12:11.) Such “peaceable fruit” comes only in the appointed season thereof, after the blossoms and the buds.

Otherwise, if certain mortal experiences were cut short, it would be like pulling up a flower to see how the roots are doing. Put another way, too many anxious openings of the oven door, and the cake falls instead of rising. Moreover, enforced change usually does not last, while productive enduring can ingrain permanent change. (See Alma 32:13–16.)

Patient endurance is to be distinguished from merely being “acted upon.” Endurance is more than pacing up and down within the cell of our circumstance; it is not only acceptance of the things allotted to us, it is to “act for ourselves” by magnifying what is allotted to us. (See Alma 29:3, 6.)

If, for instance, we are always taking our temperature to see if we are happy, we will not be. If we are constantly comparing to see if things are fair, we are not only being unrealistic, we are being unfair to ourselves.

Therefore, true enduring represents not merely the passage of time, but the passage of the soul—and not merely from A to B, but sometimes all the way from A to Z. To endure in faith and doeth God’s will. (See D&C 63:20; D&C 101:35) therefore involves much more than putting up with a circumstance.

Rather than shoulder-shrugging, true enduring is soul-trembling. Jesus bled not at a few, but “at every pore.” (D&C 19:18.)

Enduring to the end is the “passage of the soul” through this mortal experience. We choose how we will approach the experience, and what we observe and learn from it.

It is not just “put up with it”.

And as we understand that approach to mortality, we can find those hidden lessons that bring true happiness.

SilentDawning wrote:

I do agree that living the LDS version of the gospel, with most of its trappings keeps some people out of jail (word of wisdom, for example), but it’s not been a recipe for happiness for me.

Then, expand your definition of the gospel as God intends it to be understood. They are not trappings. Love sets us free.

When you do find that road to love as the core of the gospel, you can return to church, the LDS church, and with a new perspective practice living it with your brothers and sisters…sharing the light you find, and seeking the light others found…not just to stay out of jail or prevent bad things from happening…but in order to experience this life with the connection of others because we were not created to be alone, we were created, as the “good news” tells us, to find love. And we don’t experience full love by ourselves closed up in protection mode. The paradox is, we endure in love and happiness.

Many of you know from my posts over the years that I get in crappy moods, and I have had bad things happen, and church drives me nuts at times.

But I continue to try to center myself in the gospel, because that is the source of true happiness. I really believe in that, if we don’t limit the definition too narrowly, is the plan of happiness for everyone. Some may be semantics, but how else are we to find and develop ideas without trying to use some words to express our experiences and feelings? We do the best we can with the limitations we have. But…we can find the common ground of love, and work with that as the true gospel principles…finding ways to deal with all other things we are taught at church, and aligning it to truth in our minds.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

I love this definition.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

When you do find that road to love as the core of the gospel, you can return to church, the LDS church, and with a new perspective practice living it with your brothers and sisters…sharing the light you find, and seeking the light others found.

I used to wish this was true in the universal sense, but it is not. There are many paths to the top of Mt Fuji, but not all of them are traversable by everyone. The LDS church, or even church at all for that matter, is an unhealthy path for a large number of people. But, like you said, it’s important to find the common ground. We’re all trying to reach the same summit – love.

[Anonymous]

ydeve wrote:

There are many paths to the top of Mt Fuji, but not all of them are traversable by everyone. The LDS church, or even church at all for that matter, is an unhealthy path for a large number of people.

I agree with you that it can be for some people. I would distinguish those things from the gospel. I can think of many examples of that being the case.

[Anonymous]

I think I misread your comment. I understood it to mean that seeing the road to love as the core of the gospel allows one to function and be happy in the LDS church. And I responded by saying that the LDS path is, for many, antithetical to travelling towards the summit, which you have described as the gospel. I’m seeing a lot of similar sentiment in SD’s posts. That the church has, in many respects, gotten in the way of living what you described as the gospel.

It feels like we’re kind of talking around each other.

[Author]

Posts