I have been reading a discussion board on www.deseretnews.com and I find the conversation worthy of some thought.
Some are saying they have a testimony, yet the First Presidency is advocating something that is wrong. Perhaps more importantly, they are doing it in the name of the faith.
Others are saying these positions are incompatible. What do you think? Can a person have a testimony of the faith and believe the First Presidency is going astray in this aspect?
More to the point, can the First Presidency advocate things that are wrong (as some believe), in the name of the faith, and still be God's mouthpiece on earth, as they are believed to be?
Can a person maintain faith in the First Presidency and believe that they are advocating something God is against? If you really believe that it is wrong to ban same-sex marriage, and that God is against it, can you really believe that the Prophets and Apostles are speaking for God?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I think that judging whether or not somebody has a testimony is kind of a dangerous thing to do. However, here are my general thoughts on the matter:
If someone claims to have a testimony, believe them.
Also, having "a testimony" is not necessarily a comprehensive thing. Nephi talks about not knowing the meaning of all things, just that God loves his children, right? I think testimonies develop in bits and pieces. You may have a general sense that the gospel is true, and you're in the right place, without being completely comfortable with every aspect of it. So one might have a testimony of Joseph Smith, but struggle with gaining a testimony of President Monson. Not that they never will, but it just isn't there yet.
Also, this is my sense about revelation: Elder McConkie said on multiple occasions that we live on limited light. I think this is true for prophets as well as lay church members. I think that prophets and apostles have often paid a greater price to be at the level of spirituality they have attained, and therefore I believe that they are far more sensitive to the spirit than many. But I do not believe that God directs their every move. I think that he trusts them with his gospel. They are his stewards, but they are not perfect. Take note of the ways in which the church has changed since it was organized - it is mostly for the better. I think they are often left to their good judgment, have agency to work out difficult problems, be inspired as they pray for help, etc. Sometimes I think they may do things in a way that is not exactly as the Lord would have them do, but he can still be pleased with their sincerity, their prayerfulness, their honest desire to do good. And I think he will continue to work with them, as he does with us.
So I guess I do think that someone can have "a testimony" and feel like the First Presidency is advocating something that is wrong.
HOWEVER, that does not mean it is so. I think that there are some people (particularly on this issue) who are trying to be trendy and "open" as is the order of the day. I think people sometimes go to great measures to justify a position that is in direct conflict with church doctrine. I also think that for many, particularly those who have gay friends and family who they love deeply and are concerned for, this is a very sticky and difficult issue. It may take a long time for some to come to grips with church doctrine and policy on this matter. I don't think that disenfranchises their testimony, it only means that in one area of their lives, they are going to have to really want to do God's will, seek it out prayerfully, and be willing to accept it. If someone who is in disagreement with the First Presidency claims to have done this, take their word for it. Because in the end, testimony is really personal and ultimately between an individual and his maker, right?
The most important thing, for any of us, is to do our best to honestly desire to do what is right, and do everything we can to be as in line with the will of God as is possible at whatever point and circumstance we are in at a specific point in our lives.
I don't know if that really answered what you were getting at, but those are my thoughts. :)
Back in 1980, while investigating the church, I learned that blacks could not hold the priesthood before 1978. That was the end of the discussion for me. My husband is black and, back then, we had two beautiful little boys and I could not accept this as anything other than prejudice. Still, at the insistence of my husband, I read the bOM and prayed. I gained a testimony of the truthfulness of the BOM. That was it. When I decided to be baptized, two weeks after the missionaries entered our home, my husband asked about my feelings concerning blacks and the priesthood. It did not matter anymore.
Same with proposition 8.
It's nothing new. President Packer told us years ago that in the last days it would become increasingly difficult to stand with one foot in the world and one foot in the church. We've arrived. Sifting time is here.
To quickly respond to the first line. This is not judging whether people can have testimony. It is asking ourselves if, philosophically, they can coexist.
Does disagreement with the First Presidency over a stance in which they speak as a first presidency negate faith in them as the mouthpiece for the Lord.
This is not a question of do you think Jesse has faith because he/she does not agree with the church. Clearly you could extend it to that, but I do not let my mind judge other people's hearts and testimonies.
I added the last paragraph to further clarify. I am not asking us to judge people's testimonies.
I am asking if these two viewpoints are exclusive.
1. The First Presidency speaks for God
2. The First Presidency advocates something I believe is against the will of God.
Are they incompatible?
These two statements are incompatible.
What is the use of a prophet's voice in our lives if we choose to follow the opinions of men.
When the revelation on the priesthood came in 1978, formally-faithful members of the LDS church fell away, following after the traditions of men.
We either have a testimony of the truthfulness this church, which includes a living prophet, or we do not.
And yes, I am personally involved with gay friends and family members, practicing and non-practicing LDS, practicing and non-practicing Catholics, and some non-religious.
My testimony in no way diminishes my love for them. It increases it.
Comment on www.mormonconversation.wordpress.com
Post a Comment