Let the Mountains Shout for Joy!

I've never read a passage of scripture more excited than Doctrine and Covenants 128:18-24. Joseph's energy in it makes me want to get just as excited about the Gospel. When I think about it with the right attitude, it's really obvious why we should be so. Just look at the doctrine contained in Section 128: God has given the righteous dead the opportunity to receive all the blessings possible from the ordinances of the gospel of Christ, and he has given his mortal saints the privilege of facilitating such a magnificent work! Not only that, but, having been raised in the restored gospel, I have had the immense gift of being one of the "babes and sucklings" who receive knowledge kept from the world for centuries (128:18)! Life is amazing!

Without A Hurt the Heart is Hollow

If thou art called to pass through tribulation; if thou art in perils among false brethren; if thou art among perils among robbers; if thou art in perils by land or by sea; [i]f thou art accused with all manner of false accusations; if thine enemies fall upon thee; if they tear thee from the society of thy father and mother and brethren and sisters; and if with a drawn sword thine enemies tear thee from the bosom of thy wife, and of thine offspring, and thine elder son, although but six years of age, shall cling to thy garments, and shall say, My father, my father, why can't you stay with us? O, my father, what are the men going to do with you? and if then he shall be thrust from thee by the sword, and thou be dragged to prison, and thine enemies prowl around thee like wolves for the blood of the lamb; [a]nd if thou shouldst be cast into the pit, or into the hands of murderers, and the sentence of death passed upon thee; if thou be cast into the deep; if the billowing surge conspire against thee; if fierce winds become thine enemy; if the heavens gather blackness, and all the elements combine to hedge up the way; and above all, if the very jaws of hell shall gape open the mouth wide after thee, know thou, my son, that all these things shall give thee experience, and shall be for thy good.

Doctrine and Covenants 122:5-7

Sure they will. Why not? The only problem is that when asked how affliction will be for your good, most people will just regurgitate a trite Sunday school answer about how you will get stronger from it. Stronger to what end? To deal with more affliction, of course. The don't think about it enough to realize that this reply utterly begs the question.

Fortunately, soon after this fallacy occurred to me, I realized that the Book of Mormon contains a real answer to the question: For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, ... righteousness could not have been brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility (1 Nephi 2:11). You simply can't have happiness without misery. By giving us greater pain, the Lord opens up the possibility of greater happiness if we endure it well.

In my choir concert this weekend, we sang a set of mostly bittersweet pieces about remembering, including "Try to Remember" from The Fantasticks. The first two verses tenderly ask the listener to recall simpler, happier times "when life was so tender that no-one wept except the willow." The third verse, though changes tack a little:

Deep in December, it's nice to remember,
Although you know the snow will follow.
Deep in December, it's nice to remember
Without a hurt the heart is hollow.
Deep in December, it's nice to remember
The fire of September that made us mellow.
Deep in December our hearts will remember
And follow.

We can't have joy without pain. It's simply not possible, and I'm okay with that. My life is full of both righteousness and wickedness, holiness and misery, good and bad, corruption and incorruption, sense and insensibility; but it is full, above all, of joy. I don't like the bad things when they come, of course, and they sometimes sting pretty badly long after the fact, but I wouldn't forget them for anything.

The Patriarchal Priesthood

It is the duty of the Twelve,in all large branches of the church, to ordain evangelical ministers, as they shall be designated unto them by revelation—the order of this priesthood was confirmed to be handed down from father to son,and rightly belongsto the literal descendants of the chosen seed, to whom the promises were made (Doctrine & Covenants 107:39-40).

I had never thought of evangelists, or patriarchs, belonging to a separate order of the priesthood. I heard about it in class the other day and thought it sounded a little strange, but it's right there in the Doctrine & Covenants. It seems to be, just as everything else is, a subset of the Melchizedek Priesthood, since the power and authority of the higher, or Melchizedek Priesthood, is to hold the keys of all the spiritual blessings of the church (Doctrine & Covenants 107:18).

It's interesting that the text doesn't mention who may act as an evangelical minister in case nobody can be found of the proper lineage. After all, several verses explain what to do if no literal descendant of Aaron can be found to act as a bishop. Is there some other place in the scriptures that tells us where we get our patriarchs in this case?

On Church Disciplinary Councils

Doctrine & Covenants Section 102 prescribes the formation of a high council of the Church to resolve disciplinary matters too great for the bishoprics. I didn't really get anything new from it this week. I've read it many times, and the procedures laid out in it are pretty simple. Actually, I guess that's a notable fact: Church disciplinary councils are much simpler than criminal courts. They don't have to worry about memorizing the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure or anything like that. That's a pretty big deal. I'm so glad my church's ecclesiastical leadership isn't an overblown, over-regulated bureaucracy.

"Renounce War and Publish Peace"

In Doctrine & Covenants 98, the Lord lays out the law of war:

And again, this is the law that I gave unto mine ancients, that they should not go out unto battle against any nation, kindred, tongue, or people, save I, the Lord, commanded them. And if any nation, tongue, or people should proclaim war against them, they should first lift a standard of peace unto that people, nation, or tongue; and if that people did not accept the offering of peace, neither the second nor the third time, they should bring these testimonies before the Lord; then I, the Lord, would give unto them a commandment, and justify them in going out to battle against that nation, tongue, or people.

Doctrine & Covenants 98:33-36

He also states, however, that his saints are to "renounce war and proclaim peace" (Doctrine & Covenants 98:16).

My brother, Cameron, just treated his first US casualty at a combat outpost somewhere in Afghanistan. He left to war about two months ago after joining the Army as a medic earlier this year.

I always knew—logically, at least—that war is bad. I've even been vaguely frightened before that it would come more directly to this country. Now, though, one of my best and oldest friends is in some amount of continual mortal danger, and war is genuinely and personally scary.

War is serious business. Even God's permission to fight doesn't make it a good idea to do so. Wars last and escalate, and thousands on thousands of other people's brothers are going to end up in it, too.

The Most Amazing Thing that Never Happened

Doctrine & Covenants 93:23 has just made my afternoon terribly unproductive:

Ye were also in the beginning with the Father; that which is Spirit, even the Spirit of truth.

How am I supposed to get through today's study when I've started wondering what exactly it means to be "in the beginning" and, by extension, why anything exists at all?

I've wondered these things before, fortunately forgetting them quicky amidst much more pressing, mundane matters. I never really resolved the question, though. I know next to nothing about physics and cosmology, but it seems to me that I would have heard by now if they had fully developed a satisfacty explanation. Perhaps there was a Big Bang, but what went "bang" in the first place? Whether scientifically or spiritually based, ex nihilo creation is utterly nonsensical. I've gotten so confused by the matter that today it even occurred to me to think that, in fact, the universe doesn't exist.

That one thought pretty quickly showed me what was wrong with my reasoning: I've always assumed that existence was an anomaly amidst a prevalence of nothing, that there had to be a cause for it. Obviously, though, things do exist, and my premises are therefore wrong. There is a universe, and it doesn't matter why or how it got here because maybe it didn't. The beginning of existence is probably the most amazing thing that never happened.

That wasn't as overtly spiritual as may have been expected here, but really, all subjects, spiritual and scientific, are one in the end. this question, in particular, is exceedingly important to the understanding or even acceptance of spiritual concepts. At any rate, now I can finally return to everyday, rational thought.

The Key to the Knowledge of God

And if your eye be single to my glory, your whole bodies must be filled with light, and there shall be no darkness in you; and that body which is filled with light comprehendeth all things. Therefore, sanctify yourselves that your minds become single to God, and the days will come that you shall see him;for he will unveil his face unto you, and it shall be in his own time, and in his own way, and according to his own will.

Doctrine & Covenants 88:67-8

I never understood this well at all. Single eyes and bodies full of light always sounded like a load of gibberish. It finally started to make sense, though, when I combined it with another scripture I read the other day: For the word of the Lord is truth, and whatsoever is truth is light, and whatsoever is light is Spirit, even the Spirit of Jesus Christ. And the Spirit giveth light to every man that cometh into the world: and the Spirit enlighteneth every man through the world, that hearkeneth to the voice of the Spirit (Doctrine & Covenants 84:45-6).

So the light comes from the Spirit. It's not a very substantial fact by itself, but having made that first connection, I easily thought of the following familiar verses:

• The glory of God is intelligence, or, in other words, light and truth (Doctrine & Covenants 93:36).
• For behold, this is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man (Moses 1:39).
• And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent (John 17:3).

Let's piece these together:

• The Holy Ghost gives us light.
• Light is synonymous with glory and truth.
• Glory is in the eternal life of man.
• Eternal life is to know God.

The sum of these verses is to begin to explain the role of the Holy Ghost in bringing about eternal life. They also add some meaning to Doctrine & Covenants 84:19, which says that the Melchizedek Priesthood holdeth the key of... the knowledge of God. I've occasionally wondered what exactly the Lord means by the key of the knowledge of God, but it now appears that he is referring directly to the key of the bestowal of the gift of the Holy Ghost, which is not otherwise specifically mentioned in his description of the Melchizedek Priesthood.

So it turns out that the gift of the Holy Ghost, as the means to eternal life, is kind of a bigger deal than we might often think. Elder David Bednar was kind enough to neatly summarize this for me:

Praying, studying, gathering, worshipping, serving, and obeying are not isolated and independent items on a lengthy gospel checklist of things to do. Rather, each of these righteous practices is an important element in an overarching spiritual quest to fulfill the mandate to receive the Holy Ghost. The commandments from God we obey and the inspired counsel from Church leaders we follow principally focus upon obtaining the companionship of the Spirit. Fundamentally, all gospel teachings and activities are centered on coming unto Christ by receiving the Holy Ghost in our lives.

Why to Testify of Christ

Much of the second half of Section 84 is instructions regarding missionary work, listing all kinds of pertinent duties and blessings. Even more importantly, it explains why we do it in the first place: If we don't, we're damned.

Verse 61 tells us that the Lord forgives us with this commandment—that you remain steadfast in your minds in solemnity and the spirit of prayer, in bearing testimony to all the world of those things which are communicated unto you. This reminds me of a verse I learned of as a missionary: Nevertheless, ye are blessed, for the testimony which ye have borne is recorded in heaven for the angels to look upon; and they rejoice over you, and your sins are forgiven you (D&C 62:3).

These are very happy verses and don't contain explicit warnings of damnation at disobedience. However, they also reminded me of King Benjamin's final address, in which he warned his people that he that forgiveth not his neighbor's trespasses when he says he repents, the same hath brought himself under condemnation Mosiah 26:31). It seems to me that directly forgiving others would be considered on the same principles as giving them the capacity to seek God's forgiveness. If you don't give your neighbors a chance to repent, why would the Lord give you one?

Of course, that all makes the commandment seem harsher and more selfish than it really is. Bearing testimony of Jesus Christ is not something we simply get out of the way to avoid hellfire; it's indicative of our obedience to the greatest commandment Christ ever gave: ...That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another John 13:34). If we don't share the Gospel with others, we obviously don't love them enough, and therefore aren't truly Christian. On the other hand, if we do love them, we will do everything in our power to ensure that they get to feel, as soon as possible, all of the love of God that we have.

Condemnation

And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received—which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation. And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all. And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them...

Doctrine & Covenants 84:54-57

This is not metaphorical story of some distant people. Those children of Zion include us. President Benson mentioned this verse in his famous talk, Flooding the Earth with the Book of Mormon, saying that we are even yet under God's condemnation for having treated it lightly. I know I've felt pretty well condemned for it. Studying consistently has always been very hard for me, so I'm lately trying to read it more regularly and in larger amounts than I ever have, and I'm doing (relatively) well so far.

Though studying the Book of Mormon is a great start, though, it isn't enough to solve the problem. President Benson said that in order to escape condemnation, we must flood the earth with the Book of Mormon. My Google search for President Benson's talk happened to find for me an excellent example of the ideal attitude: there is a man in Indianapolis blogging about his frequent attempts to give out copies of the Book of Mormon. Frequent, in this case, means at least once every few days, and he seems to be remarkably successful.

I suppose it's not really that remarkable, though, when you consider whose book he is giving out. God isn't the sort to get tired of our pathetic efforts and just shake his head as we fail. He will help me to stop taking the Book of Mormon lightly, for both my own sake and the sake of all mankind. (Keeping this blog—especially publicly—is actually a great step toward that end. I never would have made my faith this visible even very recently.)

More on the United Order

In explaining the United Order, the Lord repeatedly mentions the apostates who apostatize after receiving their inheritances(D&C 85:2), or those who have not kept the commandment, but have broken the covenant through covetousness, and with feigned words (D&C 104:4). He makes their spiritual fate clear: It is contrary to the will of God that [they]... should have their names enrolled with the people of God. I began to wonder, though, what was to happen to the property of Church members who defied the Order and were excommunicated.

It turns out that it is really quite simple. In D&C 134:10, the Prophet declared that we do not believe that any religious society has authority to try me on the right of property or life, [or] to take from them this world's goods... They can only excommunicate them from their society, and withdraw from them their fellowship. The member's property was legally deeded to them, so the Church couldn't take it away. Thus, the United Order's basis of private property ownership therefore would have protected the members from robbery by the Church, and the Church from false accusations of such by disgruntled apostates.

On an unrelated topic, I find it interesting that in 104:80, when the Lord is commanding the Church to pay off its debts, he says, And inasmuch as you are diligent and humble, and exercise the prayer of faith, behold, I will soften the hearts of those to whom you are in debt, until I shall send means unto you for your deliverance. He didn't promise that he would get the Church's debts canceled, as one might expect. There is no free lunch, even - especially - for the chosen people of God. He loves and helps and forgives, but he doesn't coddle.

Why would the United Order work?

I got sucked onto a rather large tangent while reading Section 78 of the Doctrine and Covenenants today. While I was studying background information on this revelation, my attention got caught on the management of the United Order, the system given in connection with the early revelation of the law of consecration.

The united order was not socialism, as Church leaders such as Marion G. Romney and J. Reuben Clark enthusiastically pointed out. The model seems to actually have been as follows: Participation in the United Order was entirely voluntary. Upon entering the order, the head of a household would give all his means to the church. Then, instead of the church dictating his "needs", he would decide himself what portion his family needed back, "every man according to his wants and his needs, inasmuch as his wants are just" (D&C 82:17). This decision would need to be coordinated with the bishop, who managed locally the affairs of the Order, neither man having the ultimate say. The amount of property being agreed upon, the family would receive a full and legal deed to the property (or "stewardship") delivered to them. The property was theirs to do with as they pleased; they were expected to do their best to multiply it and contribute to the church's storehouses for the furthering of the order and the care of the destitute, but the Church did not at all own their goods or run their business. This is quite contrary to the air of oppressive micromanagement that can easily come with a pure socialist government.

The United Order ultimately broke down due to the selfishness of its participants, but it's still interesting to think about why it lasted as long as it it, and what will eventually make it last forever. It's certainly not the money - at least, not beyond simply knowing that one is amply provided for as long as he works hard. Perhaps, though, that's enough.

I watched a video yesterday - before I even knew what this reading assignment was - of a lecture by motivational speaker and former Al Gore speechwriter Dan Pink. In his lecture and a related essay, Pink briefly discusses how, according to a study at MIT, monetary reward is actually detrimental to the motivation of many tasks. Once you pay your workers enough that money is no worry, Pink claims, your best bet is to stand back and let them be motivated by their passion for their art and desire to contribute to society.

I immediately agreed that this generally described my own motivations. I run on a significant dose of altruism (possibly too much, as college students generally seem wont to have). I'm studying computer science, not because it's a strong market, but because I love developing software and I think I can do something good with it; I'm currently helping design the software platform for a collaborative, non-partisan political effort, and I have another couple of voter-education software projects on the back burner. Furthermore, I eventually want to change my major to choral music education, less for the creative challenge of teaching than because I want to bring kids the joy that I get from singing. I really just want to enjoy a full life, with enough money that I can take good care of my family and spend plenty of time on my bike.

At a regional Church conference today, I heard Elder Jeffrey R. Holland speak on "building up the waste places of Zion." There are still plenty of waste places, and I want to build them. Some are literally geographic locations, but I suspect that most of the more pressing needs are abused populations, inadequate sociopolitical instituions, and other related problems. I want to build these waste places. If I can be certain that I can take care of myself and my family and maintain my bicycles while I do it, I will gladly contribute everything I can, of my own will and out of various of my my own passions, to build them.

I think this is part of what would have made the United Orders work - as far as they did, anyway. I believe that it is, in a way, what will make them work again. People will only be willing to contribute everything they have - first their money, but ultimately their passion for their work itself - if they get to focus entirely on deeper, more personal reasons for their contribution. The deepest, most compelling reason to do anything, of course, is charity. When we truly love the Lord and his children, we will gladly give anything and everything for their sakes, which in turn makes us love them even more powerfully.

I believe Pink's lecture refers to this study, which I haven't yet read, though it's certainly intriguing. A related study that I also intend to read is Karim Lakhani's "Why Hackers Do What They Do" from the book Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software.