In an amazing OP written by John Gustav-Wrathall of Young Stranger: On Unfairness and “Spiritual Reinforcements” he discusses the injustices polygamy heaped on early Mormon women like Emma, and compared those to the indignities and heartache suffered by gay Mormons in the wake of Prop 8:
And as the sense of anger and betrayal welled up in me, I remember the Spirit speaking very clearly to me. The Spirit said in essence: “Don’t be angry. Don’t be afraid. Your Heavenly Father loves you and is proud of you, and this will be made right.” It took some effort on my part to follow that prompting; to take a deep breath, and to set aside the anger. But when I did, I experienced this incredible peace rushing in. I attended Church the following Sunday, and greater spiritual gifts followed. Spiritual reinforcements, indeed.
But what God told me in those moments was not, “You just have to learn to accept this unfairness.” It was, in essence, “Be faithful. Be loving. Be patient. I will make this right.”
I had a similar experience when I attended the temple a year ago. As a lot of the temple language places women in a second class status to men, requiring women to be subjugated under men in a way men are not subject to the arm of flesh, I often feel that agreeing is morally wrong; I don’t believe women are second rate or should be subject to men, but that we are all equal before god. I wasn’t sure how I would feel, knowing that I don’t enjoy that aspect of the temple. I went with a prayer in my heart to understand and to be able to see things for what they are.
My experience was very similar to John’s above: an almost audible assurance that things would be made right and not to worry about them now. It was like I had a teflon shield in front of me, an assurance that those sexist throwbacks were not god’s will for women and didn’t have any bearing on me or my life. It was a liberating and comforting feeling, and it certainly felt (as do all revelations) like it originated outside of me. It was as if those sexist statements were being made in a different voice, one that did not speak for god or to me.
I can think of many types of slights people might experience in the church:
- Being single, divorced or childless and feeling like you’ve been placed in a lower status as a result.
- Not having a calling when you really want to serve.
- Someone, a leader or other member, giving offense while speaking as if having authority from the church.
- You feel you obeyed yet didn’t get what was promised.
- You are surrounded by like-minded people to whom you cannot relate.
- You feel overlooked, dismissed, or ostracized for things beyond your control or simply by virtue of your sex, race, or sexual orientation.
How about you?
- Have you ever felt you received a spiritual slight?
- Have you felt comforted like this when contemplating your own situation?
Discuss.
Wheat & Tares 
No.
The eternal message of “Be still and know that I am God” is very powerful for all of us. It can be especially effective medicine for a person for who chooses to perceive that he or she has been wronged, as Job did. Job wasn’t wronged, but he chose to perceive that he was, and his perception was his reality. But regardless, “Be still and know that I am God” is indeed powerful counsel for all of us.
Yes and I have received a similar message along with a calling to become part of the solution. We are being evolved at an accelerating rate toward enlightenment by a series of stair stepped metaphorical gospel paradigms, that course corrections are required as we learn should not be a surprise to anyone who is paying attention.
Hawkgirl:
People like John of Young Stranger are campaigning to make gay sex seem normal and wholesome when it is the antithesis of wholesome. His words are hollow.
I have a couple of issue with this. One, is you talk about feelings. Feelings are what they are, feelings. If someone feels something does it make it so? Not necessarily. Sometimes we interpret things incorrectly which leads to a feeling which is misplaced. And then when we understand the full context, perhaps the feelings change.
Because someone feels a “slight,” does not mean a slight is intended.
also, if someone derives a spiritual witness contrary to a particular doctrine or principle taught in the Church, how are we supposed to deal with that? I’ve had people tell me the Lord told them they didn’t have to pay tithing until their finances improved. Am I to accept that they receive a Revelation contrary to a commandment?
I am having a hard time with that idea. And I like #2 Jj’s comment. There is much we still don’t undestand.
Jeff, you bring up some interesting points, but let me play devils advocate. Thou shalt not kill, but Abraham was supposedly commanded to kill Isaac. Why the conflicting commands?
Sterling mcmurrin in 1955 felt the priesthood ban was not doctrinal and should be removed. Was he wrong?
The brethren dispense general advice but the Spirit if you can hear him dispenses advice customized just for you, it trumps all and contrary to popular LDS folklore doesn’t always agree with the brethren or the scriptures. But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
This idea of feelings is an interesting one. We are a church based on feelings (probably all churches are), but we then label feelings as bad or good. If someone feels offended, we say it’s their fault for feeling offended, even if that offense is intended (which it sometimes is, such as Dara’s comment above). If someone has a feeling that something is from God, we accept that unequivocally. If someone has a feeling that something is not from God or doesn’t apply or is a mistake, then we blame that person for wishful thinking.
It’s an argument that can certainly be applied both ways. Feelings are subjective by their nature. Those who intend offense seem offended that their offensiveness may not be godly.
I think that the Church’s focus on families, marriage, and children unintentionally creates feelings of being a “second class” citizen. I believe that we should continue that family focus and continue to reach out to people who don’t “fit” into that category. We should not equate people who lack of a family/marriage/children as “less.”
Have you ever felt you received a spiritual slight?
Have you felt comforted like this when contemplating your own situation?
I think both of these question are answered by the doctrine of opposition in all things.
I appreciate the accounts of being comforted by those who have felt the sting of opposition. The key is not to dwindle in unbelief after receiving comfort.
33 For what doth it profit a man if a gift is bestowed upon him, and he receive not the gift? Behold, he rejoices not in that which is given unto him, neither rejoices in him who is the giver of the gift.
(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 88:33)
I felt the same way as you when I first attended the temple (and every time, really). For a long time I thought I just had the wrong interpretation and I needed to find the right interpretation which would, of course, be non-sexist. I haven’t found it. But your post helps make things a little better, so thank you.
Jared, I agree with you about not dwelling on slights, regardless of the reason. For me, it’s not about unbelief, though. It’s about forgiveness and optimism and what those things do to your soul vs. the byproducts of being offended.
Yes and yes.
MH,
“Thou shalt not kill, but Abraham was supposedly commanded to kill Isaac.”
I hate to be technical, but the 10 commandments came later. And as we have learned from this story as well as Job and others, it is better to be obedient…..
Come on Jeff. So I guess Cain didn’t do anything wrong when he killed Abel? I think that commandment was around long before Moses.
Please address the real issue here.
Jeff, Nephi kills Laban then. And unlike Isaac, noone stepped in at the last minute.
Yes, I do realize the Nephi/Laban thing is different. I thought I posted that in answer to MH, but it’s not here.
It seems those exceptions are on the side of being obedient to God, not disobedient. So, a spiritual witness about not paying tithing would be contrary as would a witness about accept a relationship outside of marriage, for example.
So, God telling Nephi to kill Laban has a higher purpose.
Just thinking off the top of my head about this….
I suspect Joseph received spiritual directives to accept more than one relationship outside of marriage. Wouldn’t a spiritual witness about not paying tithing be about being obedient to God?
Jeff, Some Muslims believe that God has a higher purpose of killing people by flying planes into buildings. How is that different than Abraham or Nephi? Furthermore, Brigham Young did tell some of the poor to quit paying tithing, especially when the railroads didn’t pay railroad workers for the work they did in Utah, so not paying tithing because you’re poor is not without precedent.
You also seem to be ignoring my Sterling McMurrin question. Was McMurrin wrong in 1955 for saying the priesthood/temple ban was not doctrinal and should be removed?
Hawkgirrl, I would say that I have received spiritual slights in this life which I will not divulge publicly, but I think that the revelation that you had that God would make everything right is the only positive way wecan approach such feelings anddeal with them. As Paul asserted, we are looking through a glass darkly in this life. We only see and know in part. But I have great faith in God, not man, that He will make all things right, and in His own due time.
MH, I am not speaking for Jeff, but you already know what my position is. Sterling was wrong.
Glenn
MH, actually I agree that the priesthood ban was not doctrinal. It was a policy. Wejust do not know why.
Glenn
Howard,
“Wouldn’t a spiritual witness about not paying tithing be about being obedient to God?’
how would it be?
Jeff,
Commandments are general advice, the Spirit dispenses specific advice, the two need not and often won’t agree. Milk is good for you…unless you happen to be allergic to it and then it’s bad for you. Drink milk is general advice, don’t drink milk is specific advice. Building the the kingdom of God is not about bricks and mortar yet that is where most of your LDS tithing goes! The kingdom of God is spiritual and therefore requires little money to support and grow, most of that is done via proselytizing which doesn’t get very much of your tithing money to support it, the cost of missions are born by the members in addition to tithing. So tithing is about something other than building buildings because tithes build a church not the kingdom of God! Receiving a spiritual witness about not paying tithing could be about many things for instance; you might be given a lesson about what happens if you don’t, you might be taught as I have about taboo breaking – the point of which is to better understand the reason for general commandments in the first place, perhaps God sees that it would be prudent in your situation to retain the cash at least short term, maybe God sympathies with you about you criticism of how tithes are spent and doesn’t mind if you contribute to a charity you prefer instead.
MH,
“Was McMurrin wrong in 1955 for saying the priesthood/temple ban was not doctrinal and should be removed?”
I don’t think he was wrong. I was never able to determine it was doctrine. I have no better insight on it than anyone else.
Howard,
“Commandments are general advice, the Spirit dispenses specific advice, the two need not and often won’t agree.”
I find that to be a very interesting statement you are making. It gives the impression that you are in favor of moral relativism. In other words, if commandments don’t matter, only feelings we get from some spiritual impression, then there really is no right or wrong, is there? And if that is the case, you are really no better off believing in God than not.
I was using tithing as an example because it was one to come to mind. Don’t hang your hat on that one. There are a million other examples.
I guess having lived on both sides of the street, I prefer to think there are right answers and wrong answers and that, man, if left to his own devices would not choose well.
Commandments matter in a general sense without them society would still be operating in pre-Old Testament mode but if ye (specific) be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law as Abraham was not under the law with Isaac. The issue really isn’t “right or wrong”, we are given those simplified concepts as kindergarten truncated black and white behavioral rules because most people in Moses’ day were far too primitive to appreciate much nuance, but notice that Christianity moved well beyond that even if the LDS church still has not! Christ brought us the beatitudes not disciplinary councils! Is adultery wrong? Should you be excommunicated for it? I don’t know but all Jesus said to the adulteress was neither do I condemn you, go and sin no more. Is that what the Bishop or Stake President is likely to say? Instead of right or wrong the real issue is are you connected or not or on you way to be connected or not? Are we truly one with God, if so “commandments” have no tangible meaning in our lives because we are following the Spirit and therefore not under the law. Why are we not under the law? Because the law only covers a small beginning portion of the gospel, the Spirit has far more to teach us and it can’t be done by observing rote or petty rules. We only have a third of the BoM today! Your LDS checklist won’t come close to getting you into the Celestial Kingdom, it’s all about behavior, Jesus was about attitude and oneness follows that! You won’t even be asked minutia like your home teaching score.
You speak of “only feelings” and “impressions”. I’d like to point out that my personal revelation and that of others who have posted on the bloggernacle go well beyond that! I have enjoyed a conversational relationship with the Spirit since 2003. This notion that the Spirit barely whispers to us today or that we must be “worthy” to receive him is total B.S. but, one does have to do the work to learn to hear him. Honestly I know far more non-Mormons that have clear reception than Mormons. Why? Because they engage God via, meditation as President McKay once did.
It is my opinion that the traditional interpretations of Abraham are all wrong, but if we are to assume that God really did command Abraham to kill Isaac, then surely this is a case of individual revelation trumping the established revelation. Same goes for Nephi in the case of Laban. And if God is going to allow exceptions to the rule, then surely God can speak to any one of us. There’s no question in my mind that Sterling McMurrin was not only 100% right that the priesthood ban was not doctrinal (which was confirmed by Pres. McKay in 1955 as well), but furthermore we can see in 1978 that McMurrin was 100% right that the ban should be rescinded.
There are lots of stories from Darius Gray, Helvecio Martins, and others that felt just like Hawkgrrrl–that the time would be right one day. Certainly Darius and a multitude of others received tremendous spiritual slights with regards to the prohibition to be sealed in the temple. In Darius and Helvicio’s case, they did receive revelation that it would one day be lifted. I just hope that Hawk’s experience in the temple will come just like it did to these fine men.
So Jeff, like you I might view someone’s revelation about not having to pay tithing skeptically, just as I find Abraham and Nephi’s revelation skeptically. But if we are to allow these rather large exceptions, surely tithing pales in comparison to what Abraham and Nephi did. Not paying tithing when one is poor seems a LOT more reasonable to me than the attempted killing of a son.
I have noticed a gentle backing off on the interpretation of Abraham and Isaac. The last time it was mentioned at church, the Stake Presidency member speaking quoted a GA (unfortunately I don’t remember who) as saying ‘God was teaching Abraham something about Abraham’, leaving the details about what that lesson might have been entirely up to the interpretation of the listener. So was it, Abraham learnt he would obey God’s every command and that was a good thing, or was it that God required Abraham to learn a moral lesson about refusing to participate in an immoral act just because you believe God required it? Or?
I think also, there are different ways of viewing the story of Adam obediently offering sacrfice without knowing why until messengers came to tell him why. They asked why he was doing it, and he didn’t know. Might they not have been somewhat exasperated that he hadn’t asked? Of course, we don’t actually have enough detail to know he hadn’t asked for sure (although his answer wasn’t that he had asked but hadn’t been told), or what their tone might have been visiting him.
So was it, Abraham learnt he would obey God’s every command and that was a good thing, or was it that God required Abraham to learn a moral lesson about refusing to participate in an immoral act just because you believe God required it? Yes this IS the lesson, the lesson is both a lesson and a test and both specifically include the *or* in your sentence. The lesson isn’t about a clear black and white, right or wrong answer because one doesn’t exist, the lesson is a early god maker test in that it places the student in an ambiguous situation approaching something God might face. It’s an ambiguous test with no right or wrong answer. It is the ambiguous situation and test Truman faced as he played god over the atomic bomb option. Does it’s use save or cost lives and he knew he must live with the decision he makes. It is the experience of working out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
God is evolving humankind when he kicks our asses Old Testament style we evolve a little faster but at the expense our agency and at the expense of those who actually feel his wrath. If he backs off humankind evolves more slowly. What is the precisely correct pace? Not even God knows. So three roles are played out within the Godhead to adjust the pace as we go. The father pushes for a faster pace of evolution, the son argues to mitigate that pace in favor of mercy for those currently affected by the pushing and the spirit comforts all involved.
Abraham not only learned who he was, he was given an opportunity to reconsider who is vs. who he wants to be!
Howard,
The way I read your comment in #26 is that while you state that commandments do matter, you go on to explain why they don’t.
Christ taught commandments unless you don’t accept what the scriptures teach. What is the basis for right and wrong? Just what we think God is telling us?
Jeff,
You continue to insist on simple either/or answers, I’m talking about something way beyond that simplistic childlike view, something much more nuanced and therefore much more sophisticated that reaches toward becoming Godlike. I explained that in general commandments DO matter especially with regard to social behavior, but they they are dumbed down beginning lessons because they focus not crossing certain bright lines and punishment is implied if you do. Isn’t this how you train a dog? Are you a dog?
Joseph said “I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves.” Is this how you teach a dog? Of course not, a dog doesn’t get the concept of principles does he? So are principles commandments? Obviously not. Why is Joesph talking about principles instead of commandments? Don’t principles transcend commandments? Therefore aren’t principles more sophisticated and Godlike than commandments? Doesn’t the mighty change of heart transcend commandments? Therefore isn’t mighty change of heart more sophisticated and Godlike than commandments? Doesn’t following the Spirit transcend both commandments and principles? Do you see where this progression goes?
So our training begins with commandments as if we were lowly dogs in training. It progresses through principles, following the spirit and the mighty change of heart as part of our evolution of becoming more Godlike.
The way I read your comment in #26 is that while you state that commandments do matter, you go on to explain why they don’t. No, I go on to explain that commandments are *transcended* as you grow to a point of them becoming functionally meaningless. When you were a child learning to add you learned to rotely carry the one but as an adult most likely you can add in your head without concerning yourself with that beginning rote rule. So as an adult you transcended the childish “carry the one” rule. As you grow spiritually you will transcend commandments because they speak to behavior alone which is a low level and you will be at a much higher level than simple dog behavioral training. You will be autonomously monitoring and governing your thoughts, your motivation will be love and connectedness rather than obedience because you will love and be connected to God in a tangible oneness way and you will have transcended the natural man instead of attempting to restrain him. The fallout of all of this is effortless behavior that expresses love and connectedness as a result rather than rote compliance with black and white behavioral rules via obedience in order to restrain your natural man to please God. The natural man cannot be perfected he must be “thrown off” or transcended, this occurs in the progression above.
Here’s another way to consider it: IF commandments are eternal it is because there will eternally be those at the dog level of learning, not because YOU will be eternally following them.
Howard,
I understand what you are saying, however, I am finding it hard to believe there are many in this world who have transcended the commandments to the point where they are far beyond needing them. And in fact, I would suggest that anyone who thinks he or she is, probably is not.
Given that humility is such an important aspect of a true disciple of Christ…..
Jeff,
You make a good point but anyone who walks in the spirit has transcended commandments. As a percentage they are not great yet there are many of them. That they exist defines a path and that path is clearly not the LDS checklist.
Howard,
I think you are mistaken if you think there is no path to perfection in this life in LDS theology.
Calling and Election
Righteous followers of Christ can become numbered among the elect who gain the assurance of exaltation. This calling and election begins with repentance and baptism. It becomes complete when they “press forward, feasting upon the word of Christ, and endure to the end” (2 Ne. 31:19–20). The scriptures call this process making our calling and election sure (2 Pet. 1:4–11; D&C 131:5–6).
You wouldn’t find any teachings in the LDS church that would allow for ignoring commandments.
Now, if you are talking about generic Christianity, I suppose since most are taught they don’t really need to do anything but believe, it is a bit easier to rationalize ignoring commandments, even those given by Jesus himself.
Jeff,
Well, that redefines what I have been saying, I didn’t say there is no path to perfection in this life in LDS theology. I defined what that path is taking it straight from LDS theology and I pointed out that the LDS checklist is not that path.
Howard #29,
I really like that assessment of the Abraham story. Thank you.