I've been trying to decide if I'm going to continue the blog into next year. I'm trying to finish up my thesis (PhD) in the next month or so and I will be released from my calling when I move back to the states, so it remains to be seen how I move forward.... Plus, I've only taken a single introductory Hebrew Bible class. This is clearly not my area of expertise. But I do have a few initial suggestions that might help in the year that follows.
My friend Ben Spackman has compiled a great list of resources for timesandseasons here.
To echo a lot of what Ben says--There is much that separates us from the Hebrew Bible--language and culture begin the list. There is a chasm between us. The King James Translation of the Bible uses antiquated language that likewise separates us even further. (English speaking Mormons will probably continue to stick with the KJV in church services due to a LDS adhesion to sacred language rather than switching to a more modern translation. I don't see that changing.) Despite this, we can benefit from the nuances and explanations offered with different translations. I would urge you to enlarge your study of the Old Testament with more than one translation--and I'm not referring to the JST, remember that wasn't a translation from the original Hebrew--that was Joseph as revelator. Ben notes net.bible.org as a great online resource to compare several different translations and the reasoning behind the translations. And it is free. Try the parallel columns. Very cool.
I also really like the Oxford Annotated Bible which includes illuminating essays--I used this in Divinity School for both the New and Old Testaments. In the opinion of some of my Hebrew Bible friends, the Deseret Book published Richard Holzaphel and friends' Jehovah and the World of the Old Testament is one of the better Old Testament references they have published. I like it. And you can get the ebook version with their Deseret Bookshelf app. I also think that Kevin Barney's essay from Dialogue here on Latter-day Saints and the documentary hypothesis is really useful to begin to think about higher biblical criticism.
Whatever you choose, do something. Something. Lately, I've been reading a lot of 19th century anti-Mormon criticism that the problem with Mormons was that they relied too much on the Old Testament--clearly that is no longer the case. It might take some effort, but generally things that require more effort are really more valuable in the long run.
Monday, December 30, 2013
Sunday, December 29, 2013
Lesson 46 - "Zion--The Pure in Heart"
I have been remiss with posting on this lesson, but I did finally teach it today and am feeling like I should round out the year, even if no one reads it. :) I think it is a nice wrap-up of the Doctrine and Covenants and nicely turns us to the Old Testament. I don't have any particular historical articles to give addition context here, but I think careful reading of the scriptural text is essential.
In my class we started with Hebrews 11, particularly the examples of Abraham and Sarah in verses 8-16. Abraham and Sarah were both made promises by the Lord. Sarah had to wait a very long time for the promise of a child to be fulfilled--she was possibly past 90, so a really long time by our standards. Abraham saw his two sons being born, but was not around for his posterity to number as the sands of the sea. The chapter focuses on those who "saw the promises" of God "afar off" and believed and waited for the heavenly city--Zion.
Zion is mentioned frequently in the biblical text, but generally Latter-day Saints rely on Joseph's revelation recorded in the book of Moses for the requirements of this heavenly city. Scripture offers three examples of physical locations of Zion.
The first example is in Genesis 5:24 "Enoch walked with God; and then he was not; for God took him." The biblical text doesn't offer much more, but Joseph took a scant 6 verses in the biblical text that mentioned Enoch and revealed an additional 116 verses about Enoch in November and December of 1830. Enoch's city--the City of Holiness in scripture--became Zion and then was translated because they were of one heart and one mind, they dwelt in righteousness, and there were no poor (Moses 7:18). These are the requirements for the physical location of Zion.
The JST of Genesis 14:32-36 teaches that Melchesidek also established Zion with his people. From the Book of Mormon we have the example of the Nephites after the coming of Christ to the New World recorded in 4th Nephi.
The first mention of Zion in the Doctrine and Covenants is section 6 in April 1829 giving Oliver Cowdery the task of bringing forth the cause of Zion. (Sections 11, 12, and 14 verse 6 likewise offer similar injunctions--divine form letters.)
The idea of Zion is initially very vague, the Lord tells Joseph and the Saints initially that it will be on the borders by the Lamanites--so somewhere to the western frontier. That gets more specific over time until it is revealed in Section 57 that Independence, Missouri would be the center place of Zion. We discussed a smattering of scriptures as the Lord begins to outline what is required of the Saints in Zion: 38:27; 64:22-24, 33-34; 82:14-20; and some parts of 97:8-28 particularly 8, 19, and 21. This list outlines the second definition of Zion--a spiritual state. The idea od Zion is always closely related to the Law of Consecration and the temple. Despite the more obvious atrocities of the Jackson county citizens in 1833, the failure of the Saints there as outlined by the Lord also gives us some things to think about: 101:1-9 and 105:1-12.
Verse 10 of Section 105 notes that part of the reason to put off the redemption of Zion (remember this is when Zion's camp is about to enter Jackson County) is that the Saints be taught more perfectly. Part of the fault of the Saints in Jackson County was that they thought that the Lord would just give them Zion, they did not understand their responsibility in becoming a people of one mind and one heart--a people who might create Zion. The process takes polishing and refining.
If we feel overwhelmed by this responsibility to build Zion, to be Zion, I think the example of Enoch is a lovely example. He thought himself unequal to the task before him--he was "but a lad" he thought "al the people" hated him for he was "slow of speech." The Lord responded to Enoch, "Go forth and do as I have commanded thee, and no man shall pierce thee. Open thy mouth, and it shall be filled, and I will give thee utterance, for all flesh is in my hands, and I will do as seemeth me good." (Moses 6:31-32)
Additionally, I like Elder Bednar's use of these verses in his October 2004 talk (as he was called to be a member of the Twelve): "For all of us who feel unprepared and overwhelmed and unequal to a new calling or responsibility, the promise of the Lord to Enoch is equally applicable. The promise was true in Enoch’s day, and it is true today." (The whole talk is here.) I also really like this tidbit from Elder Maxwell republished in the New Era in February 2002: "Enoch knew that in responding to God the test is not our capability but our availability. As did Enoch, you must trust the Lord; if you are righteous, His purposes will be served." Elder Maxwell also wrote a book, initially titled Of One Heart and then later republished under the title Enoch's Letters. Mimicking the style that C.S. Lewis used in the Screwtape Letters, Elder Maxwell imagines letters between Majiah, a resident of the City of Enoch, and his friend Omner living outside the city. The letters are one-sided as presumably Omner's letters were translated with Majiah and the rest of the City. I think the exercise offers much for thought. The discussion of Zion can be academic, but I think it is only really effective when it becomes about who we are and how we might become one.
Had I seen this before I taught this lesson, I might have used this new Church History video.
Dutch po-ta-toes and becoming one.
In my class we started with Hebrews 11, particularly the examples of Abraham and Sarah in verses 8-16. Abraham and Sarah were both made promises by the Lord. Sarah had to wait a very long time for the promise of a child to be fulfilled--she was possibly past 90, so a really long time by our standards. Abraham saw his two sons being born, but was not around for his posterity to number as the sands of the sea. The chapter focuses on those who "saw the promises" of God "afar off" and believed and waited for the heavenly city--Zion.
Zion is mentioned frequently in the biblical text, but generally Latter-day Saints rely on Joseph's revelation recorded in the book of Moses for the requirements of this heavenly city. Scripture offers three examples of physical locations of Zion.
The first example is in Genesis 5:24 "Enoch walked with God; and then he was not; for God took him." The biblical text doesn't offer much more, but Joseph took a scant 6 verses in the biblical text that mentioned Enoch and revealed an additional 116 verses about Enoch in November and December of 1830. Enoch's city--the City of Holiness in scripture--became Zion and then was translated because they were of one heart and one mind, they dwelt in righteousness, and there were no poor (Moses 7:18). These are the requirements for the physical location of Zion.
The JST of Genesis 14:32-36 teaches that Melchesidek also established Zion with his people. From the Book of Mormon we have the example of the Nephites after the coming of Christ to the New World recorded in 4th Nephi.
The first mention of Zion in the Doctrine and Covenants is section 6 in April 1829 giving Oliver Cowdery the task of bringing forth the cause of Zion. (Sections 11, 12, and 14 verse 6 likewise offer similar injunctions--divine form letters.)
The idea of Zion is initially very vague, the Lord tells Joseph and the Saints initially that it will be on the borders by the Lamanites--so somewhere to the western frontier. That gets more specific over time until it is revealed in Section 57 that Independence, Missouri would be the center place of Zion. We discussed a smattering of scriptures as the Lord begins to outline what is required of the Saints in Zion: 38:27; 64:22-24, 33-34; 82:14-20; and some parts of 97:8-28 particularly 8, 19, and 21. This list outlines the second definition of Zion--a spiritual state. The idea od Zion is always closely related to the Law of Consecration and the temple. Despite the more obvious atrocities of the Jackson county citizens in 1833, the failure of the Saints there as outlined by the Lord also gives us some things to think about: 101:1-9 and 105:1-12.
Verse 10 of Section 105 notes that part of the reason to put off the redemption of Zion (remember this is when Zion's camp is about to enter Jackson County) is that the Saints be taught more perfectly. Part of the fault of the Saints in Jackson County was that they thought that the Lord would just give them Zion, they did not understand their responsibility in becoming a people of one mind and one heart--a people who might create Zion. The process takes polishing and refining.
If we feel overwhelmed by this responsibility to build Zion, to be Zion, I think the example of Enoch is a lovely example. He thought himself unequal to the task before him--he was "but a lad" he thought "al the people" hated him for he was "slow of speech." The Lord responded to Enoch, "Go forth and do as I have commanded thee, and no man shall pierce thee. Open thy mouth, and it shall be filled, and I will give thee utterance, for all flesh is in my hands, and I will do as seemeth me good." (Moses 6:31-32)
Additionally, I like Elder Bednar's use of these verses in his October 2004 talk (as he was called to be a member of the Twelve): "For all of us who feel unprepared and overwhelmed and unequal to a new calling or responsibility, the promise of the Lord to Enoch is equally applicable. The promise was true in Enoch’s day, and it is true today." (The whole talk is here.) I also really like this tidbit from Elder Maxwell republished in the New Era in February 2002: "Enoch knew that in responding to God the test is not our capability but our availability. As did Enoch, you must trust the Lord; if you are righteous, His purposes will be served." Elder Maxwell also wrote a book, initially titled Of One Heart and then later republished under the title Enoch's Letters. Mimicking the style that C.S. Lewis used in the Screwtape Letters, Elder Maxwell imagines letters between Majiah, a resident of the City of Enoch, and his friend Omner living outside the city. The letters are one-sided as presumably Omner's letters were translated with Majiah and the rest of the City. I think the exercise offers much for thought. The discussion of Zion can be academic, but I think it is only really effective when it becomes about who we are and how we might become one.
Had I seen this before I taught this lesson, I might have used this new Church History video.
Dutch po-ta-toes and becoming one.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Lesson 45 - “The Family Is Ordained of God”
The text for this week is the Family Proclamation. My goal is to focus on the Proclamation historically. So my class will talk about the status of the proclamation and some of the scripture and history behind some of the text of the Proclamation.
I think President Hinckley and President Harold B. Lee's words here are really important.
Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.
Firstly, the Proclamation is not Scripture. (Notice the captial S and our discussion of canonical scripture with section 68:3-4.) It was presented at the Relief Society General Meeting in 1995, but was not voted on. As such has never been approved by the law of common consent and officially entered into our canon--people pasting it in their scriptures aside. That is not to say it is not inspired, important, nor to say it isn't useful, but it is not part of the canon--in LDS parlance: our standard works. A proclamation has a different status than an official declaration.
So let's begin our brief dissection--our exegesis.
WE, THE FIRST PRESIDENCY and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.
131:1-4 Places marriage as a requisite for the highest level of the celestial kingdom. If that is the goal, then marriage is essential. Verse 4 likewise introduces the concept of eternal increase with that only being possible in that highest kingdom.
ALL HUMAN BEINGS—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny.
Mormons take this very literally, this is not merely euphemistic. Doctrine and Covenants 20: 18 is one example: "He (God) created man, male and female, after his own image and in his own likeness, created he them." Very similar to Genesis 1:27 (which we'll get to talk about soon). If both males and females are literally created in the image of God, perhaps the next sentence aids in how we discuss God in this context. Heavenly parents = a Heavenly Mother and a Heavenly Father. Perhaps God in this context is a Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother sealed up together as one. However you want to think about it, Mormons are pretty literal in terms of Heavenly Parents endowing us with the same potential that they have.
We don't talk about our Heavenly Mother much. And sometimes regrettably it is in hushed tones. We will spend time in my class with David Paulsen and Martin Pulido's important article historically outlining Mormon ideas of a Mother in Heaven here. Or here. I don't think there is a need for hushed tones, we just need to know what we're talking about. This article goes to great lengths to do that.
In 1909 in the midst of widespread questions of evolution the First Presidency gave "A Statement on the Origin of Man" republished here. This is not the last statement of LDS doctrine regarding religion and science. If you are wondering about the compatibility of LDS doctrine and evolution (or if you think they are not compatible) please listen to these two podcasts by Steve Peck, evolutionary biology professor at BYU, here and here. Steve very eloquently discusses the historical context and the possibilities.
I think President Hinckley and President Harold B. Lee's words here are really important.
President Hinckley: What the church requires is only belief 'that
Adam was the first man of what we would call the human race.' Scientists can
speculate on the rest. [Gordon B. Hinckley cited in Elaine Jarvik, "Beliefs on Darwin's evolution very from religion to religion." Deseret Morning News 19 January 2006.]
President Lee:
Perhaps if we had the full story of the creation
of the earth and man told to us in great detail, it would be more of a mystery
than the simple few statements that we have contained in the Bible, because of
our lack of ability to comprehend. Therefore, for reasons best known to the
Lord, He has kept us in darkness. Wait until the Lord speaks, or wait until
that day when He shall come, and when we shall be among the privileged either
to come up out of our graves and be caught up into the clouds of heaven or
shall be living upon the earth likewise to be so translated before Him. Then we
shall know all things pertaining to this earth, how it was made, and all things
that now as children we are groping for and trying to understand.
Let's reserve judgment as to the facts
concerning the Creation until we know these things for sure. [Harold B. Lee, Teachings of Harold B. Lee (Salt Lake City, Utah: Bookcraft, 1996), 29.]
Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.
Academically I would argue that gender is historically constructed--you would think that different things were manly or feminine whether you were born in the 19th century, early 20th century or early 21st century. I believe that the proclamation uses gender as a synonym for for biological sex.
IN THE PREMORTAL REALM, spirit sons and daughters knew and worshipped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny as heirs of eternal life. The divine plan of happiness enables family relationships to be perpetuated beyond the grave. Sacred ordinances and covenants available in holy temples make it possible for individuals to return to the presence of God and for families to be united eternally.
Here we talked about premortal life (notice the move away from pre-existence). Section 76 & Moses 4 & the end of Abraham 3. We could further discuss quite a bit of Section 84 (and 88), but particularly 84:20-21. "In the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest." Ordinances open up the possibility of really our eternal potential as daughters and sons of a Heavenly Mother and Heavenly Father. The ordinances teach us about godliness, or how to be like our Heavenly Parents. This is what Moses tried to teach the Children of Israel (v23-25)--Moses tried to get them to go up the mountain with him. They chose to stay on the flat ground with a God they could see and touch and got the lesser law--the ten commandments instead of receiving the ordinances with the "key to the knowledge of God"--the way to return to the presence of God.
There is so much more that could be discussed (and hopefully go beyond perhaps the same discussion you've heard before.)
Section 130: 2 "That same sociality which exists among us here will exist among us there, only it will be coupled with eternal glory, which glory we do not now enjoy." For Mormons family is the structure in mortality and in eternity. These relationships matter.
If you want to talk about chastity please use Elder Holland's "Souls, Symbols, and Sacraments" here.
If you want to talk about "equal partners" recognize that this is fairly new vocabulary. (Hallelujah for it.) It was first used in General Conference by Aileen Clyde in 1993 here and has been used repeatedly since then. Here's the rundown of times it has been taught over the General Conference pulpit.
For me the phrase "other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation" is central to any discussion to the Family Proclamation. This talks about general principles, it is up to us as individuals to use the Spirit to decide what it means to us.
Saturday, December 7, 2013
New Statement on "Race and the Priesthood."
The Church has just published a new statement on "Race and the Priesthood" here. It is part of the new section on lds.org--Gospel Topics--here. The historical subject articles are written by historians who specialize in the specific topic. (There will continue to be more additions, but take a browse. Look at the First Vision Accounts here.)
Though a couple weeks earlier would have been lovely so we could discuss along with Gospel Doctrine lesson 42, alas. I will be mentioning it at the beginning of my class tomorrow.
This is a significant addition to the new introduction to Official Declaration 2 that we've discussed here. Watch some of the additional videos offered also here and President N. Eldon Tanner reading the official declaration for the first time in General Conference here.
The statement outlines the history of the priesthood ban and importantly repudiates the folklore that tried to explain the ban--"Over time, Church leaders and members advanced many theories to explain the priesthood and temple restrictions. None of these explanations is accepted today as official doctrine of the Church." And later: "Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form." No curse of Cain, no descendants of Ham, no fence-sitters in premortal life, anything that would continue to perpetuate any of these ideas should be abolished.
Though a couple weeks earlier would have been lovely so we could discuss along with Gospel Doctrine lesson 42, alas. I will be mentioning it at the beginning of my class tomorrow.
This is a significant addition to the new introduction to Official Declaration 2 that we've discussed here. Watch some of the additional videos offered also here and President N. Eldon Tanner reading the official declaration for the first time in General Conference here.
The statement outlines the history of the priesthood ban and importantly repudiates the folklore that tried to explain the ban--"Over time, Church leaders and members advanced many theories to explain the priesthood and temple restrictions. None of these explanations is accepted today as official doctrine of the Church." And later: "Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form." No curse of Cain, no descendants of Ham, no fence-sitters in premortal life, anything that would continue to perpetuate any of these ideas should be abolished.
Lesson 44 - Being Good Citizens
This is another lesson that attempts to take a smattering of verses from the Doctrine and Covenants 58:21-22, 26-28; 98:4-10; 134, and Article of Faith 12.
There is much in these verses about obeying, honoring, and sustaining earthly laws as well as doing good of our own accord. The Articles of Faith were originally created for a history of Mormonism written for the Chicago Democrat, but first published in the Times and Seasons in 1842. Mormons waged an uphill battle in the nineteenth century trying to convince Americans that they could be good American citizens, so including a specific article of the faith to that end seems reasonable and inline with the snippets we get in Joseph's revelations.
Section 134 of the Doctrine and Covenants is likewise an effort to the end. It is not a revelation received by Joseph Smith, though it was later canonized. In August 1835, Joseph was away on a mission to Michigan. Oliver Cowdery and Sidney Rigdon presented this "Declaration of Belief" regarding governments as written by Oliver Cowdery. Here is the earliest version published in the first edition of the Doctrine and Covenants, 1835. What is now Section 134 was most frequently quoted in General Conference during the social unrest during the 1960s as church leaders called for respect and order.
There are a lot of different directions we could take with these verses, following the example of Ardis Parshall and her excellent post on this lesson here, I think President Joseph F. Smith's words the same day that the United States entered World War I are significant:
In speaking of nationalities we all understand that in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints there is neither Greek nor Jew nor Gentile; in other words, there is neither Scandinavian nor Swiss not German nor Russian nor British, nor any other nationality. We have become brothers in the household of faith, and we should treat people from these nations that are at war with each other, with due kindness and consideration.
Treating everyone as our brothers and sisters despite different nationalities or political persuasions is a hallmark of the gospel. This flies in the face of the oft-used tactic to demonize the opposition and make them a nameless and faceless mass. Rather it asks that we encounter them as believing individuals and our brothers and sisters despite different nationalities and political persuasions.
Section 98 verse 5 offers the caveat of following the law which "is constitutional"--the footnote would apply this to governments in general. The governments should maintain "rights and privileges" for all. Section 58 says if we keep the laws of God then we will likewise keep the laws of the land "for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land." This week I've been thinking a lot about what we do when the laws of the are not inline with God's laws, more significantly when they make us break our covenants. These thoughts only expanded with the death of Nelson Mandela.
The concept of civil disobedience has a philosophical history reaching at least back to the early nineteenth century. As Latter-day Saints we don't have our own comprehensive philosophy of civil disobedience--that is left to us to use our agency to decide. In the nineteenth century Latter-day Saints in Utah actively participated in civil disobedience as the US Federal government began to pass new laws directed at Mormon polygamy. Some went into hiding, some were arrested and jailed as prisoners of conscience. Scripture gives us plenty of examples of governments that tried to get believers to compromise their covenants: King Nebuchanezzer and Sharach, Meshach, and Abednego (Daniel 3), Haman and the Jews--particularly Queen Esther (Esther 3), King Noah and his priests versus Abinadi and then Alma (Mosiah 11), Zeezrom and the leaders of Ammoniah versus Alma and Amulek (Alma 14), and more. There is no one way to deal with an unjust government.
The example I will focus on in my lesson is that of Helmuth Hübener, a Latter-day Saint teenager in 1940s Germany. Watch this on Hübener's actions and think about the situation of the German Saints, those in Hübener's ward including his bishop. Don't ignore the real danger they were all in. In 1941 Hübener listened to BBC broadcasts and believed that the Nazi government was not telling the German people the truth, he felt it his duty to share the truth and used a typewriter he had from a church assignment to type leaflets which he and his friends distributed. In February 1942 Hübener worked to translate his pamphlets into French and distribute them among prisoners of war. He was arrested by the Gestapo at work. For his actions he became the youngest person sentenced to death by the Volksgerichtshol and executed.
The Lord wants us to be involved. He asks us to care and to seek out good people to lead. He wants us to be agents unto ourselves and do much good of our own accord. We have to decide what that means for us individually.
There is much in these verses about obeying, honoring, and sustaining earthly laws as well as doing good of our own accord. The Articles of Faith were originally created for a history of Mormonism written for the Chicago Democrat, but first published in the Times and Seasons in 1842. Mormons waged an uphill battle in the nineteenth century trying to convince Americans that they could be good American citizens, so including a specific article of the faith to that end seems reasonable and inline with the snippets we get in Joseph's revelations.
Section 134 of the Doctrine and Covenants is likewise an effort to the end. It is not a revelation received by Joseph Smith, though it was later canonized. In August 1835, Joseph was away on a mission to Michigan. Oliver Cowdery and Sidney Rigdon presented this "Declaration of Belief" regarding governments as written by Oliver Cowdery. Here is the earliest version published in the first edition of the Doctrine and Covenants, 1835. What is now Section 134 was most frequently quoted in General Conference during the social unrest during the 1960s as church leaders called for respect and order.
There are a lot of different directions we could take with these verses, following the example of Ardis Parshall and her excellent post on this lesson here, I think President Joseph F. Smith's words the same day that the United States entered World War I are significant:
In speaking of nationalities we all understand that in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints there is neither Greek nor Jew nor Gentile; in other words, there is neither Scandinavian nor Swiss not German nor Russian nor British, nor any other nationality. We have become brothers in the household of faith, and we should treat people from these nations that are at war with each other, with due kindness and consideration.
Treating everyone as our brothers and sisters despite different nationalities or political persuasions is a hallmark of the gospel. This flies in the face of the oft-used tactic to demonize the opposition and make them a nameless and faceless mass. Rather it asks that we encounter them as believing individuals and our brothers and sisters despite different nationalities and political persuasions.
Section 98 verse 5 offers the caveat of following the law which "is constitutional"--the footnote would apply this to governments in general. The governments should maintain "rights and privileges" for all. Section 58 says if we keep the laws of God then we will likewise keep the laws of the land "for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land." This week I've been thinking a lot about what we do when the laws of the are not inline with God's laws, more significantly when they make us break our covenants. These thoughts only expanded with the death of Nelson Mandela.
The concept of civil disobedience has a philosophical history reaching at least back to the early nineteenth century. As Latter-day Saints we don't have our own comprehensive philosophy of civil disobedience--that is left to us to use our agency to decide. In the nineteenth century Latter-day Saints in Utah actively participated in civil disobedience as the US Federal government began to pass new laws directed at Mormon polygamy. Some went into hiding, some were arrested and jailed as prisoners of conscience. Scripture gives us plenty of examples of governments that tried to get believers to compromise their covenants: King Nebuchanezzer and Sharach, Meshach, and Abednego (Daniel 3), Haman and the Jews--particularly Queen Esther (Esther 3), King Noah and his priests versus Abinadi and then Alma (Mosiah 11), Zeezrom and the leaders of Ammoniah versus Alma and Amulek (Alma 14), and more. There is no one way to deal with an unjust government.
The example I will focus on in my lesson is that of Helmuth Hübener, a Latter-day Saint teenager in 1940s Germany. Watch this on Hübener's actions and think about the situation of the German Saints, those in Hübener's ward including his bishop. Don't ignore the real danger they were all in. In 1941 Hübener listened to BBC broadcasts and believed that the Nazi government was not telling the German people the truth, he felt it his duty to share the truth and used a typewriter he had from a church assignment to type leaflets which he and his friends distributed. In February 1942 Hübener worked to translate his pamphlets into French and distribute them among prisoners of war. He was arrested by the Gestapo at work. For his actions he became the youngest person sentenced to death by the Volksgerichtshol and executed.
The Lord wants us to be involved. He asks us to care and to seek out good people to lead. He wants us to be agents unto ourselves and do much good of our own accord. We have to decide what that means for us individually.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)