[Nathan]

Heber, I concur. Brand recognition, is one benefit. Another is boundary maintenance (as you also seemed to imply). It is a lot easier, albeit disingenuous, to explain differences via the Great Apostasy. This teaching draws the line in the sand pretty clearly. I can see that mission presidents and bishops could benefit from using the Great Apostasy in such a way. I teach early morning seminary (a class of 25, here in Stuttgart Germany). This fall the subject matter will be Church History and the D&C. The Great Apostasy will be discussed and understood much differently by my class members than by their 40-year-old teacher.

Rephrasing the question for Tom: “How does the notion of a great apostasy differ from the perspective of one interpreting from Fowler’s 3rd, 4th and 5th stages of faith (or Peck’s 2nd, 3rd and 4th)?”

From Fowler’s 3rd Stage of Faith, a Latter-day Saint needs the teaching of the Great Apostasy. It helps order a quid-pro-quo, cause-and-effect-driven interpretation of human experience and history. It explains difference; it provides meaning. Are those people currently working from a stage 3 experience wrong, or bad? Not according to Fowler (or Peck’s stage 2). In a developmental sense, most all of us need to pass through stage 3 in the maturation process. Some of us will never leave it. And there are necessary tasks in our society that are best facilitated from a stage 3 place of interpretation: elements of teaching, law enforcement, national defense. I think it likely that the notion of the Great Apostasy may also be beneficial in the 4th and 5th stages too, although in significantly different ways.

Tom, from the short time I’ve been a part of this forum I’ve observed yours is a thoughtful faith. Thank you.

[Nathan]

As a professional counselor to Soldiers, Marines and their families I have observed that those who remain active through crises–whether death, divorce, addiction, etc.–more thoroughly heal and build from their suffering. I pace while talking on the phone; it helps me process the conversation. I think the First Commandment is profound in the sense that it combines the temporal and eternal parts of our being; we are to love God with all our heart, might, mind and strength.

Whatever the historical, doctrinal or policy issue I wrestle with, I have greater success when I work and think through it.

[Nathan]

I just spent the past half hour reading this thread: Fun conversation.

Early on, someone paraphrased a line from A River Runs Through It, something about Baptists being dumber than Presbyterians. As a movie buff, I need to clarify that it was the son of a Presbyterian minister narrating who said, “Methodists are Baptists who can read.”

I was hoping to take the conversation up a notch, with this question: “Assuming it is a historical event, what is gained by the notion of a great apostasy?” Or how about, “How does the notion of a great apostasy differ from the perspective of one interpreting from Fowler’s 3rd, 4th and 5th stages of faith (or Peck’s 2nd, 3rd and 4th)?”

It’s been over a decade since I’ve benefited from the notion of a great apostasy, much less The Great Apostasy.

Nathan

[Nathan]

Alright brother, game on! Let’s start with your strong point that English is not the best language when attempting to define a word like “truth”. Sure. Okay. But this true of most critical, technical words such as love, faith, repentance, etc. So what would you propose as the categories or types of truth? What is the relatioship between truth and fact? If some truths deserve our preference over others, why? Can something be true for one person but not true for another? If, for some, goodness is an acceptable synonym for truth, does it follow that evil and falsehood have the same relationship? How would you distinguish truths that may change over time and those that don’t? Are there such truths? How do you propose we improve our understanding and use of the term “truth”?

Nathan (Forgive me if I wait to respond to your next reply; I’m beat!)

[Nathan]

Heber,

In line with the theme of this post I would share an insight I’ve gleened by experience–the hard way, if you will. Waiting to act until you recieve your guidance is understandable, but when this wait and the related disengagement with the world around us isn’t always necessary. I believe action with prayer is a wise combination. On purely theoretical issues maybe all the action one can do is “work it out in your mind”. But most issues allow me to labor while I search and wait for guidance. I’ll say this much–the things I prayed to know when I was younger seem silly by comparrison to my current quests. I only hope the same is true of the things I pray for now when I’m 60.

Nathan

[Nathan]

Sam,

Right now I want to address any one of the several articulate points you’ve made, but all I can think about is Rush Hour 5! It’s almost midnight here so let’s just agree that you’re wrong, sound fair?

Thanks for your patience.

Nathan

[Nathan]

The Spirit confirms truth, better defined as goodness. I experienced the Spirit in some of the most unexpected places and situations. The “goodness” I encountered was always filtered through the screen of who I am in my experiences and values. Some dismiss or devalue such experiences as merely subjective.

Yesterday I married a Soldier and his German bride–neither were LDS. Several things were unlike a typical LDS wedding, much less a temple wedding. The palace chapel was as ornate as any temple, but anyone could make a long list of dissimilarites. Throughout the ceremony, and at a few distinct moments, it was a highly charged emotional and spiritual moment. But it would be a mistake to take one’s encounter of the Spirit at that moment to be an endorsement of the Evangelical Lutheran Church as the only true church, or whether or not the bride’s bare shoulders was an appropriate statement of modest dress, etc. The context infomed the witness: making covenants before God to love, honor and cherish one another strengthens us as indiduals, couples, families and as a society. This is goodness, and it is worthy of our pursit. For more than any feeling or warm fuzy–regardless how sublime–it is only in the pursuit, the doing, that spiritual witness bears fruit.

[Nathan]

Sam,

It’s only a “clincher” if there is an argument that Shrek and the Muppetts are identical to Jesus’ parables and the flood story. The comparisons are made to highlight the similarities, which implies there are also differences. And yes, you pointed out one of the obvious differences. With only two sentences, I’m not sure where your emphasis is though: “authors”, “admit”, or “fictional”. Since the “author” of the flood story is not around to ask, it is an argument from silence–but my gut says that throughout most of human history the flood story was assumed to be factual–not fictional. I try to imagine someone asking Jesus at the conclusion of his parable of the good Samaritan–“Well, is that story fact or fiction?” I’m guessing that you’re tying this to The Book of Mormon and claims for its origins. But if we go there, then the rest of the world’s sacred literature comes into the discussion (as it should) and we are right back at the question of “truth”, “goodness” and the spiritual experience as a means of identifying goodness. Thanks for allowing me to push you on this.

Nathan

[Nathan]

I opt for phrases such as “experience the Spirit” and “encounter the Spirit” for two reasons. One, is an effort to correct the sentimentalism we Latter-day Saints use as a crutch. My blood pressure boils when I thumb through the Deseret Bookstore advertisement flyers that come in the mail. It pains me to see such principles and experiences serve as marketing campaigns and slogans. As much as I know the emotions are acted upon in a spiritual experience, it frustrates me when spiritual experiences are reduced to a merely emotional experience–so “feeling the Spirit” dismisses the intellectual and spiritual components. Second, the root word in “experience” means to test or try. and the root word in “encounter” means to be against, and can imply struggle. You can think of this as the struggle of Jacob as he wrestled the Lord (or an angle of the Lord), or the struggle we all undergo as “natural” men and women, striving to yield to the Spirit (Mosiah 3:19). Holiness before God, as experienced by our Muslim brothers and sisters, is understood as a struggle: a jihad.

All words become appropriated and misappropriated over time. As the words most central to our lives lose their significance or take on unintended meaning, it is our duty to find or make new ones. Words, after all, are credited with a critical role in the creation and the redemption of humanity.

[Nathan]

I’ve often heard it said that when we search for the answers to life’s greatest questions we rarely find them, however, if in the pursuit we can help clarify the question then we’ve made a meaningful contribution. To help ground this principle in the everyday context, I share the following personal story.

I was a 24 year-old RM, serving as an officiator in the Orlando temple every Tuesday. I gave concerted effort in prayerfully seeking God’s guidance on the matter of whether my girl friend was the “one”. I didn’t get the lightning bolt experience I had with other critical decisions. I reasoned that if any man lacked wisdom, I did, but since asking my father in heaven wasn’t working as I expected, I turned to my dad. My father, the former bishop and professional engineer surprised me with his counsel. “You’re not asking the right question. You’re wanting God to make your decision for you. Furthermore, your asking him to play favorites, as if he loves one of his daughters more than others. Son, I recommend you decide what you want and then ask heavenly father if he will bless your decision.” That guidance has also served me in making other major, life decisions. I also believe this principle deserves consideration from those who no longer pray because they sense/fear only themselves in the act.

Thanks again for the stimulating comments.

Nathan

P.S. For the record, my wife doesn’t much care for my story. She finds it overly mechanical, even if she finds me irresistible.

[Nathan]

Rix wrote:

This post resonates with me — what both Nathan and Cwald said. I said this quite a while ago on this forum, but I consider spiritual experiences to be a great cocktail mixture of dopamine, seratonin…and external events that allow one to feel loved, accepted, or empathic towards others that have courageous bonding experiences. (basically…)

Rix, I’m not prepared to speak with your degree of confidence when deconstructing what we call a spiritual experience–but I like hearing you say it; your candor is refreshing. My analysis of my own spiritual experiences leads me to think spiritual experiences are just that: spiritual. They may involve the neuro-chemical and subjective, personal history, value system, and need for reassurance, etc. but these experiences, although similar in some qualities, are unique when compared to others: roller coaster rides, sexual intimacy, and close calls with death. That being said, I agree with you that they are largely subjective. I believe charismatic people learn how to harness or manipulate the experience for themselves and others. And this is only one reason why we should be cautious of this category of human experience.

Rix wrote:

Now, I don’t deny that that “cocktail” may be influenced by a creative, organizing energy one might call “God,” or “Spirit,” but I am quite certain that no one religion has a corner on the spirituality market. Frankly, I think many events are deemed spiritual experiences by the subject having expectations that since certain things happened in a way that would be unlikely without divine intervention…then the mind creates a story about the event that is quite dramatic…and it gives a person great hope and purpose in their life, so it becomes labeled “spiritual.” And it may be.

True: No one religion has a corner on the spirituality market. But I have something to share that has been helpful when analyzing life. In my graduate studies (The Epistemology of Religious Experience; The Psychology of Religion and Conversion; Pastoral Ministry: Mourning Death, etc.) I was introduced to the concept that different categories of experience, even if they share the same technical term, are often different, and sometimes even fundamentally so. Prayer is a pretty basic concept, but Muslims, Catholics, and Latter-day Saints approach this activity with different sets of understanding and expectations. These, in turn, inform their experiences during and about prayer. I could list other examples, but I’m sure the notion is not new to you. As a former student and professor of world religions, I know better than to speak of unique beliefs and practices–there are none. But when combined with particular cultures and individuals, here we can speak of something being practically unique. Latter-day Saints’ concept and pursuit of “the Spirit” is practically unique. Sure, it is influenced by 19th and early 20th Century American Protestantism, but it also stands apart. The LDS notion of the Spirit–feeling the Spirit, etc–is mystical in nature and has a great deal in common with Islam’s Sufis, Judaism’s followers of Kabbalah, and many early Christian monastics. What makes it unique is the universal application. This experience is not strictly Gnostic, it is not reserved for only the elite or initiated. “The Spirit of Christ is given to every man” (Moroni 7:16). Mormons actually believe this.

In his American Religion, renowned cultural and literary critic, Harold Bloom, trips all over himself praising Joseph Smith as a religious genius. He makes no apologies for his read that Joseph tapped into inspiration from early Jewish Gnostic greats (without any realistic, empirical source for him to have done so–other than that it happens to be his spirituality of choice). My point? Most, and perhaps nearly all, adherents of the world’s various religions throughout history have had spiritual experiences, but I have not encountered any tradition whose adherents pursue and cultivate that experience with the same intensity as the Latter-day Saints. To be clear, virture, revelation, relationship with God are other ways these adherents pursue good, but it is not the spiritual experience we speak of. In the words of Ezra Taft Benson, “If there is one message I have repeated to my brethren of the Twelve, it is that it’s the Spirit that counts. It is the Spirit that matters. I do not know how often I have said this, but I never tire of saying it—it is the Spirit that matters most” (mission presidents’ seminar, 3 Apr. 1985). To be even clearer, even if I am right about this marked prioritization Latter-day Saints place on the spiritual experience, I am in no way implying a superiority or infallibility. Not at all. I want to believe that if we were more “intune” with the Spirit we could have avoided some of our corporate sins or blemishes–but who knows? Like you said, the encounter is good, and that can be enough–at least for me.

Rix wrote:

I know many here have had powerful experiences, and have labeled them spiritual. I choose not to judge the events of others. I’ve had many myself…and have spent much time and energy analyzing what they were…and to this day I say “I don’t know.” But I am just fine with it, and I continue doing things that make me “feel good,” and find that satisfying simply to have the experience without needing to explain it.

But that’s just me…..

Thank you for taking the time and energy . . .

Nathan

[Nathan]

Ray,

I heard this talk and nothing you shared here even registered at the time. If I had to guess it had to do with my attention span and his deteriorating delivery–neither good excuses. Your insight is similar to various kingdom theologies that find their roots all the way back to Augustine’s City of God. I shared in an earlier post that I have recently learned to articulate that my membership in the restored Church does not preclude my membership in the historic/traditional church. Such words came to mind only after years of serving my brothers and sisters of all faiths and realizing the blessing was the service. I can’t help but think Elder Wirthlin’s wisdom is derived from personal experience. It also echoes Mr. Keating’s challenge to his budding, adolescent students: “make your lives extraordinary . . . and what will your contribution be?” The Dead Poet’s Society (Pardon the nostalgia.)

[Nathan]

Tonight I offered the invocation for about 200 Soldiers returning to their families from a year-long deployment to Afghanistan. My prayer was exceptionally short; the commander’s remarks were equally brief, and then families and Soldiers ran to one another in tears and embraces. I’m searching my memory banks for a more powerful community experience–nothing. So, is this pure emotion: relief, gratitude, celebration? Or can this also be a spiritual experience? Does it foreshadow some element of what we long for with those we love who have passed? Who knows, but my boys were there with me. They know from personal experience what it’s like to be apart for 12 and 15 months. Perhaps that’s why Jared, our four-year-old, said afterwards, “Dad, this is the best day ever.” Had my mother been present, she would have likely said something cheesy like, “Isn’t it beautiful? Families are forever.” For me, the truth couldn’t be more profound that we are created to be in relationship with one another. Of course, tonight was marked by high ideals and the greatest of expectations. As the days pass, marital discord, substance abuse, depression and other difficulties will bring these folks to my office. But for tonight, the hope of better times is very much alive.

[Nathan]

Cadence wrote:

As for now I still seek after the spirit but I can not allow it to override my intelligence or ability to reason. It is more of an uplifting dare I say emotion than an actual guidepost. I hope to someday find more truth from the spirit. Pehaps it is something in me that stops me. Perhaps to me the spirit is my ability to reason and learn on my own. I do not know for sure. I am seeking

Cadence,

I was about 30 when I was first confronted with strong evidence against the historicity of the Book of Mormon; it rocked me, but not as badly as it has some. By that time, I had already wrestled for several years with similar evidence regarding the popularly accepted biblical history. Because of my appreciation for historical critical methods of interpreting scripture I do not look at scripture the same way as I once did, but it’s as precious to me as ever. When I have spiritual experiences while studying or preaching/teaching from scripture, they do not have to point to a particular, concrete reality to inform my values and fulfillment in life. I find instructive the example of Alma and Amulek while they stood bound at the edge of a fiery pit in Amonihah. Scriptures and believers were being thrown into the pit. Amulek suggested they use the power of God to stop the injustice, but Alma said the Spirit constrained him; the wickedness was necessary in order for judgment to follow. (Forget the more intricate problems here.) Both seemed to be “feeling” the Spirit, but one was more fluent or receptive to its guidance. Like countless others, I have had too many powerful experiences studying and applying the Book fo Mormon to toss it for lack of evidence of its external claims. I know how weak this looks to outsiders–but I just can’t; it’s too good. That being said, I’ve made sense of the paradox or conundrum by refusing to throw the baby out with the bath water. And so far, it’s working better than I imagined. (The process was anything but linear, and it has taken about ten years. I feel I should disclose or contextualize my experience.)

Nathan

[Nathan]

Idaho Coug wrote:

I regularly feel the Lord telling me that He approves of my testimony as it is . . .

I don’t know that this thought has ever occurred to me before now. That the Lord approves (and by inference, disapproves) of our convictions. It makes sense. I just think I’ve always been too independently framed for such a thought to fit in my brain. Nice.

[Author]

Posts