Lesson 19: What Worked?

So, this week I tried a modified version of the "attention activity" suggested in the manual. I used a picture puzzle, but instead of using it to talk about understanding the whole plan, I used it to talk about how and when different pieces of the Plan of Salvation were revealed or otherwise learned by Joseph Smith. We talked about the creation, fall, free agency and inklings of premortality in the Book of Mormon, specific revelations in the D&C, and aspects of temple ordinances taught in Nauvoo. With each component of the plan, I showed a part of the puzzle. Then I talked about how our understanding of the Plan of Salvation followed the same pattern as the restoration generally. I think it made for an interesting discussion of how we now understand the "Plan."

What about you? How did you teach the lesson? What worked for you?

Seek Ye Earnestly the Best Gifts? Really?

I am going to say something that might be a little controversial. I think we in the LDS Church have a complicated relationship with gifts of the spirit.

Spiritual gifts get a lot of lip service in the church. On paper, we really like them, and section 46 is prime evidence of that. What’s more, certain gifts of the spirit are very accepted among Mormons. The gifts of healing and being healed are very big. People have great faith in them, and most families have multiple stories of these gifts blessing their lives. The gift of prophesy is also very highly regarded, especially to the extent it refers to gaining a testimony of Christ and his church. Even beyond that, most people are very comfortable with the gift of prophesy as it relates to promptings and premonitions that keep us and our families safe from physical or spiritual harm, or that help us serve those around us who are in need. The gifts of wisdom, teaching, discernment, etc. - - all very well accepted.

But other spiritual gifts are viewed with some, well, hesitation. Although no one would rule them out, the gifts of ministering angles and working miracles would be exercised and talked about very rarely. Maybe I lack faith, but if my neighbor told me (s)he had seen angels, I would wonder what was really going on. And the gift of tongues? Well, unless you are talking about missionaries or general authorities being able to learn and speak a language more easily than expected, I think you should proceed with caution. Can you imagine if someone started speaking in an allegedly angelic language in sacrament meeting? Even if someone there was allegedly able to interpret? How would your Bishop respond?

This ambivalence about spiritual gifts started early in our history. As the saints started gathering to Kirtland, many experienced and exhibited some fairly extreme spiritual manifestations. Speaking in strange languages, seeing visions, acting in unusual ways supposedly under the influence of the spirit - - it was all going on in Kirtland. Joseph was not always comfortable with these demonstrations, and often tried to rein them in. In fact, a theme of the Doctrine & Covenants is how to avoid deception by false spiritual experiences and manifestations.

It seems to me, the more subtle or understated the spiritual gift, the more readily accepted it is in the Church. Remarkable and emotional displays of spiritual fervor, or claims of special spiritual endowment, while commonly accepted by some Christians as gifts of the Spirit, would cause discomfort if not downright suspicion among most members of the Church.

So, are some gifts better than others? What are the “best gifts” referred to in Section 46, and how do we earnestly seek them? And if we earnestly seek them, what should we really expect to find?

Gospel Doctrine Lesson 13: What Worked?

Here is your chance to share your successes with Lesson 13. What approach seemed to work? What topics generated intersting discussion? Did you try something new?

If you taught an earlier lesson, you can share your experiences here.

Give us your input!

Discussion Forum: Getting the Word Through Joseph Smith

So, I am having a really busy week at work, and have not had much time to think about a post for this week's lesson. I am hoping you all will help out. The lesson focuses on what we have obtained from the Lord through the Prophet Joseph Smith. Some of the obvious things include:

1. A knowledge of the nature of God and the Godhead

2. An understanding of personal revelation

3. The Book of Mormon, and other modern scripture

4. The Inspired Version of Bible

5. A more complete understanding of the creation and the fall

6. The Plan of Salvation, with all that entails

7. The Priesthood

8. Temples

Not a bad list. But, what would you focus on? What other things do you think we in our dispensation know or understand because of the Joseph Smith? How would you elicit meaningful discussion of his role? As a teacher, what do you think our objective should be with this lesson?

And, this is Gospel Doctrine Underground, so I have to ask: Like all of us, Joseph was a mixed bag of strengths and weaknesses. What do you think of Joseph Smith as the Lord's conduit? What were his greatest gifts? What were his greatest challenges/stumbling blocks? And do you talk about those during the lesson? How?

I look forward to your comments.

Getting Started: Gospel Doctrine Lesson 13

Lesson 13 focuses on Joseph Smith and his role in bringing forth scripture and “plain and precious” doctrines as part of the restoration. If you are not familiar with it, the Church’s website has a collection of presentations on Joseph Smith given at a 2005 International Academic Conference sponsored by the US Library of Congress. I especially liked Terryl Givens' and Elder Oaks' presentations. I have tried to find it in print form online, but so far, no luck.

Jim F. at Times & Seasons did his usual and masterful, verse-by-verse analysis of some of the scriptural material here. It contains some good discussion questions. Brad Constantine includes a great story (from Our Heritage) about two young women’s efforts to save unbound pages of Book of Commandments from the mobs in Missouri, here.

Hope that gets you all thinking. Feel free to share any resources you have, and don't forget to comment on what worked well in your past lessons, here.

So, Does "Gathering" Work?

Gathering is a big Mormon theme. Almost from its modern foundation, the Church has gathered. As insiders, we tend to think of gathering in pretty positive terms. We gather together for affirmation, strength and safety. We gather together in stakes to strengthen each other and to build the Kingdom. We gather to the temple to learn and save our ancestors. Examining it from the inside, gathering is all good, right?

To the outside observer, I am not sure are gathering has always been successful. The first commandment to gather to a specific location directed the Saints to Kirtland, Ohio. (See D&C 37). But then, almost immediately, Jackson County, Missouri was identified as Zion and gathering began there, too. Unfortunately, both gatherings were temporary and did not provide much peace or safety. Persecution and apostasy (fueled by the collapse of a Church sponsored bank) plagued Kirtland. Responding to the perceived threat of a concentration of (arguably arrogant) Mormons, mobs and an all-out war drove the Mormons from Missouri.

The story in Nauvoo is not that different. The Saints gathered there, almost out of default. They built a very successful city and started a temple. Soon, however, understandable Mormon efforts to consolidate power and defend themselves led to more fear and persecution, and the martyrdom of the Prophet and his brother. Another gathering place was abandoned.

The Mormons moved west and gathered in an isolated valley - - this time away from the rest of society. From around the world, members of the Church were commanded to gather to the latest Zion, in the Rocky Mountains. At incredible sacrifice, Saints left families, livelihoods and homes and dragged themselves across a continent. For fifty years or so, the gathering continued. Many died and were impoverished. Wards and branches in Europe emptied. Salt Lake City grew into a major city. But, maybe that was just the law of averages. You know, third (or fourth) time the charm.

So, does gathering work? It clearly has accomplished amazing things. Cities and temples and a place for God’s Church to grow. But it has almost always engendered fear and suspicion, pride and persecution. Could there have been another way of doing this? Or, to paraphrase Winston Churchill’s famous statement on democracy, is gathering the worst system for building the Kingdom of God, except all others that have been tried?

Gospel Doctrine Lesson 12: The Gathering of My People

Here are some materials to start your preparations of Lesson 12, "The Gathering of My People." This link has an interesting summary of the history of “gathering” by Global Mormonism, a BYU project that compiles scholarly research on the LDS Church. The old lesson materials at Keepapitchinin contain some good questions and nice tidbits, including a story of Lucy Mack Smith leading a group of early converts to Kirtland (with a bit more detail than the Our Heritage version). And, finally, here is an old Ensign article by Milton Backman on the Ohio period. Its scholarly tone struck me as quite different from what you see in the Ensign today.

Of course, if you know of good resources for this lesson, please share!

Lesson 11: The Field is White

As usual, I am starting the week with some information to get you thinking about Lesson 11. Jim F at Times & Seasons prepared this analysis, which focuses primarily on Section 4 of the D&C. Bruce Constantine at ldsgospeldoctrine.net prepared these materials, with a lot of historical information on the various sections in the lesson. And, Keepapitchinin has its weekly walk down gospel doctrine memory lane, here.

Talk Amongst Yourselves: Emma Smith

As the wife of Joseph, Emma Smith was witness to many of The Restoration's key events. She has been the center of controversy almost from the beginning, although she seems to have experienced something of a rehabilitation in the LDS Church during the past 20 years or so. She is the key figure in Lesson 10. Here are some snippets from other sources relating to Emma:

D&C 25:3-4 Behold, thy sins are forgiven thee, and thou art an elect lady, whom I have called. Murmur not because of the things which thou hast not seen, for they are withheld from thee and the world, which is wisdom in me in a time to come.


“I feel very anxious to see you all once more in this world. The time seems long that I am deprived of your society, but the Lord being my helper, I will not be much longer. … I am filled with constant anxiety and shall be until I get home. I pray God to spare you all until I get home. My dear Emma, my heart is entwined around you and those little ones. I want you to remember me. Tell all the children that I love them and will come home as soon as I can. Yours in the bonds of love, your husband.” (Letter from Joseph to Emma Smith, January 20, 1840, from Chester County, Pennsylvania).


“Joseph used to say that he would have [Emma] hereafter, IF HE HAD TO GO TO HELL FOR HER, AND HE WILL HAVE TO GO TO HELL FOR HER AS SURE AS HE EVER GETS HER.” (Statement of Brigham Young in the Journal of Discourses, Volume 17, page 159).

So, what are your thoughts on this interesting woman?

I Know the Church Is True (and Yours Isn’t)

Quick story: My wife is the visiting teacher to a good friend of ours. The Friend was raised in the Church, but for years has been pretty spotty on participation. She married a man who is not a member of the LDS Church. Our Friend likes a lot of things about the Church, but does not like the “One True Church” (“OTC”) idea. Not surprising, given her background and experience. What was surprising was the conversation my wife had with her visiting teaching companion. The Companion is a lifelong member born and raised in Church, baptized at eight, married in the temple. She has been an auxiliary president and counselor multiple times and her husband is currently in the bishopric - - you get the picture. My wife explained to the Companion that our Friend did not really like the OTC idea. The Companion says, without batting an eye, “Yeah, that’s not my favorite idea, either.” I did not see that coming (from her, anyway).

So what about this One True and Living Church idea? What do you think it means? It has made us unpopular with other religious people from the very beginning. See JS Hist., v. 21-22. And, it is not like the idea has gained popular support outside the LDS Church since that time. The OTC concept can be presented a number of ways, but the bottom line is always, “My church is better than yours.” Representing points along the spectrum, here are some of the ways the ways the OTC concept can be explained:

1. If You Are Not in Our Church, You are in the Wrong Church. Isn’t this basically what Joseph Smith says he was told in the First Vision? All other churches were wrong? See JS Hist., v. 19. Just for back up, look at 1 Nephi 14:10, which says there are two churches: The Church of the Lamb of God, and the church of the devil.

2. All Churches Are True, Ours Is Just the Most True. President Hinckley liked to formulate the OTC concept this way. Unsurprisingly, I think he said it about as diplomatically as it can be said. (See his comments at “Essence of Missionary Service,” here). But still, our Church is better than everyone else’s, right?

3. Our Church is the True and Living Church Because We Have the Priesthood and Ordinances. This is a main thrust of Pres. Eyring’s recent talk (see my the link in my last post). I think it is the implied message of Lesson 9, though it is certainly soft-pedaled. The idea is that many, maybe most, other churches are very good and teach true and important things, but only the LDS Church has the authority to administer the saving ordinances necessary to achieve exaltation. But once again, you can see how this is perceived as saying, “Your Church is nice, but it won’t get you to heaven.”

I don’t know about you, but I am uncomfortable with the idea that, if you are not member of the LDS Church, you belong to the church of the devil (I don’t even think that is what 1 Nephi 14 means). And, while I love the Church, have a testimony, and am a committed believer in every sense of the word I can think of, it makes me a little uncomfortable to explain to my friends of other faiths why mine is the OTC. On the other hand, if this is not the OTC, what was the point of the restoration? What is the point of priesthood and ordinances?

Help me out here.

Lesson 9: The Only True and Living Church

So, here is some reading material to get your mental cogs turning on Lesson 9, “The Only True and Living Church.” Keepapitchinin recently posted old lesson materials on the topic. You can find it here. Pres. Eyring recently gave a talk with a similar title, which you can find here. Finally, I remember an interesting post by “Ray” on the “only true and living church” at Mormon Matters last summer, with an equally interesting resulting discussion. You can find it here.

The Power of Godliness

The reading material for Lesson 8 contains one of my favorite passages from the Doctrine & Covenants, D&C 84:19-21. This passage explains that in the ordinances of the Melchizedek Priesthood, the “power of godliness is manifest.”

This passage is interesting for a number of reasons. At its most basic level, I like the idea that the power of godliness is manifest in priesthood ordinances. For those of us who have been in the Church for a while, it is easy to take the sacrament, see a child baptized or attend a wedding and think it is pretty routine, ordinary stuff. This passage reminds me that it is not. Priesthood ordinances show us God’s power and bind us to him as we covenant to obey, receive remission of sins, and renew promises to always have His spirit to be with us. And what greater manifestation of God’s power can we see than the creation of a family that will continue into beyond death?

I think it is interesting, though that this passage does not refer to the power of God, but the power of godliness. As mentioned above, the power of God is manifest in priesthood ordinances that save us and bless our lives. But I think the power of godliness is also manifest in priesthood ordinances in at least a couple of ways. First, there is an obvious synergy between a priesthood-holder’s righteousness and discipleship, and the priesthood power he is able to exercise. This connection between worthiness or godliness and priesthood power is pretty clear. See, e.g., D&C 121:36-42. Second, I think that each individual achieves greater levels of godliness as they receive priesthood ordinances and enter into covenants with God. Our own personal power of righteousness grows as we progress and come closer to God, assisted by ordinances like baptism, confirmation, the endowment and marriage.

Finally, I think it is pretty intriguing that Joseph received this revelation in 1832, relatively early in the restoration timeline. This was well before the sealing power was restored or temple ordinances were understood. In fact, although I am no historian, I do not believe that the Church at this time was really performing any Melchizedek Priesthood ordinances, unless you count ordinations to offices in that priesthood. I wonder what Joseph thought that phrase meant. Did he understand this as a foreshadowing of additional knowledge and ordinances?

How do you think the power of godliness manifest in the ordinances of the priesthood? Is there a difference between the power of God and the power of godliness? And what (if anything) does Section 84 say about Joseph’s understanding of the restoration process?

PS: Mormon Matters had a recent post on ordinances with some interesting discussion. You can find it here.

Priesthood Restoration: When Did It Happen?

One thing about the restoration of the priesthood has always seemed a little strange to me. We know with precision when and how the Aaronic Priesthood was restored. It happened on May 15, 1829 when John the Baptist appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery on the banks of the Susequehanna River. The Melchizedek Priesthood? Well, that’s a different story.

We do not really know when it was restored. We know that Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery say that they were visited by Peter, James and John. We know these three restored to Joseph and Oliver the keys of the apostleship. But unlike John the Baptist, Peter, James and John do not get their own section of the Doctrine & Covenants with a handy date.

Putting a date on this appearance has been difficult. “Ben” at The Juvenile Instructor wrote a very interesting post a while ago on dating the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood. You can find his post here. Richard Bushman, in Rough Stone Rolling, fleshes out his opinion (referred to in the JI post) that the three apostles may have appeared to Joseph and Oliver when they were fleeing a mob near Colesville, Ohio in June 1830. Does it matter when it happened? If so, why? Why the specificity with respect to some important visions and manifestations, but not this one?

To add to the uncertainty, Bushman suggests that it is not entirely clear that the Melchizedek Priesthood, per se, was restored by Peter, James and John in that original vision. Bushman notes that at a June 1831 conference, Joseph ordained several men to the “high priesthood.” At least in some sources, Joseph and others state that this was the first time the Melchizedek Priesthood had been conferred in this dispensation. In fact, Bushman says Joseph himself was ordained to the “high priesthood” that day by Lyman Wight.

If Peter, James and John had restored the Melchizedek Priesthood in 1829 or 1830, why was Joseph ordained to the “high priesthood” by Lyman Wight in 1831? And what about those statements that the 1831 conference was the first time the Melchizedek Priesthood had been conferred in the last dispensation? I have some thoughts about this, but would like to hear yours.

A Big Yawn About Religion

The Class Member Study Guide refers students to verses 5-10 and asks, “How was Joseph’s situation like that of people today who are searching to know the truth?” I am not sure what I think about this. Verse 5 talks about “an unusual excitement about religion”. It is hard for me to think about American society and “excitement about religion.” I guess there is some excitement between the evangelicals and the Mormons right now. Joseph Smith telling them that their creeds are an abomination haven't helped in that regard. And, there is certainly controversy between some religious and irreligious people. We can certainly hear echoes in these debates of the contention and controversy Joseph must have experienced.

Today, however, there seems to be more apathy about religion. No, apathy isn’t even the right word. There is just an overwhelming feeling of relativity. Not many people contend about whether their religious beliefs are the correct ones, because most operate from the premise that there is no absolute truth. What is true for you may not be true for me. No one is wrong. We all just have to choose our way.

It seems that there is a lot of tension and contention in the Joseph Smith story. Joseph expresses real discomfort with the battle that raged between the various religious groups in his community. The debate created a tension that got him asking questions. Who was right? How could he be saved? Which Church taught the correct way to God? Joseph fretted and struggled until he decided to ask God. I wonder if society today would have provided the tension Joseph needed to drive him the grove. Or would he have been comfortable thinking his way was good for him, and your way is nice, too?

It seems like the predominant question today is, “Is there a God or not?” Maybe that uncertainty would have led Joseph to seek God, but I have a hard time imaging a Joseph Smith in the USA in 2009 would ask which Church was true.