One

My wife at one point informed me that there was a service that could take a blog and convert it into a book. She told me that one of her friends used this to create a family journal and at the end of each year had a book created. I liked this idea and agreed that we should make a better attempt to catalogue the events of our family in a blog so that we could have the same record.

Consequently I've also found myself deeply engrossed in a number of blogs that I enjoy reading. I've taken as well to commenting on occasion, but I find that I'm not always interested in commenting publicly as its not always my interest to actual discuss my ideas (many times it is of course). So I considered just adding my thoughts to my family blog and having those compiled in our family history, however, I felt that might distract from the purpose of the family blog.

So, I've decided to start this one. Its purpose is to catalogue my own thoughts and feelings. My experiences of a more spiritual nature, who knows how long my interest in this will be maintained. It may be that I become extremely sporadic. I'm not the most consistent of individuals when it comes to this type of thing , so I make no promises. Nor do I suggest that what I write will be valuable to anyone but myself. I even have mixed feelings about making this blog known to a larger populace, a public populace. There are parts of me that enjoy the praise of my fellow remnant. But at the same time, that praise my have an influence that is contrary to the self-honesty which I hope that this catalogue promotes. I also plan on copying the content of any references I make so that when I do convert this to a book at the end of the year I can include an appendix that contains the content of the links.

Anyways, on to the purpose of this first entry. I had recently read chapter 6 of J.J. Dewey's Infallible Authority and decided that I did in fact have something to say about it that I desired for others to read. So I wrote this:

acknowledging that among a group of people there are going to be people who are less righteous and people who are more righteous is not the same as judging individuals as if you were God himself.

Ultimately it comes down to spiritual progression. If person A through life's experience, study and personal revelation has come to a deep understanding, connection and spiritual attachment to the Sacrament and its importance to his covenants and Person B has not, then in a situation where A is attempting to commune with the spirit, B can certainly interfere. Hence B is called by Dewey the "weakest link". The idea that we can't be discerning intelligent individuals when faced with the faults and weaknesses of others and not be classified as judgmental is one of the reasons why we have ended up in this situation in the first place. I'm sure even making that statement is going to convince people that I'm an arrogant , self-righteous bastard who simple judges people and casts them aside, which is rather ironic if you think about it.

While its often stated that our salvation and our relationship with Christ and God are personal, I feel this cannot be completely accurate. We have a responsibility to others, so while our progression is inherently personal, it is very dependent on those around us. I'm not suggesting that the statements made by other commenters are wrong, I'm simple expanding on their opinions with my own.

A response was made that I felt was a misunderstanding of my comment.

"We have a responsibility to others, so while our progression is inherently personal, it is very dependent on those around us."

I respectfully disagree. Example: someone I trust told me that I can not dye my hair purple if I want to because that would be distracting to others in the temple, and it is my responsibility to not be distracting so that they can learn what they need to learn while there. I believed him for a long time, but it really grated on me. I finally did what I should have done in the first place, and prayed about what he said. My answer was that what he believes is not true. I have no responsibility to others and their temple experience. If my hair is distracting to them, that is their own issue to work out. My friend did not hinder my progression by telling me this, but I did because I did not pray about it as soon as I had the chance; I took it at face value. Our progression is only hindered or moved forward by what we do with what we are told, not by what other people do with what they learn.

I responded.

Each of our actions do effect others and their actions DO effect me and while it is my responsibility and decision to act and react to what they do in a way of my own choosing, a recognition of that is essential if we are to make eternal progress. Even if, in its most simple form. Recognition that my worthiness is not subject to the judgement of others, which is exactly what God was telling you when you asked about your hair. Ultimately though you have proven my point. Had that man never accosted you with is asinine statement of total foolishness (imo), you never would have been "grated" and never would have turned to the Lord to find out for yourself. Hence the statement. Our progress is personal, but it is VERY dependent on those around us. I doubt very much that if we live in an austere world all by ourselves we would make much eternal progress.

I don't think it is possible to disconnect our personal journey of salvation from the nature of our social existence.

However, after completing this I wanted to say more.

This brought my mind a thinking about why I have such an issue with the way that the current LDS Church has become so stringent on the discussion of doctrine in a church setting. Specifically it brought to mind (again) the occurrence of my own censorship. I told the story in an email once already so for simplicity sake I'm simple going to copy that here.

A few years ago when we moved, here to Houston, in my "welcome to the ward" interview I told that Bishop that I would best be able to serve the ward in a teaching role. That its what I enjoyed, and I would likely simple refuse to take any other calling. 6 months later they called me to teach the 12-14 year old Sunday school.

I graciously accepted. So my first lesson went wonderfully, they called me to teach with little notice, actually it was just after sacrament, they said, hey guess what we need a teacher... today. So I didn't prepare anything, and they didn't provide me a manual. I decided, since I didn't have a manual, that I wouldn't ask for one and instead I would ask the class for a list of "questions, concerns, ideas, anything under the sun they wanted to discuss". I was blown away. The class come up with some amazing things, things that just got my mind whirring. The one I remember most distinctly was a young lady who asked the question: "They tell us to reach out to the underprivileged , the lost, the misguided. They tell us to reach out to them, to love them and to help them find the light of Christ, but at the same time they tell us that we need to "have the right friends". How am I supposed to reach out to these people , if I can't be their friends?".

I went home that Sunday determined to do the research that I know these kids wouldn't likely do to come up with some type of coherent thought around how best to address the issues they provided. The next week my lesson was stellar, the class was interactive. The discussion thrilling. However, after class the 2nd counselor in the Bishopric ask me if I had a moment. When went to the kitchen for a private discussion and he asked me how things were. I told him great. He asked how the manual looked for the year (like he didn't know, very much the same as last years :P). I told him I didn't have one. He said , oh so you are using the online version. I should have just lied and said yes. Instead, I did what my wife calls "pot stirring". I told him no, that I didn't intend to use the manual at all. That I would formulate my lessons from the scriptures, my own research , prayer and the spirit. I told him that how the church generally currently teaches is akin to brainwashing and that the manual is a crutch for the lazy and those who lack the confidence to research and teach using the spirit and the resources that God has provided to all men.

He told me that the manuals were inspired, they themselves were akin to scriptures and that it was the advice of the "Brethren" that they be used and that you limited use of outside resources.

I asked him if he was commanding me to use the manual. Specifically I told him, if you command me to use the manual I will. Otherwise I won't. He refused to command me.

However, instead he ran to the Bishop, made it sound like I was teaching apostasy (consequently his daughter was only a few months away from being in my class). That he thought me unfit to teach. I was released the next week. I was disgusted but ultimately indifferent. The Bishop came to my house to personally discuss the issue with me and let me know that he realized they had made a mistake. I was however, not reinstated. approximately 9 months later I was called again to teach 14-16 year olds. This time the handed me the manual. I used it and found class to be frustratingly boring, I still reached to outside resources, but this class was larger, 20ish students and thus much more difficult to have a decent discussion in, I expect you've had experience with teenagers after all :P.

Eventually I was released as well, though I lasted longer. When I was released I was "promoted" I guess. They called me to the Sunday school presidency, which of course doesn't really mean anything. Which was fine, church is beyond boring to me for the most part. So , I now had a do nothing calling and I embraced it! Eventually however the regular Sunday school teacher went on vacation so I taught Sunday school. My brother was going through a divorce at the time, specifically his wife had cheated on him. The lesson that I was up to teach was actually surprisingly relevant. Hosea. My brother was struggle with his angry with his soon to be ex-wife and the admonition of forgiveness. I tied Hosea in with D&C 98 advising that there are situation where not forgiving doesn't lead to damnation, while forgiving is always the higher path not forgiving doesn't necessarily lead to ones condemnation. During the course of the lesson we touched on a number of controversial issues. I had a head on head run in with the wife of the 1st counselor who argued that Hosea's wife had quit her whoring ways after marrying Hosea, though I personally disagreed that the scriptures provided no evidence in the matter, I told her for the purposes of the direction of the lesson, I was interested in exploring the condition under which she continued being a whore. She didn't like that. The 1st counselor in the stake presidency also happened to be present for my lesson.

I found the lesson to be extremely engaging and stimulating. I had several members tell me they enjoyed the lesson. I'm sure several didn't. 3 weeks later I was in the Bishops office being told contention was of the devil. That the counselor in the stake president had commented that my lesson was controversial. I'm sure the wife of the 1st counselor made comments as well. I haven't been asked to teach again since. That was what ultimately broke me. That's when I fully accepted that the "church" was no longer trying to actually teach the church, but was trying to control the masses of the church. I still attend some meetings, mostly so that my young children, 4 and 2 are exposed to primary, since even though I think the church brainwashes children... I actually agree with that approach to a degree while they are young. Its hard to determine though when to start sharing information with them more candidly.

This string of censorships wasn't brutal. It was done with love, yet it is censorship all the same. My way of teaching was "deemed" contentious and I was censored for it. Yet, this cannot be the way the Lord intended for us to learn , because without the differing opinions, the failures, the successes , the ideas of those around us, we ourselves can certainly never make progress in our personal journeys of salvation. It is only by personal experience or a sufficiently empathetic mind AND another's experience that we can truly progress. Generally speaking a sufficiently empathetic mind is only achieved when our personal experiences are similar to the experience of another. Though it may be that the outcome of the experience was different. The example that comes to mind is the case of losing a child or wife at birth. A man who has no wife or no children wouldn't be nearly as empathetic as one who did. Furthermore a man whose wife or child had a near death experience at birth would be even more empathetic. The closer our own experiences mirror the experiences of others the greater tendency we have to agree an empathize with their situation.

This becomes further compounded in the situation where not only do our experiences coincide but the lessons we learn from them also do. Returning to the example of child loss at birth. One man may become angry and curse God for his loss, another may become humbled and turn to God for comfort. Despite having experienced the same pain and the same situation, it would be difficult for an empathetic bond to exist between these two men simple because they decided to react differently to the outcome of the situation. However, because of the empathy exists from the pain of the experience it is possible that each of these men could influence each other to adjust their own perception of the situation. One could decide he had been wrong, perhaps anger wasn't the appropriate response, or perhaps humility wasn't. It is far less likely that these men would change their opinion or the feelings on the matter if they were never to interact with each other and allow the actions and thoughts of others at least influence them to consider their own actions and thoughts. Hence we see that the statement holds true.

Our journey of salvation is personal. Our relationship with Christ and God is our own to pursue. But it seems to me that salvation cannot be achieved alone. I do not mean that my salvation is dependent on the salvation of my neighbor, but that without my neighbor, regardless of the state of his salvation, my salvation would not be possible. Just like Christ is essential to our salvation so is my neighbor.

Hence , for me there comes greater understand of "Love thy neighbor". This may not be an admonishment that we literally love our neighbor as we... love our children or our spouse, but rather we recognize, no matter what he has done, no matter who he/she is that his existence, his evil or good all serve the purpose of allowing me to progress by exposure to experience. If anything, I have greater need for the sinner, the failure and the wicked simple because I have chosen a path that has prevented me from being exposed to that wickedness and I have an absolute need to associate with this individuals if I am ever to learn what have not been able to learn by my choices.

I'm loathe now to even use the word wickedness. My own choices have touched their share of wickedness. I'm in no way a perfect man, or even a righteous one. Yet there is still a need to discern between right and wrong. For without the concept of right and wrong is it possible for the concept of progression to exist? Progression suggests that there is a positive and negative, a way of moving forward and a way of moving backward. If all movement is considered forward, then there is no concept of moving at all. There could then only be stopped or moving and then one of those two states would have to be consider right or wrong, else the states would be equivalent and thus no distinction need be made between them.

If improperly interpreted one could easily begin to believe that there is nothing truly wrong or evil, there are simple choices and consequences, all of which lead to a growth of understanding and it is growth of understanding that should be our ultimate goal, which means that we should strive to experience ALL things possible. Yet this cannot be. Right and wrong must exist. Yet the concept of right wrong leads to numerous doctrinal and spiritual conundrum. The largest of which is exactly what I'm currently talking about. The concept that it is experience that allows one to progress and that without the existence of our fellow man such opposition would not exist in a way that promoted progress and growth. Furthermore, the idea that one man must act in wickedness so that the goodness of other men can be contrasted against it and we all may learn the difference between good and evil, is one that suggests it was the "fate" of the wicked, not necessarily the specific fate of any one man, but the collective fate that there would be wicked men and an absolute understanding that it was necessary. Then how is it fair, for me, the good man (if I am one), to suggest that a wicked man isn't deserving of the same ultimate happiness as I am? for ultimately was it not his wickedness that allowed me to see that his path was one that I should not follow? Thus I find it necessary to join my voice with Christ's in begging that all sinners be permitted forgiveness (including myself). Because ultimately the choices I made that were deemed good, were only deemed good due to the evil choices that they could be compared against? Can this be?