Blog

  • Stewardship: The Establishment of Zion

    Chauncey C. Riddle
    Campus Education Week Lectures
    12 June 1968

    Note: This is the version that Chauncey Riddle handed out in his BYU class.

    The basis of establishing Zion is the perfecting of the souls of individuals. As individuals accept the gospel and live it, they become sanctified, which is to say, they are forgiven of their sins, or they are made holy, pure, and spotless. The two basic characteristics of such a person, I would take it, are:

    (1) the fact that a person who comes to this state finds that prayer is his greatest asset and resource in his life. He lives by prayer, because through prayer, he gains the strength and help he needs to govern and direct his life according to the will of the Lord;

    (2) this person is blessed by the abundance of the spirit of the Lord that is manifest in the gifts of the spirit.

    Now there are many spirits and there are people who pray and get the wrong spirit. But as a person takes the time and the opportunity to make sure that he is following the right spirit this will not be a problem.

    One of the important ways that we can know that we are not on the track, or have the wrong spirit, is that there is such a thing on the earth as priesthood. When we square in our views, our revelations, with the priesthood authority over us, then we have a right to believe that we are on the right track. Experience will bear this out.

    But when a person finds himself going contrary to those who preside over him because of supposed revelation and he insists on believing it is from the Lord, he will go on to his sorrow to discover it is not so, because this is one of the plain, appointed checks the Lord has given that people need not be misled by the wiles of the adversary.

    Once a person has understood the basis of the gospel, and has decided to embark on a life of service to the Lord Jesus Christ, a life of righteousness—that is to say, if a person has entered into a strait gate—then they must go along that narrow way and endure to the end. I believe the next big challenge they must face in their lives is to learn to live in the order of the priesthood. Now this is an almost overwhelming challenge. I say almost overwhelming because when we contemplate the greatness of this challenge, it begins to be overwhelming as we understand the importance and magnitude of the task.

    We might approach the notion of learning to live in the priesthood order through the doctrine of stewardship.

    Stewardship is being given a responsibility by someone where we do not have ownership or right to absolute dominion in our own right, but where we receive it as a charge from someone else who does. It is the nature of our existence that we are stewards. For instance, we do not own the bodies we inhabit. They are not ours. We did not create them; they were created by God and given to us as a stewardship, as a charge. We have been loaned them for the purpose of executing the will of the owner. Nevertheless, it is given unto us to have agency to defy the owner if we will. But, if that is the case, we must reap the consequences of that defiance.

    We are given our minds as stewardships. The mind we have is a mind somewhat like the mind of God, except that it is very small, infantile, compared to the adult. Nevertheless, we have intelligence given to us that we can think and act and create and move and accomplish; and also destroy, hurt do evil things according to our own will. But we are given specific instructions by our Maker as to how to use this mind—what to take into it, what to believe, on what basis we should make our decisions.

    The talents we might have, whatever they might be, the money we have, the property we might have—everything which the world counts as being in our discretionary power is really not ours. It is only a stewardship from the Lord.

    Many people of this world, of course, do not believe in this stewardship, nor accept it. When a person is baptized as a member of this Church, however, this is one thing that they accomplish. They accept the Lord as the owner and governor of all things, and acknowledge themselves as stewards. They take upon themselves the name of Christ, not willing to be known simply as themselves. The important name they bear henceforth is not their own name but the name of their Master, Jesus Christ. They promise that henceforth they will not do their own will, but do His will to keep all of the commandments which He gives unto them. They promise from henceforth that they will not neglect this stewardship, but will remember the Master always, that they might receive His instruction constantly, and be faithful and wise stewards in executing their charge.

    Doctrine and Covenants, Section 104, elaborates on this idea. Beginning with verse 11, the Lord says:

    It is wisdom in me; therefore, a commandment I give unto you, that ye shall organize yourselves and appoint every man his stewardship; That every man may give an account unto me of the stewardship which is appointed unto him, (DC 104:11–12.)

    This, of course, is a very necessary and important part of having been given a stewardship; namely, that we may be called at any moment to account for the stewardship. If we have been doing faithfully and well according to the instructions given by the Master, there will be no regrets. If we have been slothful, if we have procrastinated obedience to the commandments, or if we have been doing our own will instead, then there is considerable reason to fear the presence of the Master.

    The scriptures commend to us that if we keep the commandments of the gospel, our confidence shall wax strong in the presence of the Lord, which is simply another way of saying we will be delighted to see Him come at any time to receive accounting of our stewardship. But if we are not ready to give an account of our stewardship, if we cannot say, “Lord, I have faithfully fulfilled Thy will in all things,” it simply means we have not yet fully applied the gospel in our lives.

    One of the tests, then, as to whether the gospel is our way of life is if we are ready to account to our Master at any time. Each day is sufficient to its own problems and if we live each day as the Lord would have us do, there would never be a moment of any day when we would not be ready to make that accounting.

    For it is expedient that I, the Lord, should make every man accountable, as a steward over earthly blessings, which I have made and prepared for my creatures. I, the Lord, stretched out the heavens, and built the earth, mvery handiwork; and all things therein are mineAnd it is my purpose to provide for my saints, for all things are mine.

    I, the Lord, stretched out the heavens, and built the earth, my very handiwork; and all things therein are mine.

    And it is my purpose to provide for my saints, for all things are mine, [All things, in heaven and in earth.]

    But it must needs be done in mine own way; and behold this is the way that I, the Lord, have decreed to provide for my saints, that the poor shall be exalted, in that the rich are made low. [Not by force, but by the doctrine of stewardship,]

    For the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves.

    We keep hearing about the fact that there is a terrible famine imminent, that the world is about to be overpopulated, or perhaps is now. But these statements are all made by people who know not God. If we understand the nature and the work of God, He has plenty to spare for each of His children. The only reason there ever has been famine on the earth or difficulty or trouble for the children of God is the fact that they have rejected their Maker. They have not been willing to account to Him who is the owner and master of all things. They have not been willing to be stewards. Had they been willing there would have been abundance for all.

    Therefore, if any man shall take of the abundance which I have made, and impart not his portion, according to the law of my gospel, unto the poor and the needy, he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment, (DC 104:13–18, Italics added.)

    Now this particular section relates specifically to the law of consecration practiced in the Church in the early days, but the general principle of stewardship is also there. Let’s read on a little bit in the last part of this section, beginning with verse 54:

    And again, a commandment I give unto you concerning your stewardship which I have appointed unto you, Behold all these properties are mine, or else your faith is vain [if there is anything we think we own that does not belong to the Lord Jesus Christ, that simply means that we do not have faith in Him, that He is not our Master, we have not really made the covenant with Him], and ye are found hypocrites, and the covenants which ye have made unto me are broken; And if the properties are mine, then ye are stewards; otherwise ye are not stewards, But, verily I say unto you, I have appointed unto you to be stewards over mine house, even stewards indeed, (DC 104:54–57, Italics added,)

    There are some wonderful things about a stewardship. One of the greatest blessings of being a steward for Christ is that we are responsible only for our stewardship. We are not responsible for things that lie outside the boundaries. For instance, supposing we think of our stewardship as a plot of ground. We are not responsible for what goes on anywhere in the world except within the limits of that plot which the Lord has designated as our stewardship. If we are faithful in that stewardship, the Lord might give us a supervisory stewardship not only over our plot but over some of our neighbor’s and their plots, too. And then it will be our great opportunity to be in the chain that blesses these stewards; that is to say, to help them be good stewards in their own area, but we never have to worry about anything except exactly that which the Lord has designated as the boundary of our responsibility. It is not necessary for us to go off dashing throughout the world solving all the world’s problems. We can’t do it anyway. But we can solve the problems of our own stewardship.

    Satan, of course, is active in this situation, trying to get people to neglect the matters of their own stewardships and to try to go about solving the problems of other people’s stewardships. By that means he can thoroughly mess up the world. Sometimes we have difficulty getting revelation for our own stewardship, but almost always we think we see clearly what our neighbor should do about his stewardship. But it is important to pause. If we don’t see clearly what we ought to do about our own problem, that will be because we lack the spirit of the Lord, right? And if we lack the spirit of the Lord for our own stewardship, would the Lord ever give us revelation for our neighbor’s stewardship? Obviously not. So if we think we see clearly how to solve our neighbor’s problems and we can’t solve our own, who is telling us how to solve our neighbor’s problems? It obviously is Satan. And he delights to do this. So he goes around fouling up the lines of stewardship changing the markers so that people don’t know where they belong. And so they get out of bounds.

    There is a very classic example of this that has influenced people’s thinking and is one of the most misinterpreted circumstances in scripture; this relates to the story of Cain. Cain killed Abel and then the Lord came to Cain and said, “Where is Abel, thy brother?” Cain retorted. “How should I know? Am I my brother’s keeper?” Ordinarily the correct answer to Cain’s question is what? No. The plain answer is that Cain was never given to be Abel’s keeper. A brother is never a keeper. But nevertheless, by taking Abel’s life, Cain had stepped out of his stewardship and had usurped the stewardship of God Himself. He arrogated to himself to be Abel’s keeper. So it is quite appropriate the Lord should come and ask Cain, where Abel was, because Cain had taken it upon himself to become Abel’s keeper, but wrongfully. Cain tried to get out of it by pleading innocence and ignorance of the situation by going back to the standard law that he was not Abel’s keeper. Then the Lord, of course, reminded him that He knew all things by saying, “Thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground.” And then Cain started to make lame excuses as to why he had usurped this stewardship.

    But you see, it is an interesting thing that Satan has been able to take this little story and ever since then most Christians, most people who read the Bible, have thought they ought to be their brother’s keeper when it was never given it to be that way. Possibly by this little technique more damage has been done in the world than by any other device, because people take this story and say, “Well, I need to be my brother’s keeper,” so they go out of their stewardship and over to their brother’s yard and start fixing up his problems—not by the revelation of God, but by the revelation of Satan.

    Every tyrant since the world began has simply been his brother’s keeper. He has been solving problems for his brother that his brother couldn’t solve for himself. If you look in the history books, almost every ruler who has taken great power to himself has done it under the guise of blessing his brothers, whom (he thought) knew not how to take care of themselves. He who had some special gift or insight and was going to bless them and take care of them because they were not wise enough. And 1968 is no different from the time of Stalin or the time of Caesar, or going back to the first tyrant, who was Cain.

    You see, it is the same story ever since the beginning of stepping out of the stewardship and trying to solve problems and fix things. If humanity could learn this one lesson, it would go a great way toward solving the problems of humanity. If every man would learn to worry about his own problems and not try to mess up someone else’s life and stewardship, it would greatly free humanity. But apparently we haven’t learned that yet. And so throughout the world we have a continuing series of attempts on the part of people who think they know best how to enlighten the minds of others and to “save” them.

    What is a “keeper”? If you lived in a zoo and you had a keeper, what would you have? Somebody who fed you, who closed the gates on you and opened the gates when he wanted to. He would be your master. A keeper is a master. He is the one who calls the shots, who gives the orders, who says what goes on. It was never given in this world that any man should be his brother’s master. Now it is given to some to be masters. But brothers are supposed to treat brothers as brothers and not as masters. A proper relationship of brother to brother is to live together and bear one another’s burdens, which is what Alma says: When my brother suffers, I should go suffer with him. When he rejoices, I should rejoice with him. (Mosiah 18:8–9.)

    But I am not to tell him what to do. I am not to instruct him or to chastise him or tell him where to get off. There will be people who will be sent to do that. And they will be masters or keepers. But they will have a specifically appointed stewardship to do that given by the Lord Himself. But it was never appointed that any brother should go around pointing out his brother’s faults to him.

    If your brother has a problem, do you go talk to him about it and try to tell him what to do? That is exactly the temptation I am talking about! If the Lord won’t give you revelation for your stewardship, will He for someone else’s stewardship? Now suppose yougo to a friend of yours and say, “I have a problem. Will you help me with this?” What are you doing in that circumstance? You are letting that person be your keeper, temporarily.You are yielding to them a stewardship to counsel you, and in that circumstance, if they are wise they might be able to help you a great deal. If someone asks you for help, then, indeed, it might be perfectly appropriate for you to help. But suppose they don’t ask? Would you, then—nevertheless—give your counsel? If you did, you see, you would be overstepping the bounds of your stewardship.

    Who are keepers? Fathers and mothers are keepers. Bishops, stake presidents, general authorities—they are keepers. They have specifically appointed responsibilities and authority over the people over whom they preside. But they cannot get outside that stewardship and do any good! If a stake president goes from one stake into another stake and tries to preside, he does nothing but create havoc!

    This is how the Lord orders his kingdom. This is one of the reasons I am talking about this subject. We need to learn the order of priesthood. And until we learn the order of priesthood and learn to live in it—both up and down the line—to honor those who are above us, to respect the stewardship we have below us and faithfully execute our duties, we cannot be Zion. It is not enough for us to be a good person by ourselves. We have to learn to live together in an harmonious arrangement, but the only way that the arrangements can be harmonious is if it is a God-ordered arrangement. This is the purpose of priesthood and stewardship; that everybody will know what his lines of authority are and what his area of responsibility is. Then we don’t get all messed up by doing things that are not appropriate. The Lord’s kingdom is a kingdom of order, and this is the order that we are talking about.

    I suppose that much unhappiness and misery has come out of the problem of stewardship between husband and wife with people who are trying to live the gospel as with any other one things. And so I would like to make some suggestions on this which I hope will be helpful in living this relationship.

    Basically, there are three stewardship relationships that we have to any human being in the world. For any human being we are either their father or their mother, we are their brother or their sister, or we are their son or their daughter. These are the basic interpersonal relationships that exist between people. Can you think of any relationship that does not fit one of those three?

    Now the question: which one of these relationships is the husband-wife relationship? Is it a brother-sister relationship? The answer is no. It never was and never will be intended to be a brother-sister relationship. What relationship is it? It is a father-daughter relationship. All that I am saying is that it is a father-daughter relationship in that the husband presides over the wife and the wife does not preside over the husband. The husband’s stewardship includes the wife, but the wife’s stewardship does not include the husband. Therefore it is a father-daughter relationship in the priesthood.

    Because this stewardship relationship is not understood, a great deal of difficulty arises when people try to relate to each other. If people would listen when they take their temple covenants, they would perhaps understand more. But many do not listen and therefore they do not understand how this relationship works.

    Any time we have a father or mother relationship with someone, that is, if we preside over them in the authority of the priest hood, our priesthood responsibility is to be instruments in the hands of the Lord to administer His blessings to them. This means to help them to develop as strong, righteous individuals. Whatever it takes to help them develop and grow as strong, righteous individuals—that is the responsibility of one who presides in the priesthood. It is not to dominate, it is not to govern in the usual sense!’ but it is to be a resource of information, of strength, of power, of courage. Whatever is needed that the person cannot furnish himself, he should be able to go to the person over him and get because that person has gone to the Lord and has received. If he cannot get it from that person than he will have to go higher.

    God is not slack. God is good, and therefore we all know that we will get what we need if we go higher. But, you see, the people in between will lose their blessings if they don’t give us what we need. And therefore, each of us works at our salvation in part by learning to be a good steward and to be an administrator of good things.

    When the Lord comes in the second coming and He finds His steward giving meat in due season, He has found a wise and faithful steward. What does that mean? It simply means this steward is measuring out the blessings of the Lord and giving those in his stewardship what they need when they need it as they need it. That’s the due season—so they can grow, so that they can be nourished spiritually, physically, socially—whatever it takes.

    Now the power of God is sufficient for all the needs of human beings, and if we would live under the order of God we would need nothing but the government of God for the perfection of our souls. It would suffice for every need that we have.

    The role of the husband, then, is to be a reservoir of God’s goodness, a source of everything that she would need that she cannot herself supply to fulfill her stewardship.

    What is her stewardship? Her stewardship is to be a reservoir of God’s goodness, a source, a help, to bless her children. It is the role of the wife to bring children into this world, to bear the souls of men, and to teach them and nurture them. And whatever she needs that she cannot supply herself she should go to her husband to get it. If her children are sick and she cannot heal them with herbs or whatever knowledge and power she has, she should go to her husband and ask of him that his priesthood might be invoked to heal these children. If she needs knowledge as to how to handle them in difficult psychological circumstances, she has the right to go to him and seek counsel as to what she ought to do.

    He can fulfill his role only if he is a man of God, only if he is on good enough terms with the Lord so that he, in turn, can go to the Lord and say, “Lord, please tell me what to tell my wife.” Or if he can go to the Lord and say, “Lord, I need power to give this blessing.” If he is a righteous man, the Lord is not slack. He will give the power and the blessing will be delivered, and the mother will be satisfied that her stewardship, then, is in good order. Likewise, the children have a right to go to their mother and to their father to receive the blessings they need. It seems that before we can perfect ourselves in these relationships we must become so strong in the power of the Lord in righteousness that we will never need anything from anybody beneath us in our stewardship. If we have need of something, we always go up the line to get the need fulfilled.

    Now let me be specific. When a man becomes what he ought to be as a man of God, he will never need the support of his wife. This doesn’t mean he wouldn’t enjoy it if he had it. But if she chooses not to support him, not to comfort him, not to sustain him, he needs to be able to get along without it. He has to be that strong. It can be a great blessing to him to have that comfort, but he must not need it. The Lord is in that relationship to us. The Lord cannot afford to need you and me. If He did, then we would be boss. We would be lord, if He needed us. Now He is grateful when we are obedient, and when we do the work we are supposed to do we build His kingdom. But He does not need us. If we choose to go on our way and defy Him, He can get along quite nicely without us. He may not have as much glory; He may not be as happy. But He will never have to come begging to us something. He is not in that position.

    Similarly, we need to be in that position in the priesthood authority—to delight in receiving support from the meek but never needing it. Again, have you seen others who so desperately needed their children that they will give their children whatever their children want and thereby destroy their children? But if the mother does not need those children, if the mother is secure enough in her relationship with her husband, and on up the line with the Lord, that she doesn’t need the children, then she is in the position to do the very best job with the children that is possible. If the children defy her, she doesn’t have to get on her knees and plead with them to do something. Then she deals from a position of strength. She can deal with them and bless them and discipline them in a way she never could if she had to have their help or their support.

    A servant of God is this way in relation to food, for instance. If I need food, then I am not a servant of Christ. If I can get along without food, if I am willing to starve to death, if necessary, then I can be a servant of Christ, but not until then. Because if I need food and I have to have it, then whoever controls my food controls me. And I am not a servant of Christ. I am a servant of whoever controls my food.

    Food is a small thing. If I am a servant of Christ, I could care less if I should die tomorrow. What a great blessing and relief that would be. There is nothing in this world that I can afford to need as a servant of Christ except to obey my Lord. And He will see to it that I always have power to do that. There is no one in this universe that can stop me from doing that except Him, and He won’t. Therefore, I need not fear. I will be able to fill my mission and do what I need to do. And if it is my calling to die tomorrow because nobody would give me food anymore, that’s fine. I must not mind.

    The same with any other need. We cannot afford to need anything that comes from beneath us in our stewardship. Now, that is pretty strong medicine, I know. But I hope you will, as I said, be sympathetic: in taking it, and you will try to understand what I am saying, because I honestly believe what I am saying is right. On the other hand, you can’t afford to believe me. You have to find out for yourself whether it is right or not.

    There were times in the Prophet’s life [Joseph Smith] when he didn’t get the support of his wife. And yet that didn’t stop him from fulfilling his mission. If it had stopped him from fulfilling his mission, he would not have been a servant of Christ. It is that simple.

    How can we gain the strength to do this? First of all we must obtain the foundation for being servants of Christ. We have to be servants of Christ: we have to be responsive to Him in the spirit. Then, one of the gifts of the spirit that we will receive is the gift of love. And if these relationships are worked out and perfected in a pure, self-sacrificing, long-suffering love—the pure charity that Paul talks about—it will work. If you try to work this on a hardnosed, puritanistic, business-like arrangement, it will never work. It has to be done in love.

    The pure love that I am talking about is strictly a gift of the spirit. Nobody has it naturally. There are some people who are very kind and loving, but their love is not pure until they become servants of Christ and receive that pure gift.

    What would you do when somebody over you in authority is not a very good steward? Suppose they are abusing their stewardship. This becomes a real test; this becomes a trial. And I have a very simple formula as to what to do about it. This again is a little drastic: so I hope you will bear with me.

    Let me use an analogy. Suppose you had some books that were very valuable to you. You had them in a ten cent box and the box was falling apart. What would you do? You would replace the box wouldn’t you so that you could take care of the books? Suppose that the box was just filled with excelsior—and you didn’t care whether you had the excelsior or not—what would you do? Would you replace the box? Probably not. You would probably let it stay as it is.

    All right, now let’s try a different level. Suppose there was a ward where there was a bishop and the bishop was doing a very poor job. He wasn’t a servant of the Lord; he was just riding high and mighty in his authority and power exercising unrighteous dominion. But, suppose the people of the ward were very faithful people and they tried to follow his leadership. What do you suppose the Lord would do to that bishop? He would replace him. On the other hand suppose that the people under the same bishop were slothful and didn’t care what the bishop said; they didn’t do what the bishop said anyway. What would the Lord do about that bishop? Probably nothing. Do you see why?

    If you have a bishop you think is wrong, what is the best thing you can do to help that bishop? The best thing you can do is to support him. Do everything he says to do as faithfully as you can. Now, when you do that, if you and the other members of the ward became faithful to that bishop and honored him in his priesthood something powerful would happen to that bishop. Do you have any idea what it would be? The Lord would begin to work upon that bishop, and he would harrow up the soul of that man until he either got in line or He (the Lord) would get rid of him. That is the way it works. But remember there are limits. No person has to follow any bishop to hell. It is within the stewardship of each ward member to be able to inquire of the Lord to find out how and how far to follow that bishop.

    But if the people aren’t doing what you say, as the bishop you just go on bumbling along—you, and the people, all the same. It doesn’t then matter, does it?

    What is your conscience? It is the spirit of the Lord. I was told by my bishop once to stand at the door of the church and physically throw out a certain person if that person came. That was hard for me to take. But I prayed about it and I got confirmation. Yes, that is what I ought to do. Fortunately, the person didn’t show up.

    I have been in that circumstance at least a dozen times, where there was something very important that I was told to do by the presiding authority over me that I didn’t think was right. In every case, when I have gone to the Lord, the Lord has said to do it. Now, I admit, there might be a circumstance where He might say don’t do it. But, if that ever came I would immediately check with the authority over the person speaking to me to find out if I was out of line or if the one I was questioning was out of line. I never yet have been told to go against an authority in the Church, although I have surely wondered sometimes. But as I have sought the will of the Lord the always has been to support that man.

    So I believe if a wife has a husband and she doesn’t think he is a very good servant of the Lord, the best thing she can do is to go to the Lord. The Lord will probably say for her to obey him as if he were perfect. That is pretty strong medicine. But that is her stewardship. And if she does that, the Lord is going to get busy on him. The Lord will begin to work on him. The Lord has marvelous ways to bring husbands around. But if the wife isn’t paying any attention to the husband anyway, and the husband isn’t very faithful, and the wife wants the husband to get faithful so that she will have some point in being faithful, it probably will never come to pass.

    All of this, of course, pertains to people married in the temple. I am not talking about any other circumstance, because unless people are married in the temple they have no stewardship in marriage. That is to say, their marriage is not appointed of God and is not, strictly speaking in the eyes of the Lord, a marriage.

    No woman has to follow any man to hell. You see, the crux of the matter is this. When a girl accepts a man as her husband, she must be willing to accept him as the lord. Now, if she doesn’t think enough of him, if he isn’t that good, she hadn’t better marry him. If he isn’t that grown up yet that he is a servant of God and able to speak for the Lord to her and to be the source of blessing that she needs to fill her role as a wife and mother, she is jumping off the cliff to marry him. If young people would get married right, you see, most of this problem would be eliminated.

    Supposing they are already married and she didn’t know this before she got married. Then, what does she do? The solution, generally, is to honor the covenant that has been made, and to serve as righteously and as faithfully, as sweetly and as humbly, as is possible.

    If the point comes where the Lord tells her that she ought to depart from him, she can go to her bishop, and if that is right, he will get the same counsel. And there again she is going to those who have stewardship over the matter.

    When she gets married in the first place, she ought to counsel with those who have stewardship over her, namely her father and mother. And if a girl has a righteous father and mother and can counsel with them and be assured, both through the spirit of the Lord and through her parents, that she is marrying a man of God who will lead her to exaltation, blessed is she. But I am afraid some marriages aren’t made that way.

    How long should a wife endure an unhappy marriage? As long as the Lord directs her to stay with him. She ought to stay with him and be as faithful to him as she can be. Her own salvation rests not on what he does but on how faithful she is in fulfilling her stewardship.

    As I have watched couples recently in the Church, I find that one of the biggest problems that active LDS couples are having is that the wife doesn’t think the husband is very righteous and therefore she won’t do what he says. This is the source of endless misery and grief. I believe that as long as the wife is bound by the temple covenant she will do the very best thing by the Lord and by righteousness to obey her husband faithfully. This may be difficult. But, nevertheless, this is the kind of trial and faithfulness in stewardship by which we show that we are worthy of exaltation. If a woman can serve faithfully under an evil man, she surely has demonstrated she can serve faithfully under a righteous man, and some day she will be given a righteous man to be her head and her guide if her husband rejects the opportunity. But I have seen marvelous transformations in brethren when their wives have been faithful. The brethren have seen that there is really some point in being a servant of the Lord, because they have responsibility. When their wife does everything they say, they get a little bit scared lest they tell their wife the wrong thing to do. And being a little bit scared, they get on their knees and ask the Lord, and then they try to become righteous, then mighty and powerful. When their wives come to them for blessings in the priesthood they get shaken up a little bit. So they repent of their sins and try to be righteous. It is marvelous what can happen.

    Lehi got a little out of line in the Book of Mormon, and he began to rear up against the Lord for the terrible afflictions they were having. So what did Nephi do? He went to Lehi and asked that he act as the father. He said, “Father, tell me where to go that we might have food?”

    Lehi was in no shape to get revelation at all because he had been railing against the Lord, but he had to humble himself and pray to the Lord. He received revelation and he told Nephi where to go and Nephi went and got the meat and they were saved.

    Now this is a marvelous principle; the principle of obedience in stewardship. If we can learn to live it, it is one of the great keys in the establishment of Zion.

    When a young man marries, his stewardship relationship to his father doesn’t change one bit. When a young lady marries, her stewardship relationship changes drastically. That is to say, she passes from the stewardship of her father to the stewardship of her husband. And that is why there should be agreement by all parties concerned in the stewardship—by the Church, by the father and mother, by the groom, and, of course, on the part of the girl, herself—that this transfer is all right.

    The more I learn about marriage the more I see the importance of knowing what we are getting into. Only through perfecting ourselves in these stewardship relationships in marriage can we ever have a faint hope for exaltation. Exaltation is the perfection of the marriage relationship.

    We are to become one with Christ—not two, but one. But Christ is the head. We are the hands and the feet. We take our direction from him. We are members of His body. In exactly the same sense as that relationship, the husband and the wife must be one—the husband the head and the wife the body, as it were—but they should function in perfect harmony and unity and love to accomplish the purposes of the family.

    Now the purpose of the family is the begetting and rearing of children unto the Lord. If the parents are together, if they are completely united in that particular goal, then they will be greatly blessed by the Lord in executing that task, and they can act as one.

    There are also stewardships in political matters. If we have political stewardship, then we become bound as servants of Christ to do His will in that stewardship. President McKay has instructed us as Latter-day Saints to do what we could do to get the principles of Section 121 operative in every stewardship in the world, not just the Church stewardships but the civil stewardships as well. The point is not to operate on the basis of force, but on the basis of persuasion and kindness and love.

    When many people get a stewardship, they assume unrighteous dominion; they forget that the powers of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven. The power of heaven through which the power of the priesthood becomes operative is the Holy Ghost, and when any man becomes unrighteous or any woman becomes unrighteous and exercises unrighteous dominion and if they seek to cover their sins and gratify their pride and their vain ambitions, the spirit of the Lord is grieved. And when it is withdrawn from them, amen to their priesthood. They have lost their priesthood and authority. They might be able to get it back, but in anything they do without it, they are exercising unrighteous dominion, they are outside their stewardship, which is another very important thing we want to remember. We can act as stewards only under the direction of the Lord. If we try to do this by ourselves, through our own wisdom, we are simply serving the adversary, which is to say, we have broken the lines of stewardship.

    In conclusion, let me simply say, will you please not take anything I have said as the final word. I am here to throw out suggestions to you, but I hope you will find the suggestions worthy of thought and prayer. I hope you will find them valuable in the sense of correct understanding of the relationship the Lord would have us come into.

    I bear you my testimony of the truthfulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ. And I feel with all my soul the importance and necessity of our making these relationships right in the spirit of the Lord, in the power of the pure love of Christ. And I bear you this testimony in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

  • Symbols and Salvation

    Chauncey C. Riddle*
    April 1968

    * Dr. Riddle, professor of philosophy, is chairman of the Department of Graduate Studies in Religious Instruction at Brigham Young University.

    Riddle, Chauncey C. (1968) “Symbols and Salvation,” BYU Studies Quarterly: Vol. 8: Iss. 3, Article 9.
    Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byusq/vol8/iss3/9

    This article is an attempt to set in orderly perspective certain elements of the process of obtaining an exaltation. No pretense is made to elucidation of any mystery, nor should the order of the ideas herein be confused with the Gospel. The justification for the existence of this work is the sincere hope that members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who understand the Gospel may receive some further insight into and appreciation of its greatness and of the urgency of serving the Lord with all of their heart, might, mind, and strength through the Gospel plan. To that end, then, I assert the following thesis: Qualifying for exaltation consists essentially in the proper ordering of symbols.

    Symbols and Mental Life

    We must first take account of certain features of the correlation of the mental and physical actions of men. The conscious physical experience of human beings is a mental recording or registration of the influences of the environment that work upon the physical body. This experience is composed of “ideas,” mental elements having a possibility of persistence and somewhat subject to recall. The most important aspect of these ideas for our purpose is that every experience-idea is a symbol. If it is a memory, it is a symbol of a past situation; if it is a sensation, it is a symbol of a present external configuration of physical affections; if it is imagination, it is a symbol of some future or possible experience. That which is symbolized by a given symbol is its referent. If an idea is true, it will have a one-to-one correspondence with certain elements of the referent which it symbolizes. In addition to its referent, each idea-symbol has a meaning, which meaning consists essentially in expectations for future sensation associated with the given idea. Idea-symbols thus become the basis for all conscious reaction to our environment. We act so that the most desirable possible consequent known to be available to us will become a reality, a future present-sensation.

    An example may serve to clarify these general statements. As a man in our culture sees an automobile, a mental image of that automobile forms in his mind. This image is for him a symbol of that externally real object. Away from it, he can call the symbol to mind and contemplate the automobile by analyzing the corresponding elements of the ideas. Through his imagination he can mentally dissociate the parts and reassemble them, perhaps in new form or with new elements and components. This latter process of mental creation is the key to all invention. The meaning of the automobile symbol is what he expects from the various components; if he imagines it to have a horn, he would expect to be able to produce a noise; if it has pneumatic tires, he would expect a certain comfort of ride and contingency of continued serviceability.

    Language complicates the idea-object symbol relation by introducing a secondary level of symbolization. Words “mean” the ideas which we each individually associate with them. In common sense we sometimes think that when we talk of Provo that what we “mean” by the word “Provo” is the physical city itself. Reflection shows that all we can possibly mean is some kind of amalgamated memory of all the experiences we have had in relation to the physical city; we “mean” the ideas we remember about the physical city. If we have never personally experienced Provo, we will mean by the name “Provo” only those ideas which we have habitually come to associate with that name. Words are, then, symbols of ideas, those ideas being mental symbols of actual or imagined external physical objects and events.

    Man’s mental life may be described as a Symbolic awareness of external reality and a symbolic preparation or planned reaction to that reality on the basis of understood possibilities of given situations. A man reacts to a moving automobile by removing himself from its path. Or he satisfies the need for change of place by recognizing in the idea of automobile the possibility of transportation. Mental life is internal symbolic adaptation to the realities and possibilities of the external world, both the internal and the external being equally real and necessary to man’s existence and to the satisfaction of his desires.

    The mental symbolism by which each person adapts himself to his environment and seeks satisfaction of his desires necessarily involves elements which have no present counterpart in sensation. We react to the here and now on the basis of an imagined continuity of today with yesterday and all prior days, and with tomorrow and all future times. We react to the place in which we find ourselves at present by imagining a continuity of the place we see with other places we have seen or have heard about or which we suppose exist. Our minds use, as it were, great maps of time and space which we take as accurate symbols representing external reality. We are able to use these maps because of the physical reality attached by present sensation to certain points of contact with those maps, and also because using them has in the past enabled us to predict our sensations of future times and different places with a high degree of accuracy. On the framework of these time and space maps we construct mentally the whole physical universe and its past, present, and future. We add details of geography, objects, persons, and events in accordance with the range and depth of our observation and education. The inner world of mental construct tends to become a symbol of the universe, seen, as it were, sub species eternitas, without regard to particular perspective of time and place but in regard to the whole of space and events at once, emphasis changing from place to place as the attention varies.

    One business of science is the implementation and correction of the social thought-symbol of the universe using purely physical data. In science, the details of present sensation are carefully incorporated into the conceptions of the universe that relate to present time, then inductively distributed backward and forward in time by the principle of uniformity. Theories of things not sensed at all are invented to fill the remaining gaps. The infinitesimal, the infinite, and the distant, all of which are outside the realm of sensation, are imagined and added to the universe-symbol on the basis of what is consistent with and possibly explanatory of the elements of present sensation. The ultimate scientific criterion for creation of the universe-symbol is that all ideas incorporated must be either directly observable or be theoretical projections having an economizing and predictive function. One special aspect of science is that the modern scientific universe symbol is naturalistic; its constructs must be limited to matter or energy in motion in relation to other matter or energy, specifically rejecting the existence of God, spirits, devils, etc.

    The practical advantage of the human universe-symbol is enormous. If a man wants, say, to erect a factory at a certain spot, he employs an architect to plan a building. He has in his mind a general idea of the functional requirements of the desired structure. He symbolizes this mental image in words or drawings which the architect or engineer must interpret to form a mental image which will have a one-to-one correspondence with the functional necessities of the project envisioned by his client. The architect or engineer must then imaginatively create an image or mental symbol of a building which will at the same time satisfy those functional necessities and also the necessities of sturdy structural characteristics and proper adaptation to the building site in accordance with the details and regularities of his own scientific world-image. This new mental symbol of the building is given a physical symbolism in blueprints and specifications. The building contractor then seeks to order the materials of nature and manufacture to build the physical structure in accordance with his understanding or mental symbol of what was intended by the creator of the blueprints and specifications. The finished physical structure is then put into operation by the entrepreneur; if it fulfills his functional needs, then everyone is satisfied and symbols have served as could nothing else in achieving that satisfaction.

    In summary, human life is a constant interplay and adjustment of reality to mental symbol, and vice versa. As we observe the world, we adjust the mental symbol to reality; as we work and create, we adjust reality to our mental symbols. Questions of metaphysics aside, mind and matter are profoundly and functionally related.

    Learning the Gospel

    We noted that the scientific world-image is naturalistic. It contains no gods or demons, spirits or spiritual forces, dead or unborn men. Furthermore, the scientific world-image is quite neutral in relation to values; it can sometimes tell men how to get what they want, but never what they must or should want.

    The message known as the Gospel of Jesus Christ is, in the framework of our discussion, an opportunity for men to add to and to correct their mental image of the universe in such a way that they can more successfully achieve their desires and avoid unpleasant experiences. It teaches men that there are gods in heaven and that we are their children; that there are spiritual influences of both uplifting and degrading effect; that we must account for all of our trespasses against our fellowmen; and that we may receive the assistance of one Jesus Christ if we think enough of our fellowmen to try to make amends for whatever sorrow we have brought into the world. The Gospel teaches men who already believe in a god how they should conceive of him and what they can do to please him, to put themselves in a position to receive his assistance. The Gospel, then, instructs men on how to construct and furnish their mental construct of the universe in relation to the things which most of them cannot see. One who has seen and personally knows of the truth of what he says bears witness to men of the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth and of our Lord’s literal resurrection and appearance in the latter days. He testifies that the power and influence of the Holy Ghost is real, and that peace and joy are the fruits of living by the Spirit. He who hears the Gospel message truly delivered will be touched himself with a spiritual experience, the witness of the Spirit to the truth of the words of the missionary, a veritable specimen of the actual spiritual reality about which the missionary is talking. Pricked in conscience and mind by living evidence of a dimension of reality which he had previously discounted or only imagined, the hearer of the Gospel is then moved with Peter’s hearers to exclaim, “Men and brethren, what shall I do?” Already sensing the power of the Gospel message and the authority of him who speaks, he feels drawn to the minister of salvation and hungers for further word.

    Having already explained to his hearer the essential personages which should be part of his world-symbol, the messenger proceeds to relate the requirements of salvation, the opportunities which those divine personages have made possible. The hearer of the Word is told of the importance of faith, obedience to the directions of the Savior; of the wonderful opportunity of repentance; of the covenant and promises of baptism; and of the comfort and guidance possible after receiving the Gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands. In short, the messenger attempts to create certain ideas of divine standards of conduct, setting an ideal pattern after the fashion of the architect’s blueprint. But the missionary is not the architect, for his message is vague, general and in the vernacular. The Lord is the architect. It is his Holy Spirit which clarifies to the mind of the hearer the specific standards and ideas suggested by the missionary. The workings of the Spirit are analogous to the engineer who takes the rough intentions of his client and transforms them into precise and realistic specifications; so does the Spirit accompany the necessarily vague and limited utterances of the missionary to create in the mind of the hearer exact and precise symbols or ideal standards. All this is so that the demands of perfect justice and divine mercy might not be rendered inapplicable through total dependence on human communication with its necessary faults and limitations. The Lord sees that all men are sufficiently instructed in good and evil.

    Thus it is that a man is saved no faster than he gains knowledge. That is to say, his ability to please God is limited by the awareness he has of the exact ideal standards of the Gospel he must abide in order to have faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. The first requisite for salvation is, then, repentance. In repentance a person must order his mental image of the universe to include all the following: the Father; the Son; the Holy Ghost; the spirits of men who are dead; the spirits of the unborn, angels, and devils; the Gifts of the Spirit; the powers of Satan; Adam and Eve; the Fall of man; the Atonement of Jesus Christ; the Priesthood and keys; the Day of Judgment; the Church of Jesus Christ; the prophets, seers and revelators; the Gospel ordinances; the visions and revelations of Joseph Smith; the historicity and divinity of the Bible, the Pearl of Great Price, the Book of Mormon, and the Doctrine and Covenants; and the divine leadership of the living prophet, etc. Within the framework of these persons, things and events, the person must order his mental symbol of the universe to include the standards and laws of the celestial kingdom, the love for the Lord with all one’s heart, might, mind, and strength, and obedience to all His commandments. He will project in his mind the heavenly city which all the prophets have longed to see, where no one hurts or destroys, where all the pure in heart dwell in righteousness under the leadership of the Savior. While it is true that no one will receive precise concepts of all these things before he accepts the Gospel, in the process of earning his exaltation he must come to have a true understanding or mental image of all these things. The first step in salvation, then, is to order one’s mental image of the universe to include true spiritual realities as one is taught them. Only then is he prepared to live the Gospel, seeing and doing all with the perspective of spiritual eternity.

    Living the Gospel

    Having attained an adequate mental basis for the proper living of the Gospel, if a person then desires the association of the gods and the blessings they can bestow, it is incumbent upon him to act according to the specific prescriptions of those divine personages. If he can change the natural actions of his life so that he conforms to the new standards they have put into his mind, he then can be saved. For example, he learns that not only must he avoid fornication and adultery, but that he must avoid every thought or desire of physical pleasure which is outside the precise bounds of righteousness the Lord has established. He then labors to fill his mind with the words of the scriptures, to garnish his thoughts with virtue, to remember the Savior always, to be led by the Spirit to understand why unchastity is such a terrible abomination; that through all this he might come to have the pure love of Christ toward all men and no longer desire any kind of evil. This lifting of one’s actions to measure up precisely to the standards of celestial law is called “justification,” the process of becoming a just or law-abiding man. This achievement is possible only under the constant tutelage of the Holy Ghost. This process is also known as finding the strait and narrow way. We enter the gate, which is acceptance of the first principles and ordinances, and then begin the struggle to tread the path to exaltation. We must struggle against the temptations of good things apart from divinely prescribed conditions, temptations of pride, of intellect, of physical attainments, of the flattery and cunning of worldly persons, of the shame of the world, and against the taunts of unholy men. If we can humble ourselves sufficiently to receive and be obedient to the Spirit, then no worldly influence can block or thwart our treading of the straight and narrow. As a little child submits to his father, so we then become meek, submissive, patient, and full of love that we might receive grace upon grace, the light of truth growing brighter and brighter in us until the perfect day, the day we become perfect by obeying the enticings of the Holy Spirit in all that we do.

    The straitness of the way to exaltation varies as we progress. It always directs us squarely to our goal, but varies in its breadth. The closer we come to living celestial laws, the more particular will the Spirit be in warning us of pitfalls. What the Spirit allows us to do in our early weakness, it will forbid us to do in our later strength of increased righteousness. As fast as we can receive and live the principles of righteousness, we are led on unto perfection, wherein we do only that which we are directed to do. Living the Gospel, then, is bringing our treatment of real physical things and events into accord with the standard of saintly action prescribed by the Lord and described in detail to us by the Spirit. It is the adequation of the acts of a free agent to the specifications of a celestial symbol through human willingness and divine spiritual power.

    But the importance of symbols does not end with the mental image of the world which a saint enjoys. There is yet another level of symbolism which might be illuminated. For the real elements of the physical world—the persons, things, and events—are all themselves symbols of a yet greater reality. These are neither linguistic nor mental symbols; rather are they physical realities symbolic of things spiritual, present realities symbolic of things future. To distinguish these special symbols which are the referent and physical reality of the Gospel standard, and at the same time are the symbols of a spiritual and future reality, let us call them “surrogates”: that which stands in the stead of. Surrogates are special symbols because, in opposition to linguistic or mental symbols, they have more than instrumental or operational value. Surrogates are intrinsically valuable as realities in their own right, and cannot be expended or disregarded in favor of their referent. In fact, the surrogate provides a unique access to the referent. Whereas the linguistic symbol is a matter of custom and convenience, proper action toward gospel surrogates is the only way of obtaining the ultimate which they symbolize.

    Let us examine a specific instance of a surrogate. The celestial standard is that we treat each human being with perfect and complete kindness and love; be he friend or enemy, we must not condemn, but bear witness to the truth; not wish evil against him, but pray for him; not harm, but return good for evil. Each human being is a surrogate or symbol of our Savior, Jesus Christ, and whatsoever we do unto the least of our brethren, even so we do it unto him. If we would be exalted, we must learn and come to have in our minds that celestial standard. We must then bring our actions up to that Standard, treating each of our fellowmen as if he were the Savior. Thus realizing that each person is a symbol or surrogate of the Savior, we learn to relate properly to those symbols in the real world, that is, to treat that person in such a way that we may become worthy of enjoying the personal presence of the Savior and do for him directly what we now do only for his surrogate. Only if we treat his surrogate as we should treat him, may we receive the Lord. This surrogate is thus a unique factor in gaining the ultimate spiritual reward we seek.

    Other examples of the surrogate-symbol relationship are as follows. A man’s wife in the new and everlasting covenant is a surrogate of the blessings of that covenant and a symbol of the covenant itself. If he dishonors her in thought or in act, he dishonors that covenant; if he does not repent, he cuts himself off from the blessings of the covenant. The children a man and wife have are surrogates of a numberless posterity. Their physical possessions, of land, animals, and things, are surrogates of an eternal physical dominion. Their priesthood is a surrogate of the full powers of godhood. The Church is a surrogate of the heavenly Church of the Firstborn. The authorities who preside in the Church are surrogates of the Lord and his role as governor of the universe. The influence of the Holy Spirit a man enjoys is surrogate of the fulness of light and truth enjoyed by the exalted. The saving ordinances are surrogates of the eternal pronouncements of blessings in the eternal world. In short, earthly things are surrogates of an eternal and a future greater reality. Each is of great intrinsic worth, and only as we accord to each that intrinsic worth and order our lives and them in relation to celestial standards can we ever enjoy the eternal and ultimate reality. Those who are damned are those who abuse the intrinsic worth of surrogates here and now in order to satisfy an urge or lust or fear, being unwilling to abide the celestial image given to them in their minds by the power of the Spirit.

    Conclusion and Corollaries

    The force of the thesis of this paper should now be manifest as that thesis is restated: Qualifying for exaltation consists essentially in the proper ordering of symbols. This means, then, that the essential steps in becoming exalted are (1) ordering our mental symbols to conform to the spiritual realities of the universe, (2) ordering the affairs of our lives in accordance with those mental symbols. We should remember that each thing, event, or person in this world is a symbol or surrogate of an ultimate spiritual reality and that our actions relative to these things demonstrate how we would react in that ultimate spiritual situation. The following corollaries might now be drawn.

    (a) It will be noted that the most important element of ordering symbols in the two steps of gaining an exaltation mentioned above are changes of self more than of anything else. We change our world-image as we are taught to understand truth by the Holy Ghost. We change our actions to treat everything and everybody as we should according to the world-image which the Spirit has given us. The ordering of symbols thus consists in ordering the position of the self, each for himself, in relation to all things external. For the concept of self is itself symbol and surrogate as is everything else. My body is surrogate for the resurrected body I shall some day have. My present desires are surrogates for my eternal desires. My thoughts are surrogates for what I shall think in eternity. If I can subject my body, my desires, and my thoughts to the standards of thought and action prescribed by the Lord, I then can be blessed by him. Subordination of the self to the will of God, then, is the particular ordering of symbols which is in my power which will lead to exaltation. Any deviation must lead to damnation. But the Savior has said this more simply; Except ye “become as a little child, ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God.” (3 Ne. 11:38.)

    (b) Another consequence of our human situation here delineated is the nothingness of man when he pretends to be anything without the help of the Lord. If we are not led by the Spirit, we cannot begin to know whether we have a correct or incorrect idea about things we cannot directly perceive. All human description of the unseen is a guess, “educated” though that guess may be. Men make sufficient errors to convince at least all who try that the theories of men can never be trusted completely. But even if a man learns for himself from the Spirit the true image of the universe, he is yet helpless if he then rejects the guidance of the Spirit in his daily actions. Without the guidance of the Spirit he will not know what to do in all things to be perfect, since light and truth are different things.

    Furthermore, we have not in ourselves the power, worlds without end, to change the past, to change the consequences of our evil deeds, that we might Stand blameless before a just God. Through the Atonement of Christ and the guidance of the Holy Ghost, we may be saved from the consequences of our mistakes, and we may be led to sin no more. Both of these great values, guidance and forgiveness, depend solely upon the proper relating of our own concept of our self to our concepts and precepts of our Savior and the Holy Ghost. If we pretend to any merit, worth, or intelligence on our own that entitles us either to a necessary claim upon the Savior’s atonement or to an ability to dispense even temporarily with the guidance of the Spirit, we have so misordered the symbols that we cannot be made perfect and cannot reach exaltation. Again, the Savior has said this more simply: “Without me ye can do nothing.” (John 15:5.)

    (c) Heretofore little has been said of scripture, but the place of scripture can now be located within the framework already established. Written scripture is a collection of human symbols which have been ordered in a particular fashion by holy men as they were directed by the Holy Spirit. Contrary to what is often supposed, the purpose of written scripture is not, generally, to make clear and certain to men the ways of the Lord. The scriptures are written in a human vernacular which is not designed for nor capable of expressing spiritual truth with any high degree of accuracy. That fact may be coupled with the fact that there is no such thing as literal interpretation of any human symbol, all meaning being strictly a matter of convention. To these mechanical difficulties we may add the deliberate confusion created by the Lord, “that seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.” (Mark 4:12.) It is also obvious that the scriptures are not topically organized nor is any pretension to completeness made for any doctrinal question other than the simple message of the fulness of the Gospel as found in the Book of Mormon. These factors surely demonstrate that the scriptures are not intended to be a clear exposition of the mind and will of the Lord. Compared with the level of communication established in modern scientific discourse, the human interpretation of scripture is almost completely blind.

    What then is the intended purpose of our scriptures? They are intended to prick the conscience, to excite the curiosity, to stimulate one to search, and to baffle him who seeks for the wrong reason. They are intended as enigmas that must be unraveled by the same power as originally gave them. He who supposes that he can in any way determine the meaning of any scripture without the explicit guidance of the Holy Ghost, however literal or historic the reference may appear, has not yet learned the answer to the most basic of all religious questions: “Can a man by searching find out God?”

    All who have the enlightenment of the Holy Ghost regarding the meaning of any passage of scripture are of one mind with the Lord, with the Lord’s appointed prophets, and with all others who enjoy the guidance of the Spirit. The scriptures, are, then, a symbolic enticement to learn of the things of God and at the same time a barricade to the learning of spiritual truth. They are a blessing to humble men who seek true wisdom and a warning to proud men to humble themselves if they wish to know truth and light instead of the vain imaginings of men. Eternal life is found only in coming personally to the Savior as we heed the living prophets and the voice of the Lord through the Holy Spirit. Hence the Savior’s challenge to the mistaken Jew: “Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.” (John 5:39.) The Jews thought the scriptures would guide them to eternal life. But they didn’t understand their own scriptures. If they had, they would have seen that the scriptures point men to Christ, and only in him can any man gain eternal life. Thus the Savior’s lament: “And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” (John 5:40.)

    (d) It is important to mention in connection with scripture a didactic symbolism employed by the Lord wherein physically real things on the earth are used to teach men of things they cannot now experience. Brief mention of certain examples of this must suffice. The sacrifice Adam offered was to teach him of the Sacrifice of the Son of God, through which Adam would be saved. The flood which ended the patriarchal world is a symbol of baptism. The ark wherein eight souls were saved by water is a symbol of the saving power of the new and everlasting covenant. The rainbow is a symbol of God’s forbearance and will not be removed until He is again about to destroy the world. The tower of Babel episode is a symbol of what happens when men attempt to find out God by searching. Light is a symbol of guidance and good; darkness and consequent stumbling of evil. Abraham’s attempted sacrifice of Isaac is a symbol of the sacrifice by the Father of his Only Begotten. Moses holding aloft the brazen serpent was a symbol to Israel that whosever should have faith to look, to believe on the Savior, should be saved. The rituals of the Law of Moses all were types and shadows, living prophecies of the Atonement. The cross whereon the Savior was crucified is a symbol of the evil of this world. The parables of the Savior were likenesses of things physical to things spiritual. The Liahona is a symbol of the guidance of the Spirit; the Urim and Thummim of the power of Seership. The destructions of the wicked, upheavals of the earth, and subsequent blessings of the righteous in Book of Mormon times were a symbol of the events accompanying the Second Coming of the Savior. Modern temples are symbols of the mountains where the prophets have gone to get away from the world and commune with God, and vice versa. Almost every physical aspect of the temple is symbolic of truths of a spiritual order. The temple ceremonies are highly symbolic but intended to convey important truths for both everyday living and for eternity. Every Gospel ordinance is a symbol: baptism, of death and burial, of cleansing, of rebirth; confirmation, of receiving the Holy Ghost; anointing with oil, of receiving the blessings of the Lord; shaking the dust off shoes, of leaving a witness; the emblems of the sacrament, of the body and blood of the Savior; our reaching out to partake of the sacrament, of our voluntary promise to obey God in all things. Obviously, this list could be extended almost indefinitely. The point is this: the Lord employs every opportunity to use physical things to teach us things spiritual. As we receive this teaching under the influence of the Holy Ghost, we are given an understanding of the truth sufficient for our salvation. If, after all this, we will not accept of the ways of the Lord, it is to our own account. After these many witnesses we cannot stand blameless.

    Suffice it to say in conclusion that symbols are at once the key to our exaltation and the lock that damns us. Only as we are honest in heart and hunger and thirst after righteousness do they become the means for our blessing which our Lord intends.

  • Points to Ponder, 1968

    College of Religious Instruction

    The Mormon Intellectual     fix WCr date in WCrVol. II, No. 1, 28 February 1968

    Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who develop themselves intellectually enjoy the riches of a double heritage. Participation in that Church brings them a legacy of prophets and principles, revelation and exhortation, as well as an active program of cultural, social, and moral reformation. Intellectual development brings to them the knowledge, culture, scholarship, and technology of the world of their fellowmen. These two heritages might be characterized in Greek terms as “mantic” and “sophic”; in direction as vertical as opposed to horizontal sources; or, as “other-worldly” and “worldly.” Tensions associated with the proper relating of these two influences, both within the individual person and also within the LDS Intellectual community, create rather considerable interest and excitement, both within and without that community. That tension may be seen as a great asset or as detrimental, depending upon one’s point of view, but it is unquestionably a very real factor in the present local scene.

    The religious heritage of the LDS intellectual is centered in a special concept of deity. In this heritage, Jesus Christ is the God of this earth, a personal, specific, divine being who once lived on earth as a man and who now, as a resurrected, corporeal person, controls this universe. Much of this foregoing theological commitment is shared with other Christians. The special difference is that to the LDS person, Jesus Christ is available for personal communication at all times. To be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is to acknowledge that Jesus Christ has and does literally speak with and appear to prophets today. To be active in this religion, each individual member is expected to communicate with Christ daily through the Holy Spirit, receiving instruction and guidance about the practical matter of moral uprightness in daily life. The goal of every person who lives this religion is to overcome unrighteousness and evil through the guidance of the Christ, and having done so, to be allowed into the personal presence of Jesus Christ, to see him face to face, as have the prophets, both ancient and modern. This is the “mantic” heritage.

    The “sophic” heritage brings to the LDS intellectual the total cultural, scientific, and social deposit of the ages. Through the processes of education, scholarship and experimentation, that total deposit is available to him, as it is to every other human being. Far from being afraid or disdainful of this heritage, as religious persons are sometimes said to be, he is anxious to inherit: “If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.” (13th Article of Faith.)

    As the possessor of a dual heritage, however, the LDS person cannot take either lightly. He must seek revelation constantly to be true to his religion, and he must seek the best that is in the world constantly, through study and experience. To become a master of both is his religious goal.

    A problem arises, however, when the commitment to his religion runs contrary to the wisdom of his fellowmen. He may then be forced to choose between his prophet and contemporary sociology, between revelation and the opinion of his peers. He cannot give equal allegiance to both traditions. The possible solutions to this dilemma mark the tensions within the Church.

    LDS persons who accept the prophets and revelation but will not study, discuss, reason and experiment are automatically excluded from the group known as “LDS intellectuals.” These, of course, do not fully accept their religion, because it enjoins them to seek learning, to be “intellectual.”

    At the other extreme is the member of the Church who is well-acquainted with the heritage of the world and gives it his primary allegiance. Ordinarily he is a person who does not enjoy personal revelation on anything like a daily basis; this makes him suspect that the prophets do not enjoy much, if any, personal revelation. This type of person may be an active member of the Church, but becomes uncomfortable when Church policy or statements of the prophets go contrary to what he has learned from the world. He views the non-intellectual Church member as hopeless and suspects the integrity of any intellectual who puts faith first.

    The LDS intellectual who enjoys personal revelation but insists on meeting the intellectual world on its own ground sees himself as taking the best of both worlds. He sees the non-intellectual Church member as needing to be inspired, and the intellectual who rejects revelation as one who is blind. He believes that revelation will help him to solve the problems of the world to the degree to which he himself works hard to implement those solutions. He sees the LDS Church as the nucleus of a perfect social organization that will eventually meet every human need for every human being: economic, cultural, intellectual, political, and religious.

    The future of the LDS Church will be a struggle to encourage its faithful non-intellectuals to become faithful intellectuals and to encourage its intellectuals to become faithful to Jesus Christ through their own personal revelation.

    President David O. McKay
    Vol. II, No. 3, 20 March 1968

    It is entirely fitting that President David O. McKay should receive the Exemplary Manhood Award from the Associated Men Students of Brigham Young University. Fitting though this honor is it does not begin to touch the greatness of the man. For this one is more than a man, a great man. He is a prophet of the living God. He is the personal steward representing the Creator of this universe, even Jesus Christ, to every living soul upon this earth.

    If we assent to the Exemplary Manhood Award, perhaps we could also envision a greater honor to be bestowed. Perhaps we could see him as the Savior’s personal emissary, inviting all men to come and drink freely at the fountain of life, truth and righteous. Perhaps through the Holy Spirit we could believe and obey in all things as he speaks the mind and will of Christ. Perhaps through this faithfulness we could come to a unity of the faith, the perfecting of the Saints, the adornment of the bride ready for the Bridegroom. This would indeed honor David O. McKay and the Lord Jesus Christ who has sent him.

    Through the years the words of President McKay have sweetly vouchsafed peace to our souls, courage to our hearts, strength to our determination. The following selection of these choice sayings is brought to your attention in the hope that all of us might rededicate ourselves to the service of Christ and that we might encourage others to do the same as we savor the prophetic, challenging words of this great man:

    Christ

    I know that God lives, that his Son Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world, and that divine beings restored through the Prophet Joseph Smith the gospel of Jesus Christ as he established it in the meridian of time. (CR, Oct. 1967, p. 153)

    The Church

    Thus does the Savior and His Church become my inspiration, my ideal in life. I think it is the one great thing for which man should strive. It presents the most efficient methods for human service, social uplift and progressive steps toward universal peace and brotherhood; and in its idea of salvation it comprehends the whole of the human family. (CR, April 1963, p. 99)

    Communism

    The position of this Church on the subject of Communism has never changed. We consider it the great satanical threat to peace, prosperity, and the spread of God’s work among men that exists on the face of the earth. (CR, Oct. 1964, p. 92)

    Force

    Force rules in the world today. Individual freedom is threatened by international rivalries and false political ideals. Unwise legislation, too often prompted by political expediency, if enacted, will seductively undermine man’s right of free agency, rob him of his rightful liberties, and make him but a cog in the crushing wheel of regimentation. (CR, Oct. 1965, p. 8)

    God as the Center of our Lives

    When God becomes the center of our being, we become conscious of a new aim in life. To indulge, nourish, and delight the body as any animal may do is no longer the chief end of mortal existence. God is not viewed from the standpoint of what we may get from him, but rather from what we may give him.

    Only in the complete surrender of our inner life may we rise above the selfish, sordid pull of nature. What the spirit is to the body, God is to the spirit. When the spirit leaves the body, it is lifeless, and when we eliminate God from our lives, spirituality languishes. (CR, April 1967, pl 134, emphasis added)

    Hearts

    Merely an appreciation of the social ethics of Jesus, however, is not sufficient. Men’s hearts must be changed. Instead of selfishness, men must be willing to dedicate their ability, their possessions—if necessary, their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor for the alleviation of the ills of mankind. Hate must be supplanted by sympathy and forbearance. (CR, Oct. 1963, p. 89)

    Love of Life

    I love life! I think it is a joy to live in this age. Every morning, as I view from my window the mountains to the east and greet the sun as it ushers in these unexcelled autumn days, I feel the joy and privilege of life and appreciate God’s goodness. (CR, Oct. 1966, p. 4)

    Missionary Work

    It is the responsibility of every member of the Church to preach the restored gospel to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people, that the evils of the world may be met by the counteracting forces of truth. (CR, Oct. 1967, p. 151)

    The Noble Life

    The noblest aim in life is to strive to live to make other lives better and happier. (CR, April 1961, p. 131)

    Radiate the Divine Nature

    God helps us to be partakers of the Divine Nature. May the spirit of this great conference radiate from your hearts to those who you will meet when you go back to your stakes and wards, and especially may it radiate in your homes. (CR, Oct. 1960, p. 60)

    Reverence

    The greatest manifestation of spirituality is reverence; indeed, reverence is spirituality. Reverence is profound respect mingled with love. (CR, April 1967, p. 86)

    Self-Mastery

    I plead with the members of the Priesthood throughout the Church to practice self-mastery. Be master of yourselves, master of your appetites, master of your passions. (CR, Oct. 1958, p.88)

    Spirituality

    Spirituality is the consciousness of victory over self, and of communion with the Infinite. (CR, April 1967, p. 8)

    The Test

    Man’s earthly existence is but a test as to whether he will concentrate his efforts, his mind, his soul, upon things which contribute to the comfort and gratification of his physical nature, or whether he will make as his life’s pursuit the acquisition of spiritual qualities. (CR, Oct. 1963, p. 89)

    Truth

    The most precious thing in the world is a testimony of the truth. (CR, Oct. 1964, p. 92)

    Unity

    The greatest safeguard we have for unity and strength in the Church is found in the priesthood, by honoring and respecting it. (CR, Oct. 1967, p. 6)

    We Must Be Born Again

    Force and compulsion will never establish the ideal society. This can come only by a transformation within the individual soul—a life brought into harmony with the divine will. We must be “born again.” (CR, Oct. 1961, p. 7–8)

    The Anchor
    Vol. II, No. 6, 15 April 1968

    President David O. McKay admonished us in his closing conference message to make the Gospel the anchor of our lives. An anchor is a device for giving a ship some freedom of motion, but setting definite boundaries beyond which it cannot go. As the wind, waves and tide force the ship in directions that lead to destruction, the anchor holds it safely in check.

    So with our lives. The fierce winds of passion, the waves of confusion, the tides of the ways of men, the stealthy fog of temptation, all effectively put us in peril. If the Gospel is our anchor, then Christ is our rock. As a sure mooring he enables us to bridle our passions that we might love purely, to know the truth that we be not double-minded, to walk in the narrow path of righteousness that we might do great good to penetrate the fog of temptation with the light which leads us out of darkness to eternal life.

    How joyful we ought to be that there is a god who is our God, who loves us enough to restrain us from evil, to protect us against destruction! How grateful ought we to be for that tug of conscience that tells us that we have gone far enough, that any further will sever our connection with the rock of our salvation! If we are humble and obedient to the tugs of the anchor chain, if we can resist being restive and proud, then the might and power of all eternity is extended to us to guarantee safe harbor. But if the anchor becomes a burden and the rock too restrictive, we can cut ourselves loose; but then we must depend upon our own power for any salvation we get.

    The choice is simple: anchor, restraint, safety, salvation, Christ; or relativity, license, danger, degradation, destruction.

    Two Kinds of Religion
    Vol. II, No. 7, 22 April 1968

    As we take spiritual inventory, we should understand the type which our personal pattern of religion exemplifies. There are two main types of religion. Both can be good, but one can be better.

    The first kind of religion is an attempt to avoid evil. It seeks a pattern of safety among pitfalls. It seeks defense against a formidable adversary. It is essentially negative. Carried to extreme, its progressive protections and proscriptions lead the doer to inactivity. Only in doing nothing is he safe. Nirvanistic loss of personal identity and responsibility is the eternal bliss.

    The second kind of religion is an attempt to do good. It seeks to establish heaven in a fallen world. It strives for an offensive against everything which deters growth, development, fulfillment. It is positive. Its culmination is in the enlargement and exaltation of the individual through laying hold of every good thing. An eternity of solving problems in blessing others is the great goal.

    The first alternative will be recognized as legalistic, law-of-Moses type of religion. The second will be seen to be a more expansive, spiritual type of religion. The former breeds fear and carelessness. The latter breeds the impetuous Peter who sought good in spite of himself. We can see these two types in the restored Church today: legalistic proscribers and liberalizing expansionists. The interesting thing to note is that neither of these approaches by itself enables one to live the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

    To live the Gospel one must enjoy both kinds of religion, both negative and positive. The negative side, as the law of Moses, is carnal; it is for the body, for the subduing of the flesh. The ultimate goal of this side of living the Gospel is to strip the flesh of identity, of autonomy, to make it humbly obedient as a passive entity, an instrument of the spirit. The spirit having gained mastery and control of the body with the help and guidance of the Holy Spirit, it can then with that same help pursue positive religion, to do the works of righteousness, of charity, uninhibited by a recalcitrant tabernacle but strengthened by a body in form like that of God himself. The fulness of the Restored Gospel leads a person to mighty works of witness, of priesthood and of love as the individual participates in the warning of the nations and in the establishment of Zion.

    Man is a dual being, body and spirit. He needs two religions. One of proscription, to subdue the flesh, and another of enticement to do good, to enlarge the spirit. The negative must come first, even as the schoolmaster law of Moses prepared the way for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But both must have their fulfillment. Then we shall be sons of both Moses and Aaron:

    “For whoso is faithful unto the obtaining these two priesthoods of which I have spoken, and the magnifying their calling, are sanctified by the Spirit unto the renewing of their bodies. They become the sons of Moses and of Aaron and the seed of Abraham, and the church and kingdom, and the elect of God.” (D&C 84:33–34)

    Both of these religions must center upon Christ through the laws and ordinances of his Gospel. As the Law of Moses witnessed the sacrifice of the Savior’s body, even so does the Gospel witness his faith, his complete obedience to the Father in the spirit. Jesus Christ is both our example and our succor in living both of these religions. As we fulfill all righteousness in him, the two become one religion. This then is our hope:

    And again I would exhort you that ye would come unto Christ, and lay hold upon every good gift, and touch not the evil gift, nor the unclean thing. …

    Yea, come unto Christ, and be perfected in him, and deny yourselves of all ungodliness; and if ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness and love God with all your might, mind and strength, then is his grace sufficient for you, that by his grace ye may be perfect in Christ, and if by the grace of God ye are perfect in Christ, ye can in nowise deny the power of God.

    And again, if ye by the grace of God are perfect in Christ, and deny not his power, then are ye sanctified in Christ by the grace of God, through the shedding of the blood of Christ, which is in the covenant of the Father unto the remission of your sins, that ye become holy, without spot.” (D&C 10:30, 32–33.)

    Spring, a Time of Hope
    Vol. II, No. 8, 29 April 1968

    On a fine spring day the surge of life as nature awakens is electric. Blooming flowers, nascent leaves, bursting buds, tireless bees, pungent fragrance, all attest the energy, the power, of life.

    For one who loves Christ, every day is a fine spring day. As he feels the testimony, the love, the gifts, the comfort of Christ, his bosom swells; the power and sweetness of spiritual life cause him to be exuberant. In spite of troubles and trials, he knows no anxiety, for he knows that in Christ all things work for good for those that love the Lord. Each day becomes an exciting adventure as the Lord’s mission takes him to new places, to meet new people, to help solve new problems. He knows no failure in any venture, for the Lord prospers him spiritually no matter what happens physically or temporally. As he goes through each day, a singing happiness of self-mastery, accomplishment, benevolence and compassion rewards and nourishes him, and the anticipation and intimation of joy beckon him onward. Knowledge distills upon his soul, understanding wreathes his experience, power flows to enable him to lay hold upon every good thing. The life and light and love of Christ are his life, his hope, his love. So every day is as spring.

    And when you couple spiritual life with a beautiful spring day. …

  • Book Review: Madsen, Eternal Man

    Chauncey C. Riddle
    BYU Studies
    1968

    (Reviewed by Chauncey Riddle, professor of philosophy and chairman of the Department of Graduate Studies in Religious Instruction at Brigham Young University. Dr. Riddle has published frequently in The Instructor.)

    In a world threatened with drowning under a flood of printed matter, Professor Madsen’s book shines forth in clear contrast to the usual run-of-the-press. It is terse, laconic—sometimes painfully so; more often it is exciting in bare allusion to profound principle (e.g., p. 26). But its brevity and terseness do not prevent it from containing more ideas in total than most tomes many times it length (80 pages). The real strength of this work, however, lies in the quality of the ideas contained therein.

    With the skill that reflects a lifetime of careful thinking and with materials patiently gathered both from the vast literature of the world and from the revelation of the prophets of the latter days, Professor Madsen weaves a fabric that wears well. His pattern is of contrast, highlighting the rich hues of gospel truth in a setting of the somber questions which have pervasively plagued mankind in recorded thought. The form of his doth is a garment for man, to cover man’s intellectual embarrassment about his own being.

    Specifically attentive to the problems of personal identity, the parentage of mankind, the mind-body problem, the challenge of evil, the nature of human freedom, and the knowing of important things, we are treated to the provocative insights of the Prophet Joseph Smith. The dilemmas, paradoxes and frustrated attempts of such thinkers as Aquinas Kierkegaard, Marcel, Bultmann, and Tillich are parried deftly with simple and powerful strokes as the restored gospel is displayed as the avenue of truth and happiness for all men.

    The reader should not expect in this treatise a systematic work either of philosophy or of theology. The intent of the author seems to be rather to speak to his topics as soul-problems that beset each human being. These problems are met, however, on a high intellectual level and are couched in terminology that makes clear the relationship between the kinds of questions the thinkers of the world are asking and the answers provided by the prophets.

    To one not of the same religious persuasion as Professor Madsen, his work offers a clear, incisive examination of the heart of “Mormonism.” To such it is a plain challenge to make a choice, seeing here the intellectual strength of the religion of Jesus Christ but being warned that the intellectual side is neither final nor consummate. But to those of like persuasion, this work is as a catalogue and reminder of riches possessed, though perhaps neglected; of strengths familiar, but possibly unused. They will likely want to review the writings of Joseph Smith with new thirst, and even to seek after the same source as did the Prophet. Perhaps the creation of such a desire would be the greatest compliment the author of Eternal Man could receive.

  • The Mormon Intellectual

    Chauncey C. Riddle
    c. 1967

    Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who develop themselves intellectually enjoy the riches of a double heritage. Participation in the Church brings them a legacy of prophets and principles, revelation, and exhortation, as well as an active program of cultural, social, and more reformation. Intellectual development brings to them the knowledge, culture, scholarship, and technology of the world of their fellowmen. These two heritages might be characterized in Greek terms as “mantic” and “sophic”; in direction as vertical as opposed to horizontal source; or, as “other-worldly” and “worldly”. Tensions associated with the proper relating of these two influences, both within the individual person and also within the LDS intellectual community, create rather considerably interest and excitement, both within and without that community. That tensions may be seen as a great asset or as detrimental, depending upon one’s point of view, but it is unquestionably a very real fact in the present social scene.

    The religious heritage of the LDS intellectual is centered in a special concept of deity. In this heritage, Jesus Christ is the God of this earth, a personal, specific, divine being who once lived on earth as a man and who now, as a resurrected, corporeal person, controls this universe. Much of this foregoing theological commitment is shared with other Christians. The special difference is that to the LDS person, Jesus Christ is available for personal communication at all times. To be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ has and does literally speak with and appear tot the prophets today. To be active in this religion, each individual member is expected to communicate with Christ daily through the Holy Spirit, receiving instruction and guidance about the practical matters of moral uprightness in daily life. The goal of every person who lives this religion is to overcome unrighteousness and evil through the guidance of the Christ, and having done so, to be allowed into the personal presence of Jesus Christ, to see him face to face, as have the prophets, both ancient and modern. This is the “mantic” heritage.

    The “sophic” heritage brings to the LDS intellectual and the total cultural, scientific, and social deposit of the ages. Through the processes of education, scholarship, and experimentation that total deposit Is available to him, as it is to every other human being. Far from being afraid or disdainful of this heritage, as religious persons are sometimes said to be, he is anxious to inherit: “If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.” (13th Article of Faith)

    As the possessor of a dual heritage, however, the LDS person cannot take either light. He must seek revelation constantly to be true to his religion, and he must seek the best that is in the world constantly, through study and experiences; to become a master of both is his religious goal.

    A problem arises, however, when the commitment to his religion runs contrary to the wisdom of his fellow-men. He may then be forced to choose between his prophet and contemporary sociology, between revelation and the opinion of his peers. He cannot give equal allegiance to both traditions. The possible solutions to this dilemma mark the tensions within the Church.

    LDS persons who accept the prophets and revelation but will not study, discuss, reason, and experiment are automatically excluded from the group known as the “LDS intellectuals.” These, of course, do not fully accept their religion, because it enjoins them to seek learning, to be “intellectual”.

    At the other extreme is the member of the Church who is well-acquainted with the heritage of the world and gives it his primary allegiance. Ordinarily he is a person who does not enjoy personal revelation on anything like a daily basis; this makes him suspect that the prophets do not enjoy much, if any, personal revelation. This type of person may be an active member of the Church, but becomes uncomfortable when Church policy or statements of the prophets go contrary to what he has learned from the world. He views the non-intellectual Church member as hopeless and suspects the integrity of any intellectual who puts faith first.

    The LDS intellectual who enjoys personal revelation but insists on meeting the intellectual world on its own ground sees himself as taking the best of both worlds. He sees the non-intellectual Church member as needing to be inspired, and the intellectual who rejects revelation as one who is blind. He believes that revelation will help him to solve the problems of the world to the degree to which he himself works hard to solve the problems of the world to the degree to which he himself works hard to implement these solutions. He sees the LDS Church as the nucleus of a perfect social organization that will eventually meet every human need of every human being: economic, cultural, intellectual, political, and religions.

    The future of the LDS Church will be a struggle to encourage its faithful non-intellectuals to become faithful intellectuals and to encourage its intellectuals to become faithful to Jesus Christ through their own personal revelation.

  • The Problem of the Academician – POINTS TO PONDER

    COLLEGE OF RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION
    CHAUNCEY C. RIDDLE
    16 November, 1966

                It is patent to observe that academicians often make a poor showing in the work of the Church; frequently they are a destructive, negative influence. The paradox is that sometimes these persons of destructive impact have the best of intentions. It is not intentions or desires which count in the long run, however; rather, it is performance. But the good intention makes this paradox worthy of further examination. The problem of the academician can be traced in part to the frame of mind engendered in his professional atmosphere.

                One principal aspect of the academic atmosphere at its best is extreme negative criticism. It is critical because of the necessity of constant analysis of one’s own and other men’s ideas, actions, and creations. It must at times be negative because it is concerned with excellence of product.  The producer, it is assumed, is enough of a scholar to know the positive aspect of production, to have delight in excellence, and not to take negative criticism personally. The criticism is extreme because of the necessity of making fine discriminations, again in deference to the ideal of performing as perfectly, as expertly as is possible for a given time and circumstance. This is one operation of the academic atmosphere at its best because the world would be flooded even more than it is with specious knowledge, with shoddy performance, with chicanery were it not for the academic crucible which attempts to eliminate the dross. In some respects the academic atmosphere is a great benefit to mankind, and one might lament that its influence is not more widespread. If academicians were not also human beings, the academic atmosphere might well be given far greater influence in society.

                In sum then, the academic approach is to achieve excellence of product through intensive, withering criticism of all that men propose, propound or produce. This approach has been of great and demonstrable beneficence to science, particularly, rescuing it from its origins in aesthetic rationalism and making of it a formidable, pragmatic giant.

                Contrasted with the academic frame of mind is a gospel frame which is in approach antithetical to the academic in almost every respect. The gospel frame begins with the premise that we are engaged in the work of the Lord, which work has come by personal revelation from the Lord. If we have that testimony, then we know that we are not here concerned with criticism of the projects of men. The man or men who present ideas and projects to us are the Lord’s chosen stewards, the prophets and presiding authorities. The task is not to oppose and criticize what they say, but rather to strive mightily to comprehend and implement what they say. What they say may appear to our critical minds to be irrational, shortsighted. But if we have the personal testimony that the Lord had appointed them as His stewards, to criticize them is to set ourselves us as the judge of the Lord.

                The gospel frame of mind has its primary focus on people rather than products. It sees all men as the children of God, as eternal souls who may, if they wish, come to a restoration of their heritage, to know their Father again personally, and to receive of all that he has. Programs and products are seen as devices and opportunities for the building of God-like character in each individual. The most essential ingredient of that character is faith—humble submission as a little child to all that the Father seeth fit to inflict. This is indeed the antitheses of academic criticism. It is learning to be deliberately non-critical of anything that comes from the Lord in order to achieve a proper personal relationship with the Lord. It is to see ourselves as weak, ignorant, biased potential servants of an omnipotent, omniscient and perfect God.

                Within this gospel frame of mind one does not criticize. He will search for the will of the Lord through personal revelation if asked for his counsel, but will only bear humble  testimony to what he believes the Lord wants. He will never attack a brother or a leader for his ideas, but will examine his own conscience for the necessity of repentance if he finds himself at odds with someone with whom he ought to be in agreement, leaving critical judgment to those who preside. If he presides, he will pronounce the Lord’s judgment, not his own. All things will be done in pure love, in genuine respect for all persons concerned, be they in agreement or disagreement with himself.

                In sum, the gospel frame of mind is a positive, joyful acceptance of all that comes from the Lord, with an earnest and eager desire to implement it.

                It can readily be seen that the gospel frame of mind employed in an academic situation would wreak havoc. To accept uncritically what is of men is demonstrably disastrous. And to apply the academic frame of mind towards the work of the church or towards anything which is of the Lord is at least equally disastrous. It will serve to alienate us from all good things—from God, from the prophets, from personal revelation—and with considerable alacrity.

                Should we then reject one frame of mind—say the academic—and adhere to the gospel? Rejection of either could be as disastrous as mis-application of either. If we reject the critical frame of mind, we might reject the possibility of finding the Lord, for it is only by a careful discrimination that we find the voice of the Lord among the welter of human and spiritual influences which play upon us. To reject criticism would be to leave oneself defenseless against the wiles of the adversary and his minions. And of course if we reject the gospel frame we cut ourselves off from all righteousness, choosing to remain in spiritual darkness and death.

                The solution then lies in a thorough mastery of the nature and skillful use of each frame of mind with a corresponding careful attention to the situation of the moment to know which frame to apply. The overall pattern will likely be to emphasize the critical frame until we find the Lord, then to emphasize the gospel frame thereafter. For if we are servants of the Lord, even when we act as acute critics in a proper academic environment, we must above all be saints and be responsive to the person and his spiritual needs even as we dissect what he academically propounds.

                “Every scribe well instructed in the things of the kingdom of heaven, is like unto a householder; a man, therefore, which bringeth forth out of his treasure that which is new and old.” (Matthew 13:52)

  • Points to Ponder, 1966

    Messages to the faculty of the College of Religion, Brigham Young University, 1966

    No. 1

    The following ideas are submitted in the hope that each of us can more completely fill our potential as servants of the Lord in instructing the youth of Zion.

    One of the choice expressions of the task of teachers in the Church is given by Moroni:

    … and their names were taken, that they might be remembered and nourished by the good word of God, to keep them in the right way, to keep them continually watchful unto prayer, relying alone upon the merits of Christ who was the author and finisher of their salvation. (Moroni 6:4)

    Let us enlarge briefly upon these concepts:

    1. Their names were taken: We are accountable for the influence we have wrought upon each soul who has been under our tutelage. We have their names in order to insure that to each one has been extended the love, understanding, and nourishment which is the rightful heritage of the children of God.
    2. That they might be remembered: This is to treat them as individuals, not as “classes” or groups. Needs are personal and particular. Optimal good is done only on a person-to-person basis.
    3. Nourished by the good word of God: The prime function of a teacher in the Church is not to express his or her own ideas and opinions but to lead the flock to feast upon God’s words: first the Scriptures, both canonized and those from the living prophets; then the words of God which come by the Holy Spirit to each individual.
    4. To keep them in the narrow way: There is only one way that is right, and it is strait and narrow. It is to hearken to the voice of God in all things, for by his Holy Spirit God will show us all things which we should do. (2 Nephi 32:3)
    5. To keep them continually watchful unto prayer: Since one receives the Holy Spirit through the prayer of faith, it is the opportunity of the teacher to encourage and commend prayer and meditation, that each spiritually new-born son or daughter of Christ might grow continuously to spiritual maturity, ever watchful against the sophistries of the adversary and the temptation to spiritual drowsiness.
    6. Relying alone upon the merits of Christ: If only we can recognize and teach that all good is of Christ, and that as intelligent beings we ought to rely solely upon Him for our nourishment, our knowledge, our health, our wealth, and our priesthood!

    No. 2

    The true Latter-day Saint is one who has come to terms with at least one fundamental fact: All he or she has or hopes for comes through Christ. They know that they must rely upon their Savior for every good thing –for forgiveness of sins, light to cease sinning, for knowledge of truth, for strength to do what is good, for the gifts of the Spirit to overcome all things. Such persons are humble and meek before God. They know that pride is the enemy of all righteousness. They know that but for the grace of God, they would be as the worst sinner. They know that the rewards of men are paltry compared to the peace of the Spirit. They know that the more like the Savior they become, the more they can expect to be shamed, ridiculed and despised by men. They know that acceptance by their Heavenly Father is the only real test with which they need be concerned.

    How does one act in relation to his fellowmen, especially towards his brothers and sisters in the Gospel? Is one concerned to appear to be learned before his fellow man? Is one constantly concerned with one’s “image?” Does one have to be heard uttering wise sayings in all public gatherings? Does one plead and scheme for the honors of men? Does one apply all the leverage one can to up his salary? Is one offended and self-righteous and critical on the occasion of evidence of the shortcomings of his brothers or sisters or colleagues? Does one demand preferential treatment because of one’s status or callings? Does one seek the adulation of students and derogate those who disagree with him? Does one overestimate one’s ability and contribution?

    All of these questions are important, and there are others even more powerful and disquieting than these. But what is needed is that everyone ask and answer each of these questions for one’s self. It will not do to fly to a loved one or friend and say, “Tell me it is not so.” These problems must be worked out in the depths of meditation, in the anguish of one’s own conscience, in the solace of one’s wilderness. The wonderful prospect is that if we can ever come to full and honest terms with ourselves, with our own conscience, then we are on that strait and narrow road to acceptance by Him who sees and knows all. If ever accepted by Him, then what of arrogance, pomposity, ego-mania, image-adoration, self-aggrandizement? All will be swallowed up in the pure love of Christ as we gain that most precious attainment. And then we can be to our fellowmen the true servants of Christ which it is our opportunity to become.

    No. 3

    What is our task as teachers of religion? It is to bring souls to Christ. The principal means of accomplishing that goal is to encourage everyone whom we can to do three things: (1) to have a profound respect for the Lord, (2) to hearken to the living prophets, and (3) to seek the Holy Spirit as a guide for all things in their lives. We join Isaiah and Jacob in challenging all men: “Who is among you that feareth the Lord, that obeyeth the voice of his servant, that walketh in darkness and has no light?” And with those prophets we also add the solemn warning from the Lord to those who would substitute the reasoning of men for the revelations of God: “Behold all ye that kindle fire, that compass yourselves about with sparks, walk in the light of your fire and in the sparks which ye have kindled. This shall ye have of mine hand –ye shall lie down in sorrow.” (2 Nephi 7:10-11)

    What then of the mechanics of teaching? What of syllabi, curricula, facts, and programs? These are the framework of our opportunity to bring the good word of God to the children of God. Let us make no mistake: There is no salvation in these methods and tools. Only by helping people to come to a personal acceptance of the atonement of our Savior and a spiritual rebirth is there any profit.

    Shall we relegate the mechanics of teaching to the realms of evil and disdain the obligations thereof? Certainly not. Only in the excellence of the academic framework can we obtain the spiritual objective. To be slothful academically would be sheer hypocrisy –pretending to be a university, then dishonoring the trust of those who come for learning. As we are masters of the techniques and disciplines, wise in the things of the world, apt in our scholarship, incisive in our insight, disciplines and in our procedures, faithful to our duties, – then can we in the power of truth and righteousness show to all the better way.

    No. 4

    The moans and groans from students upon the occasion of any examination might lead one to think that such tests are some form of cruelty. One might also be led to think that evaluation of teachers is a terrible evil as one listens to the rumblings of the faculty. But in our sober moments we know that testing and evaluation are an indispensable aspect of progress.

    The hallmark of intelligence is action which is appropriate to the contextual situation. Understanding the situation comes only through constant testing and probing. We test our students to see what they know and thus what they need to be taught. We are evaluated as teachers to see where we can best serve and in what we need to improve. As the carpenter with his square and level, the plumber checking for leaks, the physician performing a thorough examination, the courts proving a will, so we must evaluate and be evaluated constantly. To do otherwise would be to settle for the blind and rigid determinacies of a machine.

    In the Gospel, too, we are constantly being evaluated and are evaluating. The Lord judges our every thought, desire, word and act, and bestows or withdraws his blessings from moment to moment according to our heed and diligence. The essence of home teaching is to discern in love and spirituality the needs of the families we serve, then to administer the Gospel and its ordinances carefully and perceptively in accordance with the progress and problems that are apparent. Likewise we are testing our own hunger for righteousness constantly, deciding from moment to moment where to draw closer to the Lord or to shrink from Him, to have Him as our God or not.

    Since evaluation is an unavoidable and indispensable aspect of this earthly probation, would it not be well to appreciate it and learn to profit fully both from evaluation and being evaluated? “For all who will not endure chastening, but deny me, cannot be sanctified.” (D&C 101:5)

    No. 5

    Time is of the essence.

    The precious passing moments press upon us, then filter into the abyss of eternity, leaving only a residue of memory. But that memory can be of the brightness of accomplishment—of love, or sacrifice in service, of honor in defense of truth and principle; or it can be of the dull pain of waste, of aimlessness, of self-seeking or submission to the pressure of the moment. And that memory is part of the eternal “me.”

    In our teaching, every moment should be treasured as a gem. We can focus our efforts so that the class we are conducting, the counseling we do, the evaluation of student papers,—all can be high quality, and achievement of real love to bless our students. With that in mind, let us review some of the pitfalls to avoid:

    Going to class unprepared, forced to “play it by ear.”

    Allowing meaningless digressions in class discussions, however pleasant.

    Presenting material that is unorganized.

    Dismissing class sessions at “the drop of a hat,” such as only giving an assignment then dismissing the class session on the first day of meeting the class, going early to assemblies, dismissing class for the day before vacation, etc.

    Being “buffaloed” into releasing class five minutes early as the students start to stir, close books, put on coats, etc.

    Finding it unimportant to start the class on time.

    Taking role inefficiently.

    But if one has a yearning to improve the opportunity of time, there are excellent strategies to employ:

    Have a repertoire of choice answers to questions, so that the interest which provokes a student’s question also becomes the cement to fix a gospel principle in that person’s mind.

    Highly integrate class sessions with outside study assignments.

    Deliberately concentrate on building rapport with the class members during the first few meetings, and when it is established, communication and learning will increase many fold.

    Be so filled with your subject that it cries out to be expressed, then measure it carefully to the needs and abilities of your group.

    Artfully turn every digression into a novel approach to the intended subject matter.

    Treasure the chance to bear your testimony in all humility and to impress each child of our Heavenly Father in your charge with the greatness of the simple fundamentals of the Gospel.

    No. 6

    It is good to avoid the very appearance of evil.

    Priestcraft is the merchandizing of religion, representing to promote the work of God but doing it for hire and the honors of men. The Book of Mormon is particularly blunt in labeling priestcraft as one of the great evils of the latter days.

    How then does a professional teacher of religion associated with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints avoid that evil? He is on the horns of a dilemma. He can avoid teaching the truth of the Gospel; in which case he denies the very reason for being hired and becomes a hypocrite. Or, he can teach the Gospel well, which can only be done through the guidance of the Holy Spirit. But then he is selling the gift of God. How can one escape?

    The professional teacher of religion, of all people, must tread the strait and narrow. No final prescription can be given that will answer all situations. But there are some guidelines. Consider these:

    1. He or she can humble themselves in mighty prayer to receive the Holy Spirit, then do all he or she can to follow that spirit unto doing a perfect job of teaching students.
    2. One can recognize that because he or she is paid to teach religion, any real good done in that capacity is simply what is expected –that which one was hired to do. To earn eternal blessings, such an one must also work out his or her heart in the Church and Kingdom of God after working hours, as a free contribution.
    3. He can be careful never to take money for any activity which could possibly be construed as Church work, which others would be expected to do for nothing.
    4. Salary should never be a principal consideration in his teaching. If what he is paid is insufficient for his needs, the Lord will show him other, more remunerative and less perilous occupations if he is faithful.
    5. He should assume no priesthood prerogatives because of his teaching position. One prime objective of his teaching should be to encourage strongly the support of local and general priesthood authorities.
    6. He can plead with the Lord to show him exactly how to escape from his dilemma, how to be a just man while teaching for hire.

    What a great delight it is to teach young people the Gospel! But, oh how careful we must be.

    No. 7

    The typical disease of our age is materialism. Materialism is the belief that all of our important problems have a material (especially economic) causes. The changing of material (especially economic) circumstances supposedly will provide the panacea. This is the thesis of Marx. Curious, isn’t it, that western nations claim to be anti-Communist while having swallowed whole the central Communist idea. No wonder then that we only quibble with the Communists as the most efficient means to achieve the materialist utopia.

    Do you lack evidence of our materialism? Consider these: Most of us live beyond our means (installment buying) in the attempt to hasten felicity. Readiness to take a handout. Concern to buy at the lowest price regardless of whom we thus support or why the price is low. (Do you support Communist governments by purchasing the products of their slave-labor?) Supposing that our problems would be solved if our income doubled. The proportion of time we spend nourishing and caring for our physical being as compared with the time we spend nourishing and caring for our spiritual being. Not to mention present political palaver.

    What is the cure for materialism? It is simply to live that Gospel of Jesus Christ which we verbally and emotionally espouse. It is to heed the full message of John the Baptist. (Have you noticed how many discussions of religion are an attempt to repudiate the specifics of what John said was necessary to the repentance of his materialistic contemporaries, that they should impart of what they have to those who have less, to be honest and exact in business affairs, to be content with their wages, not to attack others nor accuse anyone falsely. Luke 3:9–14) It is to put our full trust in the Lord Jesus Christ, to be guided and instructed by Him in all things, putting first the welfare of our spirits: the purifying of our hearts, our unity with the living prophets, our service in the Kingdom; then latterly and almost incidentally seeking counsel and help for health, wealth and retirement. It is to act to show that we really believe that the best thing to do is to seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness, trusting that all else necessary will follow. It is genuinely to seek first for a hope in Christ before we seek for riches. It is to give our wealth away as the Lord directs. It is to begin to sacrifice all we possess, as is necessary, for the sake of righteousness.

    Seek not for riches but for wisdom, and behold, the mysteries of God shall be unfolded unto you, and then you shall be made rich. (D&C 6:7)

    Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungered, and fed thee? Or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? Or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the king shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. (Matthew 25: 37–40)

    No. 8

    Dr. Nels Ferré, eminent Protestant theologian, visited the BYU campus last week.

    After being with us for nearly two days, talking with faculty and students, reading literature about “Mormonism” which was put into his hands, he finally made what to him was a startling discovery. He found out that “Mormons” are “Christians.” Isn’t it wonderful that he found out before he left?

    But there is an application of all this. How long does it take our students to find out that our master is the Lord Jesus Christ? Do they wonder what the ultimate source of value and truth is to us?

    Is it obvious to them that we stand as witnesses of the divinity of Jesus Christ at all times and in all things, and are delighted to be called his people? Is there any message more crucial to our task than the following:

    And now, my beloved brethren, after ye have gotten into this straight and narrow path, I would ask if all is done? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; for ye have not come thus far save it were by the word of Christ with unshaken faith in him, relying wholly upon the merits of him who is mighty to save.

    Wherefore, ye must press forward with a steadfastness in Christ, having a perfect brightness of hope, and a love of God and of all men. Wherefore, if you shall press forward, feasting upon the word of Christ, and endure to the end, behold, thus saith the Father: Ye shall have eternal life. (2 Nephi 31: 19-20)

    No. 9

    Teaching is an art. It is a “fine art” in the best sense of the term, closely related to the drama.

    The teacher writes the script, selects the cast, directs the performance and evaluates the individual audience response. He writes the script as he prepares his lesson outlines, texts and objectives. He selects the cast as he himself lectures or leads a discussion, employs audio-visual aids, brings in visiting authorities, calls on students for presentations and responses. He directs the performance each day in class, suiting the action to the need, shifting the focus, tempo, devices, scenery and cast as he sees fit. And he evaluates the audience to his own satisfaction, even giving them permanent grades for their aptness or lack of attention.

    Now some observations on this situation:

    1. As drama is the most powerful form of art for most people, so teaching is an opportunity to wield great power.
    2. The teacher is not only powerful, but very powerful; the greater his skill, the more power he has over his students.
    3. The power of teaching can be used either for great good or for great evil.
    4. Some disdain to teach well, thinking it beneath their dignity to communicate effectively or consistently. They limit their role to that of being the “great authority.”
    5. Some confuse effective teaching with entertainment; they “ham” it up or titillate their students by name dropping, or make obscure references, or digress exasperatingly.
    6. The good teacher has a nigh absolute mastery of the subject matter to start with. His principal concern in class work is to lead and guide the individual students in that field,—enthusing, correcting, enriching, nourishing, as his perception of student needs shows opportunity.
    7. Of all subjects, the Gospel of Jesus Christ ought to be taught well.
    8. The real test is the active response of the audience. Does the Holy Spirit operate through us as teachers to make of the students godly men and women, examples of righteousness to all the world?

    No. 10

    What is our task as teachers of religion?

    Our task is to witness of Jesus as the Christ and to point everyone to the straight and narrow gate of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, repentance of all sin, sincere taking of the covenant of baptism, and seeking and living by the Gift of the Holy Ghost. Everything else is ancillary.

    It is not our task to teach the errors of the world. Satan is highly efficient, and none of us need to be advocatus diabolic, though we may compare truth with error to highlight the truth.

    It is not our task to be “objective scholars” in the manner of the world. There is no such thing as attaining real truth through scholarship alone. But we must be as fair and objective in our scholarship as we can be.

    It is not our position to cower before the onslaughts of modern science. Science today is a powerful pragmatic tool for subduing the earth, but most of its proponents make of it a pious and dedicated atheism. We can give science its due without letting it become Lord and Master.

    It is not our task to disabuse people of all their false and naïve notions. It is sufficient to teach the truth in humility and to let the Holy Spirit guide them to see the error of their ways.

    It is not our task to call anyone to repentance. That function is reserved to those who preside in priesthood authority. But we can show that repentance through Christ is a thing most desirable, the hope of all mankind.

    It is our task to create an atmosphere of light and warmth where the tender plant of faith can take root and grow against the day of trial.

    No. 11

    Suppose evidence comes to my attention that I am not highly rated as a teacher. What should I do? I could deny that the rating has any validity. I could assess the raters evil persons who are “out to get me.” I could insist that I am really an excellent teacher but that there are few who can appreciate my talents. In short, one alternative is to become exceedingly defensive and to attempt to preserve my self-confidence and my self-image by counterattack.

    But another alternative is open to me. I could set my goal to become perfect, even as my Savior is perfect. I could recognize that only as I present myself as a humble little child before my Savior can I truly progress towards perfection. I could take the specific evidence that my teaching leaves something to be desired as a stimulus for thought, meditation, and prayer –for chance to do a better and better job in all things, including my profession. I could refuse to identify the real “me” with the habits and patterns of my fallen nature. I could work to be spiritually alive and to “grow up” in the Lord, to strive for spiritual maturity. I could see spiritual maturity as the goal in which every evil thought, every untoward desire, every petty selfishness would be replaced in my new creation in Christ wherein I would become a more powerful and more humble exponent of the Kingdom of God.

    I could not only teach people to have faith in Christ and to repent. I could show them the way.

    Perhaps I had better do this even if I am highly rated already.

    No. 12

    We cannot see many important things in the universe. We cannot see God, tomorrow, yesterday, or the spiritual order of existence. We cannot tell by seeing or reasoning what true righteousness is. For a knowledge of all these things we must depend on someone other than ourselves. If we believe the Holy Ghost when it whispers to us of these things, we are beginning to exercise the kind of faith that will save us.

    Everyone has faith in something or someone. Sometimes we believe other people. Sometimes we trust our own thinking. Sometimes we expect our strength or our money to save us. But the only faith that leads men to righteousness or salvation is faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

    For us to have faith in Jesus Christ, three things must happen:

    1. We must receive the still, small voice of the Holy Spirit witnessing that Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world and telling us what to do.
    2. We must believe the witness and instructions of the Holy Spirit. This takes courage to be true to what we know within ourselves.
    3. We must act in accordance with the instructions of the Holy Spirit. If we can repent and become a disciple of Christ through obedience to the Holy Spirit, we then have faith in Jesus Christ.

    No. 13 Conference Weekend

    The Lord has told us that whenever:

    1. His ordained servants
    2. Speak for or to their stewardship
    3. By the power of the Holy Ghost,

    the result is scripture. It is the mind if the Lord, the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation. (D&C 68:2–4)

    While some wonder why the Doctrine and Covenants ends with the Manifesto [1966], true servants of God recognize that the Lord gives additional scriptures daily, through his living prophets. The true servants recognize that the words of the living prophets are as important and binding as anything in the standard works.

    If there is anything more important that we as teachers of religion could do than to encourage all of our students to pay close attention to Conference, and to instill in them a desire to support and sustain the living prophets? To bring souls to Christ is to bring them first of all to accept His chosen servants. Whosoever receives them receives also the Savior and the Father.

    May we all do our best to make this Conference (April 1966) and its messages the highlight of our teaching this semester.

    No. 14 Repentance

    The man who loves righteousness but finds himself doing evil in spite of himself knows he needs to change. But how can he change if he doesn’t know how to do so? The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the message to all men to tell them how to change to become righteous.

    Men must first recognize that thoughts are the basis for all feelings and actions. “As a man thinketh, so is he.” (Prov. 23:7) To repent, men must change their thinking. First, they must believe in Jesus Christ, that He lives and is the Savior of the world. Then they must be willing to obey the Savior in all things which he commands them, The voice of the Savior through the Holy Spirit will lead them to as much truth and righteousness as they are willing to receive and live.

    As men obey the Savior, they will confess their evil ways and forsake them. They will do whatever they can to right the wrongs they have done and will implore the Savior to right those things they are powerless to correct.

    But the Savior will not continue to guide men nor will he right their wrongdoings unless they formally pledge to accept his atoning blood and covenant to obey His voice in all things. That formal pledge can only be made in the ordinance of baptism. Thus it is that making the covenant of baptism is the most essential aspect of repentance in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. (Moro. 8:25)

    This then is the agency of man: to remain captive to the adversary, confirming the Fall, or to take upon us the mind of Christ, to hearken to the voice of the Lord. Every man must choose. To choose the latter is the true metanoesis.

    Can we teach this so plainly to our students that they can put on the whole armor of God and effectively quench the fiery darts of the adversary?

    No. 15 Book of Mormon Week

    One way of looking at the Book of Mormon is to see it as the special instrument which God has given for the perfecting of the souls of men in these latter days. If a man will read, study, pray, meditate about this book, then reform his life to accord with the intelligence thereby received, he will be able to draw nearer to God and the reality of being redeemed than he can by using any other book. The Book of Mormon is the stone which whets, shapes and sharpens the mind, heart, and life of every person worthy to be called a “Latter-day Saint.”

    Nothing we can do for our students can compare with leading them to Christ and to support the authorities of the Church who the Savior has sent to us than championing to them the Book of Mormon. That book is the priceless antidote for intellectual pride, for dependence on the arm of flesh, for self-centeredness, for carnality, for indifference, ignorance, poverty, tyranny—for any and all of the ills that beset mankind. Since this is Book of Mormon week on campus, we have a wonderful opportunity to bear witness and to encourage our students to appreciate this great gift from our Lord.

    No. 16

    One of the serious faults of our educational process is the oppression of authoritarianism. Professors act often as if they know for sure what they are talking about. Students are pressured into memorization of the opinions of the “authorities” rather than being taught to think for themselves. Non-conformists fare badly, both as students and as faculty. The hallmark of erudition for most academic matters is the paraphernalia of quoting someone.

    One gem of truth which we can crystalize out of the scriptures is that no one knows for sure anything of importance unless it is through personal revelation. Science is an impressive practical tool, but singularly lacking in demonstrable truth, especially as to causation. Scholarship mines opinion, not reality. Reason reinforces prejudice, but never vouchsafes the nature of existence. Only from the Lord, who is The Truth, does one obtain knowledge of things as they are and were and will be: The Truth.

    So when we teach, let us remember certain fundamentals:

    1. If we teach the truth, it is by revelation. (Ye receive the spirit by the prayer of faith, and if ye receive not the spirit, ye shall not teach. D&C 42:14)
    2. If our students understand the truth as we teach, it is by the Spirit. (Therefore, why is it that ye cannot understand and know that he that receiveth the word of truth by the Spirit of truth receiveth it as it is preached by the Spirit of truth? Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand one another, and both are edified and rejoice together. D&C 50:21–22)
    3. Therefore, we are not authorities, or even teachers, in our own right. We are but messengers, bearing humble testimony to that which we have received, hoping that our hearers will believe not what we say but that they will believe the voice of the Lord.

    Could we ever achieve a university which operates on these ideas, what wonders of learning, ability and technology could we attain?

  • Can Religion Be Objective?, 1966

    Dr. Chauncey C. Riddle
    February 25, 1966

    We are addressing ourselves to the problem, “Can Religion be Objective?” The problem was raised, of course, by the fact that a great many people in our age think it cannot and so we’ll attempt an answer to this. But first of all we will lay some groundwork for the answer. It’s not enough to have an answer. Perhaps even more important is to know why the answer is so, which makes the answer important. To begin with, any time you have discussions on anything important, the obvious thing to do is to define your terms. Let’s first of all define objectivity. There are three definitions which are important relative to objectivity. The first, which is, you might say, the one that people probably think of the most in their minds when they think of being objective is to think that that which is objective is the absolute truth—that which is really so. The problem of this definition is that we human beings don’t have the ability to know very much absolute truth. We see through a glass darkly. We don’t really know the world around us. We don’t really know our surrounding. True, we are discovering more and more about these things, but still we see through that glass darkly, and so for a really good, practical definition we will have to reject this one. Not because it isn’t a fine thing to have, but we just don’t have very much of it.

    We might define objectivity in the sense that that which is objective is that upon which people agree. Now this happens to be a very functional definition. This is actually what passes for objectivity in our society, but on the other hand, it’s a somewhat cynical definition. I don’t think it’s the best definition, simply because we all know that a hundred million Frenchmen can be wrong. We all know that people, as a group, can err. All the progress of science comes from individuals who dared to defy the rest and to prove that it’s so.

    So let’s try a third definition of objectivity. Objectivity, could be construed to be doing the very best you can, using all the evidence available to you and the very best thinking that it’s possible for you to muster in your situation. Now this is the one I choose to use in our discussion today. This is the one that a man must use if he’s going to be an Einstein, and dare to let everybody think he’s crazy. Einstein was willing to run that risk because he had something that was extremely valuable, and he knew it was valuable because he had performed all the tests that he could perform on his ideas and found them to be good, and then he opened them to the criticism of others to let them test also. Time has vindicated him, and so today he is honored as a great scientist. Not so when he first brought forth his ideas. He was considered to be quite a crackpot then. But, you see, it’s awfully easy to say that Einstein is objective 50 years after he has come to acceptance. The problem is to see that Einstein is objective when he first formulates his ideas, and the problem is that the individual has to go back over the same ground and make the same examination of the evidence and the conclusions which Einstein himself made to avoid just going along with the herd. Well, science is the paradigm for objectivity in our world, not that it should be this way necessarily, but it happens to be that way. So, let’s discuss science a little bit and see wherein this good thinking, this objectivity, has come to science.

    Science began as an offshoot of philosophy in ancient Greece 2,500 years ago and until just a hundred years ago or so, all science was called natural philosophy. Many discovered that as they sought to be wise, which is to love wisdom, to be philosophical, that one of the first things they had to know was, “What is the nature of the problem?” “What’s the situation in the world in which I live?” As men sought to know the nature of the problem, they found that it did not pay to take other people’s word for it. They had to find a way to discover for themselves the reality of the world, and this is where science was born. As men began to make this search, the first tool they used to try and discern reality was their own reasoning power, and so the simple cannon for objectivity in Ancient Greece was, “Is it rationally consistent?” Almost all of ancient Greek science was, what you might call, a pure rationalism. If a thing was deductively valid, it had to be true. The paradigm science for them was Euclid’s geometry—this tremendous intellectual feat where you could have taken a few fundamental axioms and tied together all the laws of geometry that had been observed and forming a beautiful, wonderful deductive system. It was thought that all sciences would eventually be formed after this same pattern. But ancient Greek science laid some very important groundwork that didn’t get very far off the ground. There were a few men such as Archimedes, who did go beyond rationalism. The monuments of their work were the beginning points of modern science, but nevertheless, the tenor in ancient Greek science, the hallmark of objectivity was simply to be rationally consistent.

    Now this has remained to this day to be a hallmark of objectivity. It is not the hallmark, however, as it was then. The type of approach made in the middle ages when theology was the queen of the sciences was essentially no different from that of the Greek temper. Rationalism again was the key to objectivity, and the pursuit of theology was done almost strictly by means of a rationalistic approach, taking premises from the scripture and tradition then working out the rational involvements of these things.

    Modern science, as we know it, was not really born until the 16th century. We had the work of the early modern thinkers such as Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, going down to the time of Newton who pretty well set the stage, you might say. The scheme of modern science sort of climaxed in Newton, with his tremendous triumph, not only in actual scientific ideas, but in methodology. That’s the thing we’re interested in here, is the methodology of thought. Even since Newton’s time the methodology of science has continued to grow and to increase.

    Let’s review some of the further postulates or guidelines which have been introduced into modern science as a help to keep these people from making grievous errors of thought, to help them evaluate evidence and come out with propositions that are highly defensible. The next proposition modern science uses is the idea of uniformity. Uniformity is basically the notion that it is reasonable to consider that the universe at other times and places is like it is here and now. Now the closest tie we have to the universe is sensory observation, but our senses are quite limited. We can’t see very far, and we’re limited, of course, to time and the moment of the present. We cannot perceive tomorrow or yesterday. We can perceive right now. We can’t perceive far away, but we can build yesterday and tomorrow and far away in our minds. We can build imaginative pictures of these things. And we do this on the basis of the principle of uniformity. It just so happens this is the only way we can think. If nature doesn’t happen to be uniform, we can never know it. And so the areas where we have progressed most, in our science, for instance, are the areas of greatest uniformity. Where the number of factors influencing something are the fewest or where we can get down to get experimental control, we thus very quickly achieving uniformity. When we have this uniformity we can project, we can predict, and our hypotheses come to be verified in this kind of a situation. Uniformity is one of the very life bloods of science. We couldn’t have thought very much without this principle of uniformity because we couldn’t have it without the necessity of being rationally consistent.

    Thirdly, science postulates the need for a cause for every effect. This principle is called various names, but it doesn’t matter what you call it. It’s the same thing under any title: causality, determinism, sufficient reason—these are all names for the same idea. This is the notion that events do not happen fortuitously in the universe. Everything that happens happens for some reason. There is a sufficient reason behind every event.

    Now science, from the days of Aristotle down to now, has had as one of its significant points that it’s not enough to observe the world; we must understand what we observe. Understanding comes from our way of thinking, through knowing causes. Causes are relations of things, and understanding is a matter of relating things. The more relationships we see for something, the better we understand it. In our modern terminology we tend to think of causes as the efficient cause; something pushes something. But the word cause has a much broader heritage than that. Perhaps the word because is a little closer to the historic usage. The word because suggests a reason for something and cause simply means a reason. It’s the rational cause, the intellectual explanation, that gives understanding to our observations of the physical world. And so science has said this, “You don’t really know anything until you can explain it.” Just to see the moon eclipse doesn’t give you science, but when you understand why the moon is eclipsed and you see that there is a sufficient reason for it—you see that the earth is interposed between the sun and the moon, the shadow of the earth therefore blots out the light that would otherwise be reflected from the surface of the moon, then, having the sufficient reason or the cause of the phenomenon, we can appreciate what the phenomenon is and we then have scientific knowledge of it. And so, as we pursue science in the world, we try to get this kind of understanding for everything.

    A fourth postulate is the idea of naturalism. This has come since Newton. Newton believed that God was a very important part of the universe and he introduced the notion of God into his theories to account for things that he could not otherwise account for. It so happened, in the last few hundred years, that men have been able to account for all these functions that God was supposed to perform and so God is no longer necessary. No longer is God necessary in the theories of physics. In modern science, if you were to go to a convention and read a paper including the idea of God or such notions as spirits or devils or such beings of any kind, you would be laughed out. This is just not scientific objectivity anymore. Scientific objectivity now includes the idea that we must limit ourselves to what is called the natural universe. We limit ourselves because this is the only way we can be sure to avoid certain kinds of errors. The errors of ancient scientists are many and as our methodology increases and refines, we are able to eliminate more and more of these errors. By limiting ourselves to the natural universe we have been able to make greater progress in describing and accounting for the phenomena of the material world.

    The fifth one of these things we have mentioned is the postulate of publicity which is simply to say that we can have sciences only about things that are publicly observable. The meaning of “publicly observable”: where two people can see the thing in question and agree on its description. Science has had to introduce this postulate to get rid of certain vagaries of opinion that caused it much embarrassment over the years. What it specifically excluded in this is anything that is private or personal. My thoughts, for instance, would never be a subject matter for science because no two of you can observe them and agree with them. This includes feelings that I have; the values that I have. You could take what I say, you can ask me questions. You can take the response I give and use that as a basis for science. This is called behaviorism in psychology, and by limiting yourself to a behavioristic approach, you can get fairly reliable generalizations about things. But you can never have a science about my personal thoughts because you cannot observe them. So, anything that is not publicly observable is simply a sufficiently dangerous ground for even theorization or hypotheses. Scientists, in protecting themselves from making gross errors, delimit themselves from this area.

    Now the strength of science is to take these five principles and apply them, and apply them only where they can be well applied so that what science comes out with is a defensible generalization. As a matter of fact, these principles and others that apply are applied more or less thoroughly by different individuals, but the thoroughness to which an individual applies these things, in the long run, becomes the hallmark of his worth as a scientist. I was talking with an eminent sociologist the other day, a man who is deeply engaged in research in the field and has published, I guess, a hundred articles in the journals. He stuck his neck our quite a bit, and he was telling me that one of the reasons he feels so confident about his work in sociology is because he and the men he respects in sociology have the good sense not to try to make statements about at least 95% of the questions they would like to know about. There’s only a very small area where they have tools and they can apply the methods of scrutiny with sufficient care to be sure of their results. So on the other 95% they don’t even pretend to have answers, and this is the way they obtain objectivity. This is very commendable. It’s not very commendable to make wild statements about something where one has no basis for statements, but if one can limit themselves to the area where they can be objective and then make statements in that area, this indeed is doing very good thinking and it’s the kind of thing I think we would all want to commend. I mentioned the fact that a certain study was done trying to vindicate certain of Freud’s ideas. One hundred fifty tests were made on a certain population. Only about twelve of the tests turned out to be significant. Half of them tended to vindicate Freud and half of them tended to disqualify Freud’s ideas. Probably in this particular study that he mentioned the people picked the half dozen that vindicated Freud’s ideas and published them and, thereby, completely ruined their reputation because other people went out on the same experiment, got different results, not only once but several times. This was brought to the attention of the community of sociologists and now these people aren’t listened to anymore. Why? Because they weren’t careful enough. They did not accept the data and the evidence with sufficient care to be awarded with the kindness, you might say, of being listened to. Maybe they can redeem themselves, but that is awfully hard after making that kind an error. There are a lot of lessons in that for us too. The point of all this is that scientific objectivity is obtained by highly limiting what will be studied. Don’t study and don’t make assertions on anything you can’t be reasonably sure about. That’s the net point of this great approach of objectivity on the side of science.

    Now let’s turn to religion and consider objectivity on the side of religion. Religion also, I think, must come under this third definition. In religion, to be objective, we must do the very best kind of thinking that we can possibly do with the evidence available to us. So, there are postulates in religious thinking that are just as important as there are in scientific thinking. They’re not the same postulates. But let’s go through and see where they are the same and where they differ. The first postulate, the idea of being reasonable, is necessary. In science reasonableness is the thing which, shall we say, is kind of an end product. You don’t start out by being reasonable. You end up by being reasonable. Today we know that light is probably neither a particle nor a wave, because neither of these hypotheses is reasonable. In other words, it’s not consistent with all the evidence, but nevertheless, we continue to use these until we can get something better. So, as we go on, the thing we are saying is that, until this thing works out to be completely consistent, we will openly admit that this is not any kind of final hypothesis. Even if it were reasonable, science has learned enough that you have to experiment. You have to test, and you have to go on. Even then, it might be wrong. Just because it’s reasonable does not mean it’s right or true; but if it is unreasonable, you know there is something wrong; you need to gather more evidence. You need to do something more. That’s the real problem that’s involved. The same thing happens in religion. If a thing is inconsistent, you need to go on gathering evidence and not make any final pronouncements. Science and religion happen to coincide in this particular postulate.

    Secondly, there is the postulate of uniformity. We need a uniformity just as much in religion as we do in science. Again, if it so happens that the spiritual universe is not uniform, we can never know it. That is because our human minds or brains are so equipped to deal with something where the same sort of thing happens again and again. Supposing that no two days were ever of the same length. How could you ever plan a day? If the days were not only not of the same length, but you could not ever know of what length they would be, you could never plan a day, could you? Similarly, if there were no spiritual uniform realities, you could never have knowledge of anything spiritual. It’s interesting as we look into the scriptures you see the statement that God makes about himself. One thing he wants to inform us of, as a hypothesis which we might personally test and find for ourselves to be true, is simply the notion that He is uniform. He tells us, “I am without variableness or shadow of turning. My course is one eternal round. I am the same yesterday and forever.” Why is that important? It’s important simply for this reason: If God is that uniform in His dealings with His children, then if we perform an experiment now and get a certain result, it is very highly likely that if we perform that experiment again we will get the same result. If it were not so, what could a person ever do to live a good life? He wouldn’t know what to do. This is the same as in science. If the sun didn’t come up every morning we couldn’t plan a thing. There has to be a uniformity in the universe for us to “know” it. So far as I can observe the uniformity in the gospel, the spiritual uniformity is at least as great as that of the physical uniformity enjoyed by the physical world. Therefore, we have at least as good a basis. How do you tell there is a uniformity in the physical universe? Only by experimenting, only by trying it to see if there is one. How would you know there is a uniformity in the spiritual universe? With exactly the same test, by trying it and seeing if it works. Only then can you say that you know what you are talking about.

    Let’s go on to the third postulate, the postulate of causality. Again, this is absolutely essential to religion. In religious thinking, there is a cause for everything: there are reasons behind things; there are laws—this universe is run on the basis of law and order. This, of course raises the problem of agency. If everything is determined in the universe, and here’s a causality which is valuable both in science and religion. How does the problem of agency get solved? We don’t have time to solve that one today, but suffice it to say there is a very simple, beautiful explanation. There is such a thing as agency. At the same time there is a determinism. But we don’t have time to follow that one through.

    The next postulate, which is necessary to religion and which differs from science now, is the postulate of honesty. Now, this is the one that corresponds, you might say, to the postulate of publicity in science. The way you keep a scientist honest is by forcing him to be public. As long as he is forced to publish his results in order that people can compare, you don’t have to worry about whether he is going to be honest or not because someone else will come along and check it. So you don’t have a postulate of honesty in science, although it is a fine thing to have. But you don’t need to enforce it by any rule. The social system that we are in in the scientific world enforces honesty; in other words, objectivity, if you will.

    But you see the thing that we deal with in religion is a different universe; we are not even talking about the same sort of thing, at least in large measure. The universe and the area we are talking about in religion is what is going on inside my mind. The important thing to know in religion is: What things do I do that make me happier and what things do I do that make me less happy? This can’t ever be possibly studied by science until we can someday learn to interpret brain waves or something like that. At the present time this can’t be done. But this is the area that is central to religion. It is what makes up my relationship to the rest of the universe—not physically speaking, but within my own mind, my thoughts, my feelings, my values, my hopes, my desires, my fears. Before I can do some kind of good, clear thinking in this area, I can never be a stable person; I can never grow and develop as I ought to; I can never become a religiously mature person; I can never have the blessings of the Gospel of Jesus Christ until my thinking is objective. So the first thing I’ve got to do is to be sure that I’m honest. Specifically, if I perform an experiment and I discover that a certain thing leads me to be happier and then I perform the contrary experiment and find that this leads to unhappiness, I’ve got to be honest enough to admit that the one thing led to happiness and the other didn’t. If I can’t be that honest, you see, since there’s no one that can check—there’s nobody outside that can know my thoughts and my experiences and my happiness—the only salvation I have is to be absolutely and rigorously honest. And as soon as I start kidding myself and telling myself that maybe I enjoy this little bit of sin and I’ll pretend that it leads to happiness, we destroy ourselves religiously right there. There’s no hope for us. It’s no wonder that when the missionaries go out, they look for whom? The honest in heart. They’re the only ones they can possibly help religiously. Unless people have that they just can’t get off the ground, religiously speaking.

    The next postulate in religion is the postulate of courage. This isn’t really a postulate, I guess; this is a way of acting. But it figures very importantly in being objective religiously. Why is courage important? Simply for this reason: When you study psychology you know that social pressure has a tremendous effect on people’s thoughts, beliefs and values. Maybe you’ve seen the experiment where the teacher draws a straight line on a board and asks everybody how long it is. They go around the room saying how long it is. Just guessing, from a distance. What they do is they have everybody except two or three in the back who have been planted to tell them all to say 45 inches long. Well, by the time you get around to the people who don’t know what’s going on, they tend to make a judgment somewhere between what they really think and what the group has said. Almost nobody is strong enough to call a spade a spade the way he sees it. Now, there’s some good in this because we frequently find that we are wrong and other people are able to help us temper our judgment. But you see, in the area of religion you can’t afford to do that. Why not? Simply for this reason. The data you are dealing with in the area of religion is your own personal consciousness. You are not the same as another individual. You never have the same experiences and experiments as another individual, so you can’t afford to depend on what other people say. You’ve got to perform the experiment for yourself and then have the courage to stand by it when you have made the evaluation of the data within your own mind. Religion is thought out in the inside of the individual. It is not a public thing. Every individual has come to his own testimony, to his own light. Don’t mistake me—this is not saying you pay no attention to anybody else. You do. But what you receive from other people is hypotheses, not conclusions. You receive structures of experiments to perform yourself, to be evaluated and to form conclusions on your own. You can’t get a testimony from any other human being. You can’t know right from wrong or what makes you happy or unhappy from any other human being. Now you can go along with other people but that will never make you an individual. That just makes them your master, as it were, and makes you their slave. But the purpose of God is to free all men from every other man. Read Section 1 of Doctrine and Covenants where the Lord tells why He restored His Gospel. Why? So that man would not have to counsel his fellow man, so that every man might speak in the name of the Lord God from his own personal knowledge. Now, that’s freedom, that’s the freedom from tyranny that every human being needs. But he’s got to have the courage to perform his own experiments, he’s got to have the honesty to call a spade a spade and then he’s got to stand forth before the world and bear his testimony to what he thinks is true.

    In religion we don’t have the same kind of thing that we have in science. Science is a community project and the thing that really counts is the consensus of the community in science. And that’s good, that safeguards science. But it also limits science to those things which can be publicly observed.

    Religion, too, by delimiting itself to the consciousness of our own conscience, our own personal feelings, thoughts and desires, it gets strength and we avoid certain kinds of errors that come from letting other people influence us too much. But at the same time, all that we can then assert is that I believe this—on the basis of my experiments, this is what it seems to be. And that’s why the missionaries from this church don’t go forth in the world saying, “I’m right and you’re all wrong.” The missionaries from this church go forth and the only righteous thing they can say is, “I know for myself that this thing that I’m telling you is true. Won’t you please perform an experiment for yourself and see if you find this is true for you.” Personal testimony is the hallmark of our religion. It has to be.

    Well, let’s make a few concluding remarks about objectivity. The important thing about objectivity is not to be concerned with the subject matter. I hope it is clear from what I said that objectivity is not a function of subject matter or discipline. Objectivity is a function of people. It’s meaningless to say that science is objective because science doesn’t even exist. That is a generalization or a platonic idea in our minds which doesn’t have any real existence; it’s just a generalization. The thing that exists is people who act as scientists. Those people who act as scientists have a great need to be objective but because they are pretending to be scientists doesn’t mean they are objective; they must meet the canons and if they meet the canons, they are objective. If they don’t, they aren’t. By the same token, in religion the important thing is to be an objective thinker; to do the very best we can in analyzing, thinking, experimenting so that when we come out with some notions that for our own experience, for our own area of life, we are justified in making the statements that we make.

    So—let’s answer the question, “Can religion be objective?” Well, religion is a thing again that doesn’t exist. The question is, “Are you objective in the religious matters of your life?” That’s the real question, isn’t it? It has nothing to do with whether or not you are thinking about religion. If you are a scientist, you need explanations. As a matter of fact, every human being has a pattern by which he makes his decisions in his life. That is his religion. The question is, “Are you objective about your religion? Do you do the very best kind of thinking you can do?” One of the wonderful and delightful things to know about the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the fact that this kind of thinking is encouraged in this church and in this gospel. The Lord wants every one of us to have our own light and stand upon our own light. He doesn’t want people to follow blindly. He has His prophets tell them, “Don’t listen to just the president of the church. Get down on your knees and pray to find out for yourself.” That’s the only way you can seize upon the truth. That’s the only way you can be objective. And only if you are doing the best you can, can you oppose the adversary.

    The adversary would love to have us fall into all kinds of error and the best defense that we have against him is to know whereof we speak, for our own selves, for our own lives. It’s to know that Jesus is the Christ. It’s to know for ourselves on the basis of our own experiments that God can be trusted. We need to know for ourselves that if we rely on the Holy Spirit it is a sure and unerring guide, a rod of iron that leads in the path of righteousness that leads us to the good things of this life, that it leads us to love, it leads us to kindness, it leads us to peace, to comfort, to all the things that we so desperately need in this world. But that comes only if you’ve tried it. That comes only if you know what you’re talking about, only if you are doing some very fine objective thinking in the area of your own religion.

    So, can religion be objective? The answer is plain. Religion is an abstraction, a figment of our imagination, like unto “science,” another abstraction. But scientists can be objective if they follow the rules for objectivity. And persons can also be objective about their own religion if they follow the rules of careful thinking. Let us think carefully and we will do well. The results show how carefully we have thought, both in science and religion. We can be objective about our religion.

    I bear you my testimony the Gospel of Jesus Christ is true. It works in my life. I am acutely conscious that my unhappiness comes only when I defy the principles of the gospel and that all the good things that I have ever received in my life have come as I have done what is right in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I bear you that testimony in His name. Amen.

  • The Marks of a Saint

    Religion Lecture Series- 1966

    Chauncey C. Riddle

    The Savior said that signs (physical evidences, marks) would follow his disciples who truly believe in Him.

    And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

    They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them: they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. (Mark 16:15-18)

    What are the marks of a latter-day saint?

    The hallmark of a true disciple of the Savior is success. Such an one will not put his hand to doubtful or unworthy causes. He seeks a commission from the Lord, and when so commissioned the Lord assures that he need not fail, and will not, if faithful. Essential individual marks are as follows:

    1. Self-control. A latter-day saint is not given to highs and lows, to anger or depression, to compulsive action of any kind. Eating, sleeping, exercise, personal appearance, and properties are all well-ordered, Health and strength are sufficient to the tasks undertaken. Learning, giving and becoming a better person all during life.

    2. Family oriented. Being a father or mother is seen as the greatest mission in this world. The sacrifices necessary to being part of a good family are gratefully made.

    3. Priesthood oriented. Learning and faithfully fitting into the priesthood structure of the family and the church as evidenced by faith acceptance and discharge of callings. Missionary, genealogy, welfare and church service are pursued with enthusiasm and ingenuity. Concern for the poor is always evident.

    4. Skilled in subduing the earth. An honorable occupation will be pursued to provide economic benefits for family and for the kingdom. Whatever one’s profession, one will be skilled in doing many things with one’s hands.

    Active in promoting political freedom. Will be supportive of causes that increase the freedom and agency of man, including just punishment of those who misuse that freedom and agency. Will honor every man in his station but recognize no one worthy to rule mankind except Jesus Christ.

  • Faith, Hope, and Charity

    THE HIGHWAY TO ETERNAL LIFE IS MARKED BY…

    FAITH, HOPE, AND CHARITY

    The Instructor, October 1965

    by Chauncey C. Riddle

    As the Prophet Moroni was completing his message to the people of the latter days, he found it expedient in the Lord to include in his record some of the choice teachings of his father, Mormon. One of these specially preserved sermons is concerned with faith, hope, and charity, the three great virtues of the sons and daughters of God.

    The foundation of all righteousness, Mormon emphasizes, is faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord blesses men with knowledge of His will; this makes faith possible.

    “And behold, there were divers ways that he [God] did manifest things unto the children of men, which were good; and all things which are good cometh of Christ.”… (Moroni 7:24.)

    Men who delight in righteousness believe God when they receive instruction from Him. Belief in the words of Christ enables them to act in faith, to carry out the instructions of God. As men obey God, the fruits of righteousness abound in their lives.

    “Wherefore, by the ministering of angels, and by every word which proceeded forth out of the mouth of God, men began to exercise faith in Christ; and thus by faith, they did lay hold upon every good thing.” … (Moroni 7:25.)

    One of the blessings consequent to faith in Christ is to be able to have hope, Mormon tells us. If we have kept the commandments of God, we then become heirs to the promises, and we an rightfully anticipate blessings from God:

    “And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise.” (Moroni 7:41.)

    Those who see with the eye of faith look forward in hope to the overcoming of all of their personal problems. Putting their trust in the Savior, they strive to obey Him in all things, hoping for the time when every bad habit, every false notion, every evil desire, every thoughtless moment will have been subdued. They hope for strength to resist temptation, for help to avoid error, for courage to face adversity, for power to bring to pass much righteousness. Their hope is a bright, vitalizing, liberating power, for they know in whom they trust:

    … Whatsoever thing ye shall ask the Father in my name, which is good, in faith believing that ye shall receive, behold, it shall be done unto you. (Moroni 7:26.)

    Not only the personal but also the social problems of mankind are lightened through hope in Christ. He who mourns the tyranny in human history can hope for the reign of Him whose right it is to rule, knowing that righteousness will triumph over evil. He sees a day when men will serve God, not mammon the time of true brotherhood, real peace, and genuine prosperity for all. He sees order in homes, love in families, and consideration and kindness for all. He hopes for the new world which is to be built upon the ashes of the old

    But the greatest hope of the servant of God is not for this life. That hope is for eternity, where God and the angels dwell, where Satan is bound forever. He hopes for the perpetuity of the family wherein he and his dear wife, his parents, and his children can live and serve together in freedom and love forever. He hopes to gaze unashamedly into the face of the great Being who gave His all for mankind. He hopes to do the works of righteousness and godliness always. Thus, if a man has faith, he can have hope; if he has hope, then he can endure the trials of the world unto the salvation of his soul.

    When a man has this faith and hope in Christ, Mormon emphasizes, then he can have and needs to have the greatest of all virtues, which is charity, the pure love of Christ. This pure love is a gift from God through His Holy Spirit, which gift comes to all who seek it through faith. No man can love purely except he be taught how to do so by God; no one can return good for evil always, as pure love demands, except he has a hope in Christ. This virtue is so important that if his faith and hope do not lead him to that pure love, then he is nothing. That love is the bond which Elijah spoke of which would keep the earth from being utterly wasted. It is the ultimate power of the holy priesthood and the highest fruit of its ordinances. That love is the only motivation sufficient to enable a man or woman to overcome all things. It is a pure, selfless love for God and for one’s fellowmen, and through it comes the joy for which man was created.

    In answer to the question what does it mean to seek first the kingdom of Cod and his righteousness?” we might well answer that it means to attain fullness of faith, hope, and charity, through the laws and ordinances of the Gospel. We are much indebted to Mormon and Moroni for preserving for us these precious teachings, and we could well heed Mormon’s plea:

    Wherefore, my beloved brethren, pray unto the Father with all the energy of heart, that ye may be filled with this love, which he hath bestowed upon all who are true followers of his Son, Jesus Christ; that ye may become the sons of God; that when he shall appear we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is; that we may have this hope; that we may be purified even as he is pure. Amen. (Moroni 7:48.)

    Library File Reference: Charity

    OCTOBER 1965

    1. For Course 15. lesson of December 12. “Moroni’ s Farewell’:
    2. For Course 17. lesson of November 21. “Salvation Available to All”;
    3. General interest to courses 9. 13. 27, and 29; to support Family Home Evening lesson 40;
    4. Of general interest.

    *Chauncey c. Riddle is a professor of philosophy and chairman of the Department of Graduate Studies in Religious Instruction at Brigham Young University. He obtained his B.S. in 1947 from BYU and both his M.A. in 1951 and Ph.D. in 1958 from Columbia University. He presently serves on the high council of Sharon (Utah) Stake. His wife is the former Bertha Allred. They have eight children.