Author: Chauncey Riddle

(BYU Graduate School Convocation)

We have come to that moment which the program denominates as a “charge to the graduates.” The root and original meaning of the word “charge” is “to lay a burden upon” something. How interesting that the “charge” most of us experience today is the charge card, the rationale for which is to relieve us of the burden of immediate payment. But the historic meaning penetrates this pleasant illusion of burdenlessness and we discover that to postpone a burden is not to escape it but to enlarge it.

As is is with charges, so it is with intellect. Intellect, the realm of words and ideas, has its own proper burdens. If these burdens are borne with intelligence and grace, they become the works that ennoble and exalt. But if the burdens of intellect are shunned or postponed, for whatever pleasant illusion, they become stumbling blocks that lead only to misery and degradation. I would then speak to you of intellectual honesty.

To be an honest person is a burden. It is strenuous labor, the most difficult that I know and especially so in the realm of intellect. I admit that most people do not find honesty to be a burden. That is because they are not honest persons. When I say “to be an honest person,” I do not mean being honest “most of the time” or “when convenient.” People who are honest most of the time or when convenient are honest on those occasions by accident; honesty just happens to coincide with the way they are going. To be an honest person is to be honest in all things, at all times, with all people and in all circumstances. That is an accomplishment which but few men have ever attained.

But if honesty is a burden, be it also noted what great works are fulfilled by those who fully shoulder this burden. The mention of one of these works must suffice here. The greatest need in the world, as many have noted, is love. But what is needed is not the idea of love, nor the hope for it, nor the disposition to desire it or give it. What is needed is that pure, selfless love which blesses and uplifts those whom it touches. Love can be pure, selfless and beneficent only in one who is an honest person. Let us further examine that connection between pure love and pure honesty.

Honesty is the ability to discern reality as it is and describe it correctly in symbols. The reality one must discern is both himself and the rest of the universe. The description he gives must be “true;” it must correctly represent things as they are, as they were, and as they are to come.

Pure love is the ability to bless people. It is to act towards another in a manner that deliberately contributes to the happiness of that individual, and to act that way consistently. Happiness is not a thing of one moment. We would not count a person happy who, though delighted at the moment by the fulfillment of his greatest desire, was at the next moment to be wrenched from fulfillment to be in pain and misery for the remainder of existence. Nor could love be pure if it did not countenance and contribute to the happiness of total existence.

Love then is the meeting of real needs, the affecting of the reality of our fellow beings through time. Since we cannot meet needs without discerning correctly both those needs and our own ability to assist, honesty becomes a prerequisite to pure love, a necessary though not a sufficient condition.

If people live by high moral principles, they do not need the restrictions or enforcements of civil law.

A society is strong and can meet changing times and conditions readily only as the individual members of the society are strong-minded enough to live by correct principles.

As a society dictates to its own people, as the wishes of the vocal minority are inflicted upon the passive majority, the climate for strong-minded individualism is perverse. Indeed, individualism tends to be punished.

Individuals need to be responsible.

An interesting stricture for LDS art is that the great dramas of real life are conducted within the framework of ordinances which must not be publicly discussed. So the great dramas are worked out in private lives, unknown even to close observers. Those on the inside who live the dramas will not reveal them. Those on the outside who would reveal them, never know them.

1. No doctorate degree in any subject can qualify a man to teach the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Any person who attempts to teach without the direction of the Holy Spirit is promoting darkness, not light. Having a doctor’s degree may be rather more a hindrance than an asset for having the companionship of the Spirit.
2. There is no natural check on paid teachers of religion. In other fields, professionals can be checked by the work of other persons in the field. But professors of religion in the Church necessarily differ from their counterparts in other churches. If not held in check by the Spirit or the Priesthood, they become a law unto themselves.
3. Professional teachers of religion tend to make their subjects unnecessarily complex. The simple Gospel that everyone can and should understand is made recondite and philosophical in the interest of expanding the professional opportunity. Truth is thus obscured rather than revealed.
4. Professional teachers of religion tend to say too much of what is true. The main function of any teacher of the Gospel is to bring those taught to be able to receive the companionship of the Holy Spirit. All further teaching is then not only superfluous, but may indeed be harmful. Further information should be conveyed by way of suggestion only. The Savior was careful to teach in a manner that would obscure His message to those not prepared to receive it.
5. Teaching for hire tends to make the holder of the purse strings the standard of truth. Congregations pay for what they want to hear. Administrators perpetuate their own doctrinal preferences. If the Lord is paymaster, most false hirelings soon depart for lack of reward.

Ideally, all Gospel teaching should be done on the basis of a call from those in Priesthood authority and to be recompensed by spiritual, not physical rewards. The major difficulty with this ideal is the shortage of men who can teach effectively and with knowledge. But could not men be called to prepare themselves to teach? Could not teaching religion during the week be as much a calling as being a Bishop or Quorum President?

1.   What is the Holy Priesthood?

Our Father in Heaven gave unto His Son, Jesus Christ, power and authority over all things in heaven and earth. By that power the sun, moon and stars are governed. By that power the earth was created, and the forces of nature are controlled. By that power life comes to all plants and animals and humans, and through it all men are able to move, think and act. That power is the greatest force in the universe. That power of God is the power of His priesthood.

Because our Savior was an obedient Son, our Father in Heaven gave to our Savior all power. Our Savior would like to share this power and authority with men. If men will be obedient to God, they may receive of this great power, and by it assist God with His works. Those whom God makes responsible for ordering the material affairs of His Kingdom are ordained to the Aaronic Priesthood. Those whom God make responsible for ordering the spiritual side of His Kingdom are ordained to the Melchizedek Priesthood. There is no greater honor on earth than to be a co-worker with God in bringing to pass righteousness and happiness on earth through His priesthood.

The Holy Priesthood is power and authority from God to assist with the work of God on the earth.

2.   Why is Bearing the Holy Priesthood Important to Men?

Our Father in Heaven placed us, His children, here on earth to see how much we would want to become like Him. As we desire to be like Him, He helps us to grow to be more like Him. If we love righteousness as much as He does, eventually we can become like our Heavenly Father in all things.

 The work of our Father is to bless all of His children. He uses the power of His Holy Priesthood to do this. To help us become like Him, our Father gives us some of His power of Priesthood and also responsibilities to bless our fellow men using this power. If we delight in blessing our neighbors, our Heavenly Father carefully instructs us as to how and where and when to use His power and authority. The more good we can do and the more we enjoy it, the more our Father in Heaven increases our responsibility and the more we share in His work of blessing mankind. If we never tire of doing good for our fellow men through the Priesthood, our Father in Heaven can give us a fulness of His Priesthood. Then we can do all good things.

To have the Holy Priesthood is to have the opportunity to become like our Father in Heaven.

3.   When is One Worthy to Bear the Holy Priesthood?

No man can earn, buy, or deserve the Holy Priesthood of God. But our Heavenly Father is willing to give it to men as a gift if they will prepare themselves to receive it. What preparation does God ask of men? There are three basic things a man must do to profit from bearing the Priesthood.

First, a man must love the Lord with all of his heart, might, mind and strength. He will see Jesus Christ as the most wonderful person who ever lived, and will long to be like Him. He will honor God as being all-wise, all-knowing, all powerful, and especially as being the fulfillment of the ideal of pure love. He will strive day and night to draw closer to His Savior. As he does this, the Lord draws closer to him and blesses him with light, truth and power.

Second, the man must love his neighbor as himself. He will radiate kindness and love to his fellow men by the help of the light, truth and power God gives him. He will esteem every man as himself, a child of God. He will liberate the captive, nourish the hungry, clothe the naked; and do these in both a physical and spiritual way.

Thirdly, a man must have self-mastery. He will recognize that every sin he commits keeps him from honoring his God and blessing his fellow men. He will strive with all his soul to be steadfast, constant, selfless, and spiritual. He will never let the temptations of Satan linger in his mind. He will cry unto the Lord night and day for strength to avoid evil and to do what is good.

To be worthy to bear the Holy Priesthood, the power and authority of Jesus Christ, we must become Christ-like.

4.   Where Should One Use His Priesthood?

There are three parts to the Priesthood God shares with men.

The first part is the office, or the power. One is ordained to an office in the priesthood such as Deacon, Teacher, Priest, or Bishop in the Aaronic Priesthood. One is ordained to the offices of Elder, Seventy, High Priest, Patriarch, Apostle, or Presiding High Priest in the Melchizedek Priesthood. When one receives one of these offices, he knows for what duties in God’s Kingdom he must prepare himself.

The second part is the calling, or the authority, sometimes called the “keys.” This is the assignment given to one who has the power of the priesthood; it is his permission to use that power. One might be called to be a quorum officer, a missionary, a bishop, a Ministering Brother, etc. When one receives a calling, he knows where he is supposed to labor in the Kingdom of God.

The third part of the Priesthood is direction from the Lord, which comes by revelation. This revelation may come through the leader in the kingdom who is over us, or it may come directly from the Lord, or both. Every righteous servant of God listens carefully both to the instructions of the prophets and leaders of the Church and to the voice of the Lord in his own heart.

It is the will of the Lord that every bearer of the Holy Priesthood carefully study the powers of his office, carefully examine the needs of his calling and carefully minister to those needs as he receives instruction.

5.   What will the Priesthood Do for Mankind?

Our Heavenly Father sends the power of His Holy Priesthood among men in order that the earth may become a heaven.

Most of the children of our Father in Heaven live under miserable conditions. Poverty, ignorance, disease and slavery have been the companions of most of the people who have ever lived, including most of those now living. Obviously, something needs to be done about this. Men have been trying for six thousand years to solve the problems themselves. But they have always failed.

There have been bright spots in the history of mankind. Our Heavenly Father has repeatedly sent His prophets to teach people of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and some have responded. When men have lived all or part of the principles of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, their lives and civilizations have been blessed.

Today, as in past ages, there is a Prophet of God on the earth. He bears the Priesthood of God. He and those who serve with him can, with that Priesthood, solve every problem that oppresses mankind. The key to men’s problems is the condition of their hearts. If men will come unto Jesus Christ and let their hearts be purified through partaking of the laws and ordinances of the Gospel, the way to peace and happiness will be open to them.

Those who put their trust in the Lord Jesus Christ and follow His prophets will know a happiness and joy that surpasses anything of which the world dreams.

It is easy to slide through life, but not very satisfying. Satisfaction comes in being a Man.

A Man is:

1. Truthful. You can trust what he says.
2. Dependable. You can be sure he will do what he says he will do.
3. Unselfish: He thinks and works more for the welfare of others than for himself.
4. Effective: He works hard and intelligently and gets things done. He pulls his own weight and more.
5. Cheerful: He sees the good in everything, and emphasizes that, rather than the bad.
6. Kind: He treats all others kindly, especially women. This does not depend on how they treat him.

But becoming a Man does not happen by accident. It only results from thoughtful, hard work.

The careful reader of the Book of Mormon observes a framework of thought and value expressed by the authors which is simple and plain, but which contrasts markedly with the thinking of both the opposition which those authors faced in their own time and which believers in the book face in our modern world. As a first approximation to this distinctive Nephite pattern of thought, the following five points are offered.

1. Patriarchal Society. The polar concept to the Nephite patriarchal society is not matriarchal but rather secular. Priesthood, divinely ordained and directed authority, was the key to the social functions of the society. Family affairs were administered by the patriarch of the family, not just until the children reached majority, but in the work of their adult lives. Priesthood authorities were responsible for education, industrial development, military affairs and legal authority during most of the Nephite history. In those times when the high priest was not the chief judge, the office of high priest was considered the more important function.

2. Historical Orientation. One principal function of the prophet presidents of Nephite society was the keeping of careful records, recording both happenings as they occurred and prophecies of the future. The initial story of Nephite history is the obtaining of the brass plates which were deemed of utmost worth, giving the Nephites roots to the past of their people and proper expectations for the future. All contemporary events of Nephite history were viewed by the writers as the expected unfolding of a panorama foreknown; the Nephites lived out a tragic drama, knowing full well the script from the beginning.

3. Lineage Consciousness. The “who” of their history was as important as the “what” to the Nephites. They knew themselves to be the offspring of God, but were acutely conscious of their estrangement from Him. They knew themselves to be children of Abraham, the Faithful One, and heirs to all the blessings of that righteous progenitor. They knew that though long eras of darkness and rebellion would see Israel unfaithful, there would be bright spots and that in the last days, the literal blood would again triumph over evil and prepare the earth for the coming of its king. This consciousness of lineage is reflected in the discouragement of intermarriage with the non-faithful, the tracing of various “ites,” and the careful keeping of genealogical records.

4. Gospel Paramount. The Gospel of Jesus Christ was used by the Nephites to solve every problem. They believed that faith in Jesus Christ, repentance from sinning, taking the covenant of baptism and enduring to the end under the guidance of the Holy Spirit was the only successful and intelligent way to meet life. Whether to obtain the plates, find game in the wilderness, build a ship to cross the ocean, subdue a primitive land, vanquish enemies, locate armies of opponents in the wilderness, escape from captivity, or to come to stand face to face with the living God, all would be done, and was done by them, through the simple and powerful steps of living the Gospel.

5. Christ Centered. Though an isolated people, though facing ultimate destruction, though a minority group, the Nephites always looked with a brightness of hope on their Savior, Jesus Christ. They knew that no matter what happened to the group or the nation, no matter if they were killed, or scourged, or shamed, they had an Advocate in the Heavens, an ever-near Master who loved them and nurtured them in the troubles of the flesh. They taught of Christ, they hoped in Christ, they prayed in Christ, they served in Christ, they knew the Christ. The greatest hope any of them had was to learn His voice so well that they could think, speak, act and love in all things under His personal direction, and then to be folded in the arms of His Eternal Love forever.

As with the Nephites, so with us. Though most of the race may perish, the righteous lineage will be preserved, and every person who hungers and thirsts for the truth, the Christ, can be prepared to meet Him when He stands again on the earth in the latter day. The thinking of the righteous Nephite was his key to success. The Book of Mormon is given to us to bring to us the key to our success, to think likewise.

We assume for our model of human communication that we begin in medias res. We take person A as he exists in the world, having received much communication from other human beings, having decoded that with some success; having well-formed opinions about the persons who communicate with him and about the world and the universe, and having some fairly definite ideas as to just what changes he wishes to effect in the world.

Person A is seen to be doing three things more or less simultaneously and continuously. First, person A is translating the verbal messages of others. To do this he creates a hypothesis as to the intent of a given speaker, then fleshes out that hypothesis according to the verbal-cultural context which unites person A and the speaker which he is translating. This is a creative, willful act for which he is responsible. This translating or decoding is essentially but not exclusively a function of the thinking of person A. This is to say, this translating reflects what he believes the person he is translating to have said; but it does not necessarily reflect what he believes the person he is translating to have meant. True meaning comes in assessment.

Person A is also assessing the nature of the world around him. He assesses the persons whom he translates, and decides whether they are trustworthy or not, whether they speak ironically or not, etc. Thus he decides what they really mean by what they have said. He assesses the total social context, the verbal and physical messages he has received and is receiving from all persons. He assesses the physical environment as to what it was, is, and portends. All of this assessing is the creature of the imagination of person A. Though he works with abundant input, the output of his assessment is of his own making. This assessing is essentially but not exclusively a function of the feeling of person A. That is to say, it reflects his desires.

The third function which person A is continually doing is forming intents or intentions. Out of what he has translated others to have said, and our of his assessment of what they really meant and his assessment of the past, present and future of the state of the world, person A is preparing to act to affect the world, either by speaking or not speaking, or by acting physically or not acting physically. That intention reflects the desires of person A and his thinking, but essentially reflects the action part of his nature. Once the intention is formed, the actions of person A begin to reflect his intent.

The translations, assessments and intents of person A are the thrust of his personality in the world. The manifestations of that thrusting are the actual actions of the person, their intentions reflected in speaking and acting. According to the best of his skill, person A translates his intentions into code or act. He may act honestly or deceitfully, selfishly or selflessly, but in any case his words and acts taken as a whole and over time reflect whatever his intentions are, be they honorable or dishonorable, skillful or artless. Speech code or action, all that person A does is relevant to a cultural context, and the translation he makes of his intent is projected into that context. The context has some physical existence, but its principal existence is in the minds of the hearers or observers of person A.

In addition to the cultural context, the speech code or action also exists in and acts in a physical environment. Sign language in the dark or conversation by a waterfall are typical cases where communication or effect is lessened by the environment. The use of a megaphone or of video transmission are cases where the code and acts of person A are enhanced in their effect by the environment. The environment also provides referents which affect the interpretation of the code and/or act by the hearer, such as the presence of a charging bull when the cry goes out “Watch out for the bull!”

At this stage of communication, everything that remains is the responsibility of the hearer. The hearer must now perform his three functions. First, he will translate any code into a message, using his understanding of the cultural context plus his personal knowledge of the speaker. Second, he will assess the situation to decide what the speaker really meant, whether the speaker speaks truthfully or meaningfully, and the net import of what the speaker literally says but really means in the context of the physical environment. Third, the hearer will create out of his translations, assessments and desires his own intentions, what he will say and/or do to try to push the world in the “right” direction. As with person A, person B is creative about each of these three steps. He creates a literal interpretation of person A’s words and acts, he creates an assessment as to the true meaning and import, and he creates an intention to affect the world in some manner so it will become more to his liking, all done as a creative reaction to the universe.

Person B then encodes his intent, using the cultural context, and projects that code into the physical environment. Another person, perhaps person A, then decodes, assesses and forms another intention. Thus the process of communication is a constant reverberation of codes and acts among feeling, thinking, acting creative individuals.

The Taxonomy of Human Communication

Having laid the groundwork which was necessary, we may now proceed to make explicit the taxonomy of human communication which is the heart of this paper.

It is posited that all human communication may profitably be classified in one of three basic types. These types match the functions of man. Thus, representing the feeling aspect of man we shall designate a category to be known as “disclosure.” Representing the thinking aspect of man we designate a category known as “description.” Representing the acting aspect of man we designate a category known as “directive.”

Disclosures may be subdivided into four main types, these being more representative than exhaustive. First is the subtype of expression such as “I feel ill.” Second is the subtype of value judgments, such as “What a beautiful sunset.” Third are plans, such as “I’m going to run for governor.” Finally we have preferences, such as “I really prefer a little less winter in the climate.”

Descriptions may also be placed in four subtypes, these here intended to be both representative and exhaustive. The first subtype is that of fact, which is a description or classification of a phenomenon which is present in the physical environment of the speech act describing it. An example of a factual type assertion would be, “This dog has a broken leg.” Second is the subtype of law; a law-like assertion is one which is an induction from many related factual assertions. For example, after observing many dogs with broken legs, one might assert that “Injuries of this sort are readily healed with proper care.” The third subtype is that of theory, which is a wholly or partly fictional account created to make sense of the facts and laws of an area of thought. An example of such a useful fiction is Newton’s idea of gravity. Gravity is never perceived, and it is quite possible that no such thing exists, but until we can do better it provides a useful mental image. The fourth subtype of descriptive assertion is that of principle. A principle is a fundamental postulate of thought which aids in the construction of theories and in the explanation of laws and facts. An example of a principle is Newton’s idea that to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Each kind of descriptive assertion may be used in the form of a hypothesis, which is an assertion of fact, law, theory or principle which is seriously proposed for acceptance, but which as yet lacks the necessary basis for acceptance. The basis for acceptance of a hypothetical fact is a pertinent observation. The basis for the acceptance of a hypothetical law is a series of observations of the phenomenon described by the proposed law, which series vindicates the statement as a reliable generalization. The basis for the acceptance of a hypothetical theory is its usefulness in forming a basis for deducing the accepted laws of an area and for leading to hitherto unobserved facts and laws. The basis for acceptance of principle is the usefulness such a hypothesis shows as a fundamental postulate in a useful body of thought. Needless to say, theoretical assertions and principles cannot be proved to be true.

The third basic type of assertion, that of directive, may also usefully be divided into four subtypes. The first subtype is non-verbal, and will be called “art.” This subtype includes all of those things which a human being may do physically to change the world around him. This area is subject to the laws of physics, wherein every effect must have a sufficient cause. Examples of this subtype are piano playing, carpentry, skydiving, sculpture and disguise. The next three subtypes are verbal forms, encompassing command, questions and definitions. In each of these verbal forms of directive the speaker is attempting to change the universe by using words only, leaving it to others to supply the force which physics requires for changes. In commands, person A tells person B what to do, how to move his muscles. In questions, person A is directing someone to make an appropriate response. In definitions, person A is directing how a certain symbol must or may be used. What all directive communications have in common is an attempt to change the nature of the world.

It is posited that every communication, verbal or non-verbal, may be formed into an assertion, which is a complete sentence expressing the hearer’s hypothesis as to what the initiator of the communication intends. Where no assertion can be formed, the observer or hearer has no understanding, correct or incorrect, to attach to the observation. Thus every communication can be interpreted in the form of an assertion.

By examining cases we observe that all assertion may be properly categorized as being primarily disclosures, descriptions, or directives. But we further observe that every assertion may also be interpreted as representing the other two types as well as its primary type. In fact, it appears that a formulation of all three forms of the assertion is necessary to establish complete meaning. Thus “meaning” is taken to be a resonance among the three types of assertions wherein each is represented in different strengths according to the interpretation of the hearer. Just as intent involves feeling, thinking and acting, so interpretation involves attribution of feeling, thinking and acting as the hearer attempts to recreate the speaker’s intent.

Examples are necessary at this point. If a speaker says, “You’re all right,” after assessment we may form a disclosure assertion such as, “I like you.” But also meant will be a description, such as “I believe you are a reliable person.” And a directive such as “You: believe that I esteem you.”

If the original code is such as “Utah is a western state,” we have an assertion that is primarily a description. This may also be decoded and assessed as a disclosure: “I believe that Utah is a western state,” and as a directive: “You should believe that Utah is a western state.” This resonance becomes more apparent when we move to the realm of theory. If the original code is “Man evolved from a lower form of life,” the disclosure might be, “I am convinced that man evolved from a lower form of life,” and the directive would be, “You should believe that man evolved from a lower form of life.”

If the original code is such as “Stand up,” we have a typical command form directive. But it also may be represented after assessment by the disclosure form: “I want you to stand up,” and the descriptive form: “You are a person who should stand up.”

Conclusions

1. Communication may be enhanced by understanding the resonance nature of meaning.
2. Assertions are better formed from assessments than from decodings, and that intent is more truly captured in assessments.
3. It is claimed that gods, little children and dogs understand principally by assessments, therefore they interpret more effectively than those who do not recognize deceptive coding.

Heart language is the ability of a human being to read and to express matters of the heart. The vocabulary of heart language is simple though infinite. There are only two terms, good and evil. Good is singular, unambiguous. Evil, on the other hand, spans an infinity subdivided range from nearly good to totally evil. So the heart has to make two decisions in both reading and speaking: Is a thing good or evil? And, if it is evil, how evil is it? (If one finds or chooses to express good, the matter resolves to only one question, of course.) Heart language is the basis of all other human language transactions. It is the independent variable.

Mind language is the ability of the human mind to read and to express ideas. The potential for mind language is great, virtually infinite. There are three orders of ideas which are noteworthy for our purposes:

1. Unit concepts: Things and functions. (E.g., apple, liberty; decay, endure)
2. Structures, taxonomies, maps, standards, as static formations of unit concepts, (e.g. the parts of a typical flower, the genetic phyla, a building floor plans, excellent writing.)
3. Stories, as dynamic formations of unit concepts. (E.g. myths, histories, fictions, current events, dramas, etc.)

Mind language is the basis of the human being talking with oneself, weighing alternatives, making plans, choosing actions. The mind presents a picture of “reality”, poses a problem within it, selects alternative courses of action which might be taken to solve the problem, and launches the selected solutions on its way to being enacted.

Strength language is the realm of what human beings typically recognize as language. There are three main types of strength language by which human beings communicate with each other:

1. Body language: Gestures, clothing styles and conditions, posture, etc.
   Body language also includes such things as dancing, painting, carpentry, husbandry, etc., by which one controls one’s physical environment.
2. Standard spoken or written languages: English, French, Swahili.
3. Technical languages: the jargons of particular trades and disciplines.

The function of strength language is to control. We control things and people through body language. Normally we only attempt to control people through standard and technical languages. Magic (black) is the control of things using words only, and is the counterfeit of priesthood power, which is controlling things by using God’s words.

Might language is the record people leave behind them in the world, the deposit or fallout of their heart, mind and strength languages. Might language is the language by which we are instructed to judge one another. (By their fruits shall ye know them.)

There are three major divisions of might language to be read. The person’s effect on things:

1. Home and possessions. In what order are they kept?
2. People. What has been the person’s influence on others?
3. Supernatural. What has been the persons influence from God and Satan?

Heart, mind and strength language capability is the register of what a given person can do, his or her present potential. (Future potential may be greater or lesser, depending on whether the person’s capability in heart, mind and strength languages is increasing or decreasing.)

Might language is the register of what a person has done. Everyone leaves a mark on the universe, and by that mark will be judged.

God is a perfect judge, and looks upon the heart, mind, strength, and might of the individual, reading the language potential of each aspect, the actual performance of each aspect, and assessing how much blessing each person can stand for the eternities. Each person is given the opportunity in eternity to do all the good linguistic transactions of heart, mind, strength and might which he or she mastered during probation (but none of the evil transactions which the person indulged in.)

Repentance is thus a matter of changing the way we use our own language capabilities of heart, mind, strength and might. Salvation is being rescued from evil desires so that we learn to use our heart, mind, strength, and might only for good language transactions.

It is noteworthy that on the day of judgment we shall be called to account for every idle word we have spoken. (Every evil language transaction in each of the four areas of language transaction?)

A just man made perfect is a man and woman bonded together in the New and Everlasting Covenant by love of God and of each other, who read good and evil in the hearts of others without error, but who express from their own hearts only good; who read the ideas of others without error, but who think in their own minds only that which is good; who read the strength languages of all others correctly but who express with their own bodies only that which is good (righteous): and who assess correctly the might language of all others but who express in their own might only that which is perfect in Jesus Christ.

The most important thing mortals do in this mortal human life is the nurturing of another human being. Nurturing means to do things which increase the happiness and/or health of another human being. Increasing happiness is more important than increasing physical health, but both are important.

To actually succeed in increasing both the happiness and health of another person is the greatest human achievement. To increase the happiness of another person is to teach or help them to choose good over evil and truth over error, and in that order. Buttering people up is not nurturing them.

There are certain human occupations which have the potential of nurturing more than others. I will list what I think are occupations high on the nurturing list in order of power to nurture: 1. Being a mother. 2. Being a father. 3. Being a wife. 4. Being a husband. 5. Being a sibling. 6. Being a friend.

Some other occupations which rank high in nurturing are: 1. Being a missionary. 2. Having a church calling. 3. Being a teacher.

These are ranked in order of their potential for doing good, the greatest good for others (which is also the potential for doing the greatest harm).

Note some things about these occupations:

1. What matters about each one is how well the role is executed.
2. The world (most people) takes these occupations for granted, not deeming them most important.
3. The world (most people) will tell you that how you make your money or fame is your most important occupation. Don’t be fooled by their error.

Please don’t waste your time in mortality by pursuing fame or fortune to the neglect of nurturing someone(s). Making money (fortune) can be a good thing, but making more than we need for our own needs is good only if the money we gain is used to enhance our ability to nurture others or is used to nurture others.

And not incidentally, if you are not happy, it is because you are not nurturing others as you could and should. Helping others to be happy is the greatest source of human happiness. Many of us would rather lick our wounds and complain about how others treat us than be happy. We live in a world where many people will hurt us, some intentionally and some unintentionally. The way to happiness is to forgive all who wound us and to focus on doing as much good (nurturing) as we possibly can for others.

Is it possible to nurture oneself? I think not. Self-nurturing is selfishness. If I wish to enhance my own happiness, I do it not by seeking it directly, but by seeking to help others treasure and use light (good) and truth, which is nurturing others. If I seek truth and to do good for myself, the truth I will find is that nurturing others is the greatest good I can do.

He who would find happiness will find it not in selfishness, but in sacrificing self and his or her own resources to nurture others. The intelligent goal for human beings is to live outside ourselves in love for others. The purer that love is (pure love is selfless love), the greater the nurturing and the greater the happiness for both the receiver and the giver.

Happy nurturing!