Category: Essay

One of the aspects of our social existence which makes life interesting and, at the same time, somewhat exasperating is the phenomenon of disagreement. As we compare ideas, objectives, goals, and plans with our fellow man, one of the things we are faced with immediately is the wide variety of attitudes, beliefs, and feelings which we and our fellow beings exhibit. One might go so far as to say that because of the nature of our mental existence and of the knowledge we have of the world, each human being acts as if he lives in his own private universe. We construct, as it were, a universe in our own minds. We people it with the things we know, with the people we know about. We furnish it with the things that we believe to exist. We cause it to function according to the pattern of existence we believe obtains. And, all in all, we structure it according to the experience, evidence, and desires of our own personal nature. There are among the many worlds that we see exhibited in other people’s lives and thoughts two principal worlds which are somewhat standard and of special interest to us who are Latter-day Saints. One is the world, or the universe, which is pictured to us by the teachings of the scriptures and the prophets. We might call this the “Universe of the Gospel.” The other is the world, or the universe, which is the standard world of our western civilization, the one which every one of us has encountered in our education and which is sufficiently stereotyped that we can describe it in general terms fairly accurately. It is our purpose this evening to examine these two special worlds and to contrast them and to note the very fundamental and important differences that exist between these two worlds. For purposes of analysis we shall break our discussion down into four main headings and under each of these main headings pursue special subtopics.

The four main headings we shall use will be:

(1) the spiritual realm,
(2) our understanding of history,
(3) the nature of values, and
(4) the source of salvation.

            Let us first of all examine the nature of the spiritual area. We will take first the gospel picture and then contrast with it the standard world of western civilization. In the gospel frame of reference there is a definite spiritual realm of existence which is different from, though certainly related to, the physical realm with which we are all familiar, which we experience daily. The spiritual realm is important because it contains the things that are believed by Latter-day Saints to be the most important things in the universe. It contains, for instance, a personal God, a being who is our literal father, who is a kindly, good, exalted man and who has our personal interest at heart. He is a God of justice, but also a God of mercy, a God of power, but also a God of righteousness; and it is to him that we look for our understanding of the universe and for every good thing that we hope for in this universe. Now there is no existence without opposition we are told, and so correlative with the idea of a personal God necessarily goes the idea of a personal devil in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We believe that there is a person who is a devil. This is not to say that he is the only evil, or that he is necessary to evil, but he is a person who promotes evil in the same manner in which our Heavenly Father promotes good. This personal devil is a being like unto ourselves, and like unto God, but having a personality which differs in respect to the things that he desires. He desires to bring about the misery and the misfortune of mankind. A third aspect of the spiritual nature of existence relates to the personal spirit which is in each man. Each human being is composed not only of the physical body which we observe, but his real self is rather something quite different. We believe that this body is inhabited by a spirit and that spirit body by an intelligence’ so that there is a definite and complete distinction between the spirit of man and his body. In Latter-day Saint terminology the basic struggle of this life is the struggle between the spirit and the body. Our Heavenly Father, assists the spirit in its side of the struggle, and the devil works through the physical body, attempting to further its domination over the spirit. A fourth aspect of spiritual existence which is important to Latter-day Saints is simply the reality of spiritual experiences. Not only are God, the devil, and the spirit in man realities, but they are things which may be experienced. We, each of us, experience a stream of consciousness wherein we are aware of influences which cannot be traced to the physical environment. It is in this realm of consciousness that we experience the whisperings of God, the whisperings of Satan, and our own personal response to these things.

            Let us contrast with this spiritual understanding of the universe, now, the standard world of western civilization. In western civilization the existence of the spiritual realm as a whole is denied, except perhaps as a mental ideal. In this realm there is no God; there is no devil; there is no spirit in man; and man has no such thing as spiritual experience. This fundamental denial, of course, assumes a burden of proof which is much greater than the assertion of the existence of these things in the gospel light. To assert that there is no God and no devil in the universe necessitates a sufficient omniscience that one could survey the whole universe and in no part of the universe find any God or any devil. To say that there is no spirit in man is similarly a most difficult thing to prove. This might be likened to asserting that, because we cannot see any electricity in a wire, that therefore there is no such thing as electricity. But one can certainly feel electricity, especially when grounded, and one certainly can be aware of the existence of at least his own spirit, especially when he is grounded in the strength of independent thought and not short-circuited by the shame of the world. One of the most fundamental experiences a human being has is the inner struggle that goes on within himself, the struggle between right and wrong, the struggle between truth and error, the struggle between what is ennobling and what is degrading. To deny the existence and the importance of this realm is to deny what we are: independent spiritual human beings. To relegate ourselves to the realm of machine is to give up independence, individuality, and everything which has brought significance to human achievement.

            Let us move next to the realm of history. Here again we see extremely divergent views separating the gospel picture of the universe from that proposed by western civilization. The gospel teaches us plainly of the divine origin of man, that men are the children of the Gods, and that at one time we were of the same basic nature as God is physically. That is to say, that in the Garden of Eden Adam and Eve had celestial bodies and never would have had to die. They, of course, were not like our Father in Heaven in every respect, but at least in that physical respect were like him. A second important teaching in the historical perspective relates to the Fall of man. In the gospel, when Adam partook of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil, he became fallen. This involves several important ramifications. In the first place, man became dead to that personal God who is his literal and real Father. That is to say, he was cut off from the presence of his Father and righteousness because of his disobedience, no longer able to see God with his physical senses. Being cut off from God and righteousness  made Adam completely subject to that personal devil who then had full access to tempt and to try him. Man, thus, comes under the burden of an overwhelming influence to do evil. Unless this overwhelming influence  is counteracted by the Spirit of the Lord, man is not a free agent, but must and will do greater or lesser amounts of evil, depending on the ability the individual has of his own desires to resist Satan or not to resist. Hd Adam been left in this state, he would have been doomed to remain estranged from God, his Father, forever. But Father sent the Holy Spirit and angels to minister to Adam of truth and righteousness. With these two influences in balance, that of Satan and of the Holy Spirit, man became an agent to choose between good and evil.

            Two aspects of the future history of man which are important in this connection are first, the literal reality of the resurrection of each human being. To know that we go on living forever and that death is not the end and that we will be reunited with the bodies which we have in this life and will go on living into eternity is, indeed, a most important aspect of our understanding. Secondly, coupled with the idea of resurrection is, of course, the necessity of our accounting for the acts of this life. We must stand before the bar of judgment and be held accountable for our acts, whether they be good or whether they be evil. The net result of this understanding of history is to place upon each individual the full weight of the responsibility for his actions and to teach him that his actions are important and that the ramifications of his mortal actions are of eternal significance.

            The world, on the other hand, teaches in connection with history a very contrary view. So far as the origin of man is concerned, the world teaches that man came about by a slow, chance evolutionary process, beginning with some non-living form of life, and over the course of millions and perhaps billions of years evolving into the present status of what we call man. This, of course, gives man an extremely low origin compared to the gospel account. Evolution is a scientific theory which, though valuable to scientific tinking, is not proven and for which there is very important and serious doubt as to the necessity of its truthfulness. It suffices to say that this along with all other scientific theories rests in a realm of speculation where nothing can really be proved. If an individual believes in the evolutionary origin of man, it is because he wants to. It is not because there is any evidence which necessitates such a belief. Indeed, if one wishes to gather all the evidence concerned, there is at least a piece of evidence contrary to the theory of evolution for every evidence which supports the theory of evolution. This is a rather safe generalization, or course, simply because evidence by itself is completely neutral as to its explanation. Explanations are provided by humans, and any piece of evidence which could be construed one way could also be construed another way by the person involved. Since the evidence itself is completely neutral, the individual makes up his own mind as to whether he believes in evolution or not. However, many people are browbeaten into believing in the theory of evolution. According to some this theory has the status of scientific fact. But there is much evidence against evolution and no necessity for any human being to believe it as a proven idea.

            In contrast to its account of the humble natural origin of man, the standard world of western civilization aggrandizes the present nature of man. We are taught that man is basically good, that men can be trusted, that the important thing is that we not degrade man by supposing him to have in any sense evil motives. If it is true that men are subject to Satan, it makes a great deal of difference in our understanding of the processes of this world. If every politician is subjected to the influence of and adversary who attempts to get him to do evil, thinking beings would rather not put into the hands of any one human being any great concentration of power. But, if on the other hand, as western civilization teaches, every man is inherently good, perhaps we need not fear. Each individual may be given the opportunity to account for himself and his own personal experience as to what the real nature of existence is. What is your sample of human nature? Are most human beings good, or do most human beings do evil in one degree or another? When human beings have a highly concentrated power in their hands, do most people use it to do good, or do most people use it to do evil? Single examples may be taken to prove either side. But the question, or course, is, what is the generalization which is true?

            Going on to the future history of man, again though the world recognizes that death is a necessity which comes upon every human being. The important thing is, what is the consequence of death? The world teaches that there is an oblivion, that when we die, we pass into a non-existence where we no longer exist as entities. Coupled with this is the idea that there is no judgment for the acts of man, that the only possible consequences of our acts in this life are the physical rewards and punishments which affect us up until the day of our death. This leads, of course, to the idea that  getting caught in doing anti-social things is the problem and that if we suffer social disapprobation, it is simply because we were not wise enough to elude the restrictions of our community.

            Going on to the third general area, let us contrast the values of the gospel and the world of western civilization in regard to the status of values themselves. The gospel plainly teaches that there is a right or wrong. There is a morality which is not simply the whim of God and which man can know. There is an eternal righteousness which leads to happiness both now and later. Accompanying this idea of the eternal nature of right and wrong is the concept of the worth of the individual. In the gospel frame of reference, the individual person is the most important thing in existence, and every human being is of virtually infinite worth compared with anything else in the universe, compared with any non-personal or non-individual existence in the universe. Whatever programs, governments of society, or actions of individuals which are proposed and executed, the church would teach us that the worth of the individual ought to be respected and kept in mind at all times. No human being should be treated simply as a means to an end, but every human being ought to be treated as an end and worthy in and of himself. Now, in contrast to this, the world teaches that all values are relative, that the thing that is important is simply the satisfaction of desire, that there is no right or no wrong. The world also teaches that the individual is of little worth. The individual may have some worth insomuch as he finds himself on the top of the social power structure, but the teaching of the world is that the important thing is the social group, the social group being the basis and source of all values for individual human beings. The important thing, therefore, for the human being is to accommodate himself to the nature of the group. Most education is carried on under this valuation, attempting to get the individual to subordinate himself to the nature of his social existence and group rather than attempting to bring out in him the important things which he feels are of worth and to enable him to be an independent individual.

            The fourth category in which we might contrast these two worlds is in relation to salvation. In the gospel of Jesus Christ salvation is vertical; that is to say, man has to look upward to a supernatural source for his salvation both from the troubles of life and the perils of eternity. Man seeks to receive from his Father in Heaven first of all the Spirit, to be guided in truth and light; secondly the priesthood by which power he can control the elements of this earth, the power of Satan, and anything necessary which stands in the way of his salvation. Thirdly, he receives the blessings of a personal God, a Father who loves him and who is anxious to reunite with him.

            Salvation for the world, on the other hand, is lateral. This means to say, the teaching of the world is that salvation is to be obtained from our fellow beings. The teaching is that man is saved first of all through learning, so we must go to school and be taught by our fellow human beings what is truth, what is right, what we should know. Ultimately, the problems of our civilization and the struggle against nature are to be solved according to the world through physical force. To this end science is employed, but even more the power of government to pass laws and physically to force certain requirements upon society is looked upon as the great panacea. In the gospel of Jesus Christ, the ultimate salvation is looked for in righteousness; whereas in the world salvation is looked for in physical force. In this connection we quote President David O. McKay in his speech in the October, 1962 General Conference. President McKay says this:

            “Today many nations have lost their independence. Men defeated have been compelled to labor for their conquerors. Property has been seized without recompense, and millions of people have surrendered all guarantees of personal liberty. Force and compulsion will never establish the ideal society. This can come only by a transformation within the individual soul, a life redeemed from sin and brought in harmony with the Divine Will. Instead of selfishness, men must be willing to dedicate their fortunes, and their sacred honor for the alleviation of the ills of mankind. Hate must be supplanted by sympathy and forbearance. Peace and true prosperity can come only by conforming our lives to the law of love, the law of the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ. A mere appreciation of the social ethics of Jesus is not sufficient. Men’s hearts must be changed. In these days of uncertainty and unrest, liberty-loving people’s greatest responsibility and paramount duty is to preserve and proclaim the freedom of the individual, his relationship to Diety, and the necessity of obedience to the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Only thus will mankind find peace and happiness.”

            So it is we see that we are faced with this fundamental choice. We can choose the universe the gospel commends to us, or we may choose the world of western civilization. Under the one, we will seek righteousness, which is to say, we will seek by the help of God to better the lives of our fellow men through kindness, through love, through any way that does not involve physical force, which is compatible with the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ. If, on the other hand, we seek the power of the world, if we seek to follow the pattern of the world, we will try to solve the problems of man through physical force. May I remind you that these two are essentially the two plans propounded in the council in heaven. The one is the plan of righteousness and agency and honoring of the individual propounded by our Father in Heaven and accepted by the Savior in the pre-existence. The other is the program of Satan which denies the agency and  worth of the individual man and tries to solve all problems and bring about salvation through physical force.

            Again may we note in this Christmas season that the life of our Savior Jesus Christ is a monument to his belief that righteousness is a much greater power than physical force. When the Savior came among men in his earthly existence, the Jews were expecting a Messiah who would come and blight the Roman armies and physically destroy all the enemies of Judaism. But the Savior recognized that there is something much greater, that righteousness is the greatest triumph of all. In his life he sought and succeeded never to succumb to the temptations of the adversary in any particular or in any degree. By this triumph Jesus Christ was able to gain the power of righteousness which is for him the power to resurrect all human beings, to bless those who have themselves sought righteousness with the blessings of eternity including exaltation, and to deliver to each man that happiness which he deserves and wants. He rejected explicitly the possible salvation he could have wrought even with the power of Godhood in destroying armies, in destroying disease, in destroying physical force. He recognized the worth of the individual and that the only salvation worth anything is getting human beings to choose righteousness of themselves, that he might honor them as persons. So in this Christmas season, may we remember the example of our Savior. May we seize upon a clear understanding of that world in which the Savior believed and in which he acted and which was the basis of his triumph. May we reject the sophistries of the adversary and the very unreal world which he and his proponents would have us believe in, the world which leads to destruction.

One of the aspects of our social existence which makes life interesting and, at the same time, somewhat exasperating is the phenomenon of disagreement. As we compare ideas, objectives, goals, and plans with our fellow man, one of the things we are faced with immediately is the wide variety of attitudes, beliefs, and feelings which we and our fellow beings exhibit. One might go so far as to say that because of the nature of our mental existence and of the knowledge we have of the world, each human being acts as if he lives in his own private universe. We construct, as it were, a universe in our own minds. We people it with the things we know, with the people we know about. We furnish it with the things that we believe to exist. We cause it to function according to the pattern of existence we believe obtains. And, all in all, we structure it according to the experience, evidence, and desires of our own personal nature. There are among the many worlds that we see exhibited in other people’s lives and thoughts two principal worlds which are somewhat standard and of special interest to us who are Latter-day Saints. One is the world, or the universe, which is pictured to us by the teachings of the scriptures and the prophets. We might call this the “Universe of the Gospel.” The other is the world, or the universe, which is the standard world of our western civilization, the one which every one of us has encountered in our education and which is sufficiently stereotyped that we can describe it in general terms fairly accurately. It is our purpose this evening to examine these two special worlds and to contrast them and to note the very fundamental and important differences that exist between these two worlds. For purposes of analysis we shall break our discussion down into four main headings and under each of these main headings pursue special subtopics.

The four main headings we shall use will be: (1) the spiritual realm, (2) our understanding of history, (3) the nature of values, and (4) the source of salvation.

The Spiritual Realm

            Let us first of all examine the nature of the spiritual area. We will take first the gospel picture and then contrast with it the standard world of western civilization. In the gospel frame of reference there is a definite spiritual realm of existence which is different from, though certainly related to, the physical realm with which we are all familiar, which we experience daily. The spiritual realm is important because it contains the things that are believed by Latter-day Saints to be the most important things in the universe. It contains, for instance, a personal God, a being who is our literal father, who is a kindly, good, exalted man and who has our personal interest at heart. He is a God of justice, but also a God of mercy, a God of power, but also a God of righteousness; and it is to him that we look for our understanding of the universe and for every good thing that we hope for in this universe. Now there is no existence without opposition we are told, and so correlative with the idea of a personal God necessarily goes the idea of a personal devil in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We believe that there is a person who is a devil. This is not to say that he is the only evil, or that he is necessary to evil, but he is a person who promotes evil in the same manner in which our Heavenly Father promotes good. This personal devil is a being like unto ourselves, and like unto God, but having a personality which differs in respect to the things that he desires. He desires to bring about the misery and the misfortune of mankind. A third aspect of the spiritual nature of existence relates to the personal spirit which is in each man. Each human being is composed not only of the physical body which we observe, but his real self is rather something quite different. We believe that this body is inhabited by a spirit and that spirit body by an intelligence’ so that there is a definite and complete distinction between the spirit of man and his body. In Latter-day Saint terminology the basic struggle of this life is the struggle between the spirit and the body. Our Heavenly Father, assists the spirit in its side of the struggle, and the devil works through the physical body, attempting to further its domination over the spirit. A fourth aspect of spiritual existence which is important to Latter-day Saints is simply the reality of spiritual experiences. Not only are God, the devil, and the spirit in man realities, but they are things which may be experienced. We, each of us, experience a stream of consciousness wherein we are aware of influences which cannot be traced to the physical environment. It is in this realm of consciousness that we experience the whisperings of God, the whisperings of Satan, and our own personal response to these things.

            Let us contrast with this spiritual understanding of the universe, now, the standard world of western civilization. In western civilization the existence of the spiritual realm as a whole is denied, except perhaps as a mental ideal. In this realm there is no God; there is no devil; there is no spirit in man; and man has no such thing as spiritual experience. This fundamental denial, of course, assumes a burden of proof which is much greater than the assertion of the existence of these things in the gospel light. To assert that there is no God and no devil in the universe necessitates a sufficient omniscience that one could survey the whole universe and in no part of the universe find any God or any devil. To say that there is no spirit in man is similarly a most difficult thing to prove. This might be likened to asserting that, because we cannot see any electricity in a wire, that therefore there is no such thing as electricity. But one can certainly feel electricity, especially when grounded, and one certainly can be aware of the existence of at least his own spirit, especially when he is grounded in the strength of independent thought and not short-circuited by the shame of the world. One of the most fundamental experiences a human being has is the inner struggle that goes on within himself, the struggle between right and wrong, the struggle between truth and error, the struggle between what is ennobling and what is degrading. To deny the existence and the importance of this realm is to deny what we are: independent spiritual human beings. To relegate ourselves to the realm of machine is to give up independence, individuality, and everything which has brought significance to human achievement.

Our Understanding of History

            Let us move next to the realm of history. Here again we see extremely divergent views separating the gospel picture of the universe from that proposed by western civilization. The gospel teaches us plainly of the divine origin of man, that men are the children of the Gods, and that at one time we were of the same basic nature as God is physically. That is to say, that in the Garden of Eden Adam and Eve had celestial bodies and never would have had to die. They, of course, were not like our Father in Heaven in every respect, but at least in that physical respect were like him. A second important teaching in the historical perspective relates to the Fall of man. In the gospel, when Adam partook of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil, he became fallen. This involves several important ramifications. In the first place, man became dead to that personal God who is his literal and real Father. That is to say, he was cut off from the presence of his Father and righteousness because of his disobedience, no longer able to see God with his physical senses. Being cut off from God and righteousness  made Adam completely subject to that personal devil who then had full access to tempt and to try him. Man, thus, comes under the burden of an overwhelming influence to do evil. Unless this overwhelming influence  is counteracted by the Spirit of the Lord, man is not a free agent, but must and will do greater or lesser amounts of evil, depending on the ability the individual has of his own desires to resist Satan or not to resist. Hd Adam been left in this state, he would have been doomed to remain estranged from God, his Father, forever. But Father sent the Holy Spirit and angels to minister to Adam of truth and righteousness. With these two influences in balance, that of Satan and of the Holy Spirit, man became an agent to choose between good and evil.

            Two aspects of the future history of man which are important in this connection are first, the literal reality of the resurrection of each human being. To know that we go on living forever and that death is not the end and that we will be reunited with the bodies which we have in this life and will go on living into eternity is, indeed, a most important aspect of our understanding. Secondly, coupled with the idea of resurrection is, of course, the necessity of our accounting for the acts of this life. We must stand before the bar of judgment and be held accountable for our acts, whether they be good or whether they be evil. The net result of this understanding of history is to place upon each individual the full weight of the responsibility for his actions and to teach him that his actions are important and that the ramifications of his mortal actions are of eternal significance.

            The world, on the other hand, teaches in connection with history a very contrary view. So far as the origin of man is concerned, the world teaches that man came about by a slow, chance evolutionary process, beginning with some non-living form of life, and over the course of millions and perhaps billions of years evolving into the present status of what we call man. This, of course, gives man an extremely low origin compared to the gospel account. Evolution is a scientific theory which, though valuable to scientific tinking, is not proven and for which there is very important and serious doubt as to the necessity of its truthfulness. It suffices to say that this along with all other scientific theories rests in a realm of speculation where nothing can really be proved. If an individual believes in the evolutionary origin of man, it is because he wants to. It is not because there is any evidence which necessitates such a belief. Indeed, if one wishes to gather all the evidence concerned, there is at least a piece of evidence contrary to the theory of evolution for every evidence which supports the theory of evolution. This is a rather safe generalization, or course, simply because evidence by itself is completely neutral as to its explanation. Explanations are provided by humans, and any piece of evidence which could be construed one way could also be construed another way by the person involved. Since the evidence itself is completely neutral, the individual makes up his own mind as to whether he believes in evolution or not. However, many people are browbeaten into believing in the theory of evolution. According to some this theory has the status of scientific fact. But there is much evidence against evolution and no necessity for any human being to believe it as a proven idea.

            In contrast to its account of the humble natural origin of man, the standard world of western civilization aggrandizes the present nature of man. We are taught that man is basically good, that men can be trusted, that the important thing is that we not degrade man by supposing him to have in any sense evil motives. If it is true that men are subject to Satan, it makes a great deal of difference in our understanding of the processes of this world. If every politician is subjected to the influence of and adversary who attempts to get him to do evil, thinking beings would rather not put into the hands of any one human being any great concentration of power. But, if on the other hand, as western civilization teaches, every man is inherently good, perhaps we need not fear. Each individual may be given the opportunity to account for himself and his own personal experience as to what the real nature of existence is. What is your sample of human nature? Are most human beings good, or do most human beings do evil in one degree or another? When human beings have a highly concentrated power in their hands, do most people use it to do good, or do most people use it to do evil? Single examples may be taken to prove either side. But the question, or course, is, what is the generalization which is true?

            Going on to the future history of man, again though the world recognizes that death is a necessity which comes upon every human being. The important thing is, what is the consequence of death? The world teaches that there is an oblivion, that when we die, we pass into a non-existence where we no longer exist as entities. Coupled with this is the idea that there is no judgment for the acts of man, that the only possible consequences of our acts in this life are the physical rewards and punishments which affect us up until the day of our death. This leads, of course, to the idea that  getting caught in doing anti-social things is the problem and that if we suffer social disapprobation, it is simply because we were not wise enough to elude the restrictions of our community.

The Nature of Values

            Going on to the third general area, let us contrast the values of the gospel and the world of western civilization in regard to the status of values themselves. The gospel plainly teaches that there is a right or wrong. There is a morality which is not simply the whim of God and which man can know. There is an eternal righteousness which leads to happiness both now and later. Accompanying this idea of the eternal nature of right and wrong is the concept of the worth of the individual. In the gospel frame of reference, the individual person is the most important thing in existence, and every human being is of virtually infinite worth compared with anything else in the universe, compared with any non-personal or non-individual existence in the universe. Whatever programs, governments of society, or actions of individuals which are proposed and executed, the church would teach us that the worth of the individual ought to be respected and kept in mind at all times. No human being should be treated simply as a means to an end, but every human being ought to be treated as an end and worthy in and of himself. Now, in contrast to this, the world teaches that all values are relative, that the thing that is important is simply the satisfaction of desire, that there is no right or no wrong. The world also teaches that the individual is of little worth. The individual may have some worth insomuch as he finds himself on the top of the social power structure, but the teaching of the world is that the important thing is the social group, the social group being the basis and source of all values for individual human beings. The important thing, therefore, for the human being is to accommodate himself to the nature of the group. Most education is carried on under this valuation, attempting to get the individual to subordinate himself to the nature of his social existence and group rather than attempting to bring out in him the important things which he feels are of worth and to enable him to be an independent individual.

The Source of Salvation

            The fourth category in which we might contrast these two worlds is in relation to salvation. In the gospel of Jesus Christ salvation is vertical; that is to say, man has to look upward to a supernatural source for his salvation both from the troubles of life and the perils of eternity. Man seeks to receive from his Father in Heaven first of all the Spirit, to be guided in truth and light; secondly the priesthood by which power he can control the elements of this earth, the power of Satan, and anything necessary which stands in the way of his salvation. Thirdly, he receives the blessings of a personal God, a Father who loves him and who is anxious to reunite with him.

            Salvation for the world, on the other hand, is lateral. This means to say, the teaching of the world is that salvation is to be obtained from our fellow beings. The teaching is that man is saved first of all through learning, so we must go to school and be taught by our fellow human beings what is truth, what is right, what we should know. Ultimately, the problems of our civilization and the struggle against nature are to be solved according to the world through physical force. To this end science is employed, but even more the power of government to pass laws and physically to force certain requirements upon society is looked upon as the great panacea. In the gospel of Jesus Christ, the ultimate salvation is looked for in righteousness; whereas in the world salvation is looked for in physical force. In this connection we quote President David O. McKay in his speech in the October, 1962 General Conference. President McKay says this:

            “Today many nations have lost their independence. Men defeated have been compelled to labor for their conquerors. Property has been seized without recompense, and millions of people have surrendered all guarantees of personal liberty. Force and compulsion will never establish the ideal society. This can come only by a transformation within the individual soul, a life redeemed from sin and brought in harmony with the Divine Will. Instead of selfishness, men must be willing to dedicate their fortunes, and their sacred honor for the alleviation of the ills of mankind. Hate must be supplanted by sympathy and forbearance. Peace and true prosperity can come only by conforming our lives to the law of love, the law of the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ. A mere appreciation of the social ethics of Jesus is not sufficient. Men’s hearts must be changed. In these days of uncertainty and unrest, liberty-loving people’s greatest responsibility and paramount duty is to preserve and proclaim the freedom of the individual, his relationship to Diety, and the necessity of obedience to the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Only thus will mankind find peace and happiness.”

            So it is we see that we are faced with this fundamental choice. We can choose the universe the gospel commends to us, or we may choose the world of western civilization. Under the one, we will seek righteousness, which is to say, we will seek by the help of God to better the lives of our fellow men through kindness, through love, through any way that does not involve physical force, which is compatible with the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ. If, on the other hand, we seek the power of the world, if we seek to follow the pattern of the world, we will try to solve the problems of man through physical force. May I remind you that these two are essentially the two plans propounded in the council in heaven. The one is the plan of righteousness and agency and honoring of the individual propounded by our Father in Heaven and accepted by the Savior in the pre-existence. The other is the program of Satan which denies the agency and  worth of the individual man and tries to solve all problems and bring about salvation through physical force.

            Again may we note in this Christmas season that the life of our Savior Jesus Christ is a monument to his belief that righteousness is a much greater power than physical force. When the Savior came among men in his earthly existence, the Jews were expecting a Messiah who would come and blight the Roman armies and physically destroy all the enemies of Judaism. But the Savior recognized that there is something much greater, that righteousness is the greatest triumph of all. In his life he sought and succeeded never to succumb to the temptations of the adversary in any particular or in any degree. By this triumph Jesus Christ was able to gain the power of righteousness which is for him the power to resurrect all human beings, to bless those who have themselves sought righteousness with the blessings of eternity including exaltation, and to deliver to each man that happiness which he deserves and wants. He rejected explicitly the possible salvation he could have wrought even with the power of Godhood in destroying armies, in destroying disease, in destroying physical force. He recognized the worth of the individual and that the only salvation worth anything is getting human beings to choose righteousness of themselves, that he might honor them as persons. So in this Christmas season, may we remember the example of our Savior. May we seize upon a clear understanding of that world in which the Savior believed and in which he acted and which was the basis of his triumph. May we reject the sophistries of the adversary and the very unreal world which he and his proponents would have us believe in, the world which leads to destruction.

Chauncey C. Riddle

            One of the most profound generalizations ever uttered was father Lehi’s dictum that there must be opposition in all things. If it were not so, he points out, all things would be a compound in one and there would be no existence. To say that something exists is the same things as saying, “it differs.” Etymologically, the word existence may be traced to the Latin roots “ex + stare,” to stand out. Taking the visual field as the paradigm, that which “stands out” is that which contrasts with or differs from the remainder of the visual area. This contrast enables us to distinguish figure from ground, thus allowing the figure to “exist.” If we could not distinguish figure from ground, we would not only not see figure, but we would also not see the ground. In other words, we would not see. This general principle of opposition applies not only to vision but to all sensation, to considerations of value, to the possibility of the existence of classes in the mind (i.e., in the universe of discourse, one class cannot be created without the simultaneous creation of its negative class), and to the physical world (e.g. Newton’s “law” that to every action there must be an equal and opposite reaction). It would be difficult to find an idea of more universal application and importance than this principle of opposition.

            One important social application of the principle of opposition relates to the possibilities of unity and disunity in social groups. Applying this principle we might observe that every attempt to unify a group of people faces a fundamental dilemma.

            The unity of the group can be achieved on the one hand by destroying the personal differences that cause people to be individuals. The push for egalitarianism has as its goal the creation of a Parmenidean order of timeless, motionless, featureless unity, where each person contributes to the group as does each individual radius to a sphere. The individual is not a person, but a “slot;” he fills a potential in the whole which is individuated only mathematically; i.e., by his orientation in space. He is a good radius only as he is completely indistinguishable from his fellows. Any aberration on his part destroys the aesthetic symmetry of the whole and therefore cannot be tolerated. This Parmenidean sphere is the social model of the socialist movement. To be sure, it differentiates people as to their assigned task in society; one man will lay brick, another farm, another teach. But each in this scheme is a person of identical political persuasion, of the same metaphysical outlook, of the same valuational pattern. Each is the product of social planning, of careful education, of deliberate indoctrination. His mind and his heart are attuned to the glory of society, and as a well-formed radius he contributes to the beauty and perfection of the absolute sphere.

            The principle difficulty with the Parmenidean social model is that its proponents cannot escape hypocrisy. They teach that all men must come under a planned social order which will direct their minds and hearts through education, their physical inheritance through eugenics, and their physical welfare through manipulation of economic levers. But it is obvious that the creator of radii of the sphere cannot be himself a radius of the sphere. Someone outside the sphere must say how and what education must be, must say which persons will be out breeding stock, must say we should pull this economic lever. It is just that obvious then that the sphere with all its faceless radii must always remain the dictatorship of few men over the many. The few can never take the medicine they prescribe without relinquishing their power. History records that those in power who prescribe this ideal are singularly unwilling to give their power to others and become radii. Perhaps this is one reason they seek to control the writing of history as well as the society of men.

            But someone will say, “The leaders are radii. They simply are part of the great overriding rule of science which works out its inexorable destiny in perfecting mankind.” This is the familiar plea of both the communists, promoting the Marxist thesis of economic determination, and the socialist liberals who want world society run by “enlightened intellectuals.” History has shown that economic factors are powerful in shaping the course of human events. But history also reveals that economic determinism does not always hold.  People don’t always rebel because of the nature of the factors of economic production in their society, and Marxists find it necessary to force artificially the so-called “inexorable destiny.” In other words, these Marxists are not part of the sphere. They must deliberately be non-radii themselves in order to force other men to assume the posture of radii. History has also shown that scientists and social planners can improve upon social orders run by ruthless despots for their own pleasure and amusement. But an examination of the nature of science quickly reveals that any scientist who starts prescribing for society has thereby departed from science. Science itself has and prescribes no values; it is inherently incapable of doing so. The scientist who pretends to be prescribing in accordance with the dictates of nature, or reason, or science, is plainly either an outright prevaricator or so unaware of the limitations of science as to be unworthy of the name “scientist.”

            The sum of the matter is then that the egalitarian ideal of socialism is always a process of the few in power creating a unity and equality among their subjects but never including themselves. While they destroy the individuality of their captive fellow men in creating the sphere of equal radii, they rule triumphant over the creature they prescribe but will not and cannot be part of it. All their subjects have become a compound in one and for them there is no “existence.” They may be bodies, but as persons they do not exist. That state of affairs is, or course, consonant with the philosophy of materialism. But where do the non-conforming, non-deterministic, non-equal leaders fit into the philosophy of materialism? They don’t; materialism is simply the opium with which they quiet the masses to create conforming radii.

            What are the social consequences of this Parmenidean social order? Two examples will suffice, one from the realm of mind, the other from the realm of matter.

            In a social order where men are forced to think alike, where there is unity through sameness, without freedom, two consequences will follow of necessity. First, no one who is a good “radius” will ever do any real “thinking.” He will react, respond, and repeat; but since he lives in a world where all of his peers think as he does, he is never challenged and never makes any decisions of importance on his own. He either reacts as he has been trained in meeting familiar problems, or he will seek further training (sometimes called “education”) to meet new problems. In any event, his mind is the child of the planners. The second consequence is the product of the first:  there will be no progress generated by a good radii. He is simply a machine which has been programmed by the planners to do a particular job in a particular way. Because he has been made incapable of thinking (and therefore of rebelling), he can never see how to improve in the task he performs. As a teacher he repeats old saws; as a scientist he applies old principles; as an administrator he perpetuates old dicta. The stability and order of such a society would be admirable; these values overwhelm some who think that the Middle Ages (which closely approximated this Parmenidean ideal) were the golden age of Europe, and who long to reinstitute such an order. But thank goodness that the progress of suffering humanity was not stopped at the Middle Ages! Of course, it is the responsibility of the leaders and planners to institute necessary reforms in every aspect of the social order. But it is notorious that planners are usually far removed from problems; waste and chaos have been the ordinary consequence of absentee planning as anyone who has been a member of a large socialistic organization such as an army can testify.

            Let us turn now to a consequence of Parmenidean planning in the realm of the material world. One of the great so-called “curses” from which the purveyors of Parmenidean unity wish to free men is the “jungle warfare” of the free competition. Through enlargement of the size and influence of the “public sector” of the economy they intend to relieve society of the “waste” engendered by ruthless competition. But they miss the main point of free competition; that it is a competition to see who can serve the common man best. In free trade each unit vies with each other to see which can deliver the most goods to men at the lowest price. Ingenuity, thought, struggle and life-blood all go to increase the efficiency of the delivery of goods. Conversely, in a planned society there is no competition and the units of production tend to try to absorb more and more of the goods of society (this is known as “justifying and enlarging your budget” in a socialist scheme.) Efficiency is anathema because it would mean reduction of budget. The natural consequence is that waste is promoted and the common man receives the minimal shoddy product of the society’s self-improved “enlightened planners.” No, it isn’t always shoddy. Sometimes it is very beautiful and functional. But how much would the new congressional office building in Washington have cost under free enterprise?

            Enough for the Parmenidean ideal of unity. That ideal could not be fully meaningful unless under the principle of opposition a contrasting ideal of unity is presented.

Chauncey C. Riddle
Nov. 1990

One of the strong teachings of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the injunction of the Savior to each person to take up his or her cross. This is clearly made a condition of salvation. This teaching is given in the Bible, in the Book of Mormon, and in the Doctrine and Covenants.

In Matthew 10:38 the Savior says:

“He that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.”

The idea is even more emphatic in Matthew 16:24:

“Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever shall lose his life for my sake shall find it.”

In the Book of Mormon Jacob tells us: “But behold, the righteous, the saints of the Holy One of Israel, they who have believed in the Holy One of Israel, they who have endured the crosses of the world, and despised the shame of it, they shall inherit the kingdom of God, which was prepared for them from the foundation of the world, and their joy shall be full forever.” (2 Nephi 9:15–23) In the Doctrine and Covenants, it is revealed to Thomas B. Marsh:

“Now, I say unto you, and what I say unto you, I say unto all the twelve: Arise and gird up your loins, take up your cross, follow me, and feed my sheep.” (D&C 112:14)

It is plain from these quotations that the Savior is our pattern. To take up our cross we must do as he did. The Savior’s cross was given to him of his father. It was something he had to endure to complete his mission on this earth. He bore it faithfully and in so doing he completed his mission to bring salvation to all mankind.

The cross the savior bore was to atone for the sins of each and all mankind. His mission of bringing salvation included the necessity of satisfying the law of justice, to suffer for each infraction of Father’s law which ever had been or ever would be committed on this earth. In one twenty-four hour period he suffered for these sins, finishing the suffering on the cross. The cross upon which he was crucified was not his cross; but it was the symbolic representation of his cross. Thus the symbol of the cross becomes the symbol of the suffering each human being must do to follow in the footsteps of our Master, Jesus Christ.

And suffer we must, even as did our Savior. He tells us that we must bring a sacrifice to him to be saved, that of a broken heart and a contrite spirit. The broken heart is doing away with all pride, to come down in the depths of humility, because of our sins. To be contrite means to suffer with—to suffer with our Master. As he suffered for the sin of all mankind, so we must be willing to suffer. Sometimes we must suffer for sins, our own or the sins of others. But some human suffering has no obvious good cause or reason. Some of it simply happens as the result of Father’s omniscient benevolence, and we discover that benevolence only after the suffering is completed. Thus we have crosses.

It seems that every accountable human being who wishes to be saved must suffer. Not every human being suffers his or her assigned cross; sometimes it is possible to avoid it, and thereby avoid salvation. Sometimes the cross cannot be avoided; then the question is, is the cross borne in humility before Father’s will or in angry rejection of him. But it is clear that if we are to be saved we must take up our cross and bear it well. The Savior did not enjoy his cross. He asked that it be taken from him. But when it could not be, he manfully shouldered it and bore it off triumphantly. In this each of us must follow him.

Let us now turn to ten examples of human beings bearing crosses well in Christ.

Friend No. 1 was born with a clubfoot. He was born before orthopedic surgery could cure this problem. So his only course was to suffer it. He suffered it well, through his faith in Christ. He earned a living as a woodworker, raised a fine family, and triumphed. The really hard part was not being crippled all of his life. The worst part was enduring the taunts and the shame his fellows heaped upon him, and especially the many persons who considered him to be demented, as humans are wont to do with crippled persons.

Friend No. 2 was widowed at age twenty-six with four small children in the depths of the Great Depression. She had no money, poor health, no family to help. But she had faith in Christ. She bowed her head and struggled against all the odds to raise those children in righteousness. In abject poverty she eked out a sustenance, bearing the shame of poor clothing and having little but life itself. When her children were raised things were a bit easier, but her health was no better. Still she pursued genealogy, was faithful in all church assignments, was the most dependable person in her ward. She bore her cross well.

Friend No. 3 had a mother who took Thalidomide when she was in the womb. She was born without arms. But she was the soul of cheerfulness and determination. She learned to swim to paint to do virtually everything a normal person would do in school. Though she required help every day of her life, she tried to give something to others every day of her life. And give she did, being an inspiration to all who knew her.

Friend No. 4 was a prosperous professional. Having come from a background of poverty, he was generous withall, enjoying giving his wealth to others that they also might be well off. Then one of his business partners embezzled hundreds of thousands of dollars and left him in virtual ruin. He picked up the pieces, held his firm together with sheer grit and a good name, and gradually brought things back from the brink of disaster. The irony of it was that the man who wounded him so badly had done the same thing once before. But the embezzler had asked forgiveness and proclaimed repentance in the first instance. So he was trusted again and became a cross to be borne.

Friend No. 5 was a superb academician and a top university administrator with a national reputation. A faithful Latter-day Saint, he was a kindly mentor to budding professors and anxious leaders. As he approached the climax of his career, he was an obvious choice for the position of chancellor in the university system of which he was a part. But he was passed over and a man with but a fraction of his ability was selected for the position. Patiently he watched the new man struggle, and patiently he tended to his own professional labors, not complaining once. For his trust was in the Savior, not in the honors of men.

Friend No. 6 was the soul of friendliness—outgoing, warm generous in every way. He married a beautiful young woman and they were blessed with four handsome, intelligent children. Oh how he loved his family. But his wife was frigid. After the birth of the last child she refused to let him touch her ever again. He could have divorced her. He felt it was not right to do so. So he suffered his cross, year after year of complete denial of physical affection. He felt it was right simply to bear the cross, to give all the love he could both to his wife and to his children.

Friend No. 7 discovered in his childhood that he was not like other boys. He did not know why, and did not want it to be so, but he could only like and love men. As he became a teenager and it came time to date, he was horrified at the prospect. He was homosexual and dating a girl was equivalent to hell for him. So he did not date. But he knew he was in trouble. He went to his priesthood leaders for help, but very little was forthcoming: they simply did not know what to do to help him. Eventually he came into contact with one of the General Authorities of the Church. This kind man spent hours and hours with him helping and encouraging him. In all of his wild twisting and turnings to shake off this malady, he did not give in to his sexual desires to have physical sexual relations a man. Determined to fulfill the Savior’s pattern, he married and he and his wife raised a fine family. He held many church positions, helped many people, and sought valiantly to proclaim the testimony of Christ.

Friend No. 8 was born to goodly parents, and she was a bright precocious youngster, head of her class all through school, fine athlete, devout Latter-day Saint. Her great goal in life was to have twelve children and to teach every one of them the love of the Savior. But she was six foot three inches tall and very intelligent. Though she longed to marry, she was never once courted. So she lived her life in loneliness, taking her students in school and church as her children, hoping in the savior that in some other world she might be fulfilled.

Friend No. 9 was abandoned by his parents when he was ten years old. They were poor and he was told to go out on his own. With only the clothing on his back, he left home, never to see his parents again. He ate out of garbage cans, slept on rooftops in the mild climate of his hometown. And he went to school every day! He studied hard, though that was hard on an empty stomach. He finally found work and someone who would let him sleep on their floor in the winter. He worked his way through high school, then through college, and became a top government engineer. He married, had a fine family, and how he loved those children. He forgave his parents, found and helped his brothers and sisters, and did great good with his life.

Friend No. 10 had a fine professional career and a model family. Then his wife became ill. The illness was diagnosed as multiple sclerosis. She progressively was debilitated, first losing her strength, then her sight, then the ability to move. For seven years she lay bedridden, and her husband personally cared for her when he was home. He had to turn her in bed often to avoid bedsores and muscle spasms for every night of those seven years. But he did not complain, nor let on that he had lost any sleep. He was attentive and loving, loved his children, and did what was right, bearing his cross in Christ.

Our Savior is trying to exalt each of us, to make us equal with himself in purity, wisdom, knowledge and power. But before he can bestow these blessings upon us we must show that we can be trusted. The way, the only way which we can demonstrated that is to do what he did: to take the cross which Father gives to each of us and bear it, at the same time keeping all of Father’s commandments, our lives are not given to us for pleasure. There is pleasure in living, but to live for the pleasure is to show that we cannot be trusted with the riches of eternity. But if we can be as little children, meek, submissive, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all that which Father sees fit to inflict upon us, then we prove ourselves trustworthy.

There is a plan of salvation. The plan provides the opportunity for each child of Father to prove that he or she is trustworthy. The plan is that each person must deny himself or herself, that is, each must not seek first to please himself or herself, but each must sacrifice personal desires to do Father’s will, to bring to pass his righteousness. This sacrifice involves taking up our personal cross, and while bearing it, do everything within our powerto keep every commandment of God. This means for each of us to be an exemplary Latter-day Saint no matter what troubles or problems we might be called upon to bear.

This is not to say that a Latter-day Saint is masochistic. We do not self-inflict pain and suffering to show our devotion. It is not that easy. What we must do is take the cross assigned to us and bear it with faith in Christ. Sometimes the cross will be lifted by Father: the disease may go into remission, fortunes may change, love might come to the forlorn. But these reprieves are Father’s doing. We do not bear our cross just because Father will soon lift it from us, for he might not. We do not assign our own cross and we should not reject our own cross, just as in the Church we do not seek callings from the Lord nor do we reject them. If a cross is not assigned by Father, we need not bear it. But if it does come from him, and we can know this through the Holy Spirit, then bear it we must or we cannot be saved.

There are two kinds of burdens we humans bear. One kind is a cross: a handicap in life assigned to us by Father which we must bear while keeping the commandments to demonstrate that we love God with all of our heart, might, mind and strength. The other kind of burden is suffering for our own sins, the just consequences of our own choice to sin. Part of being intelligent is not to mix these two, not to confuse crosses with consequences.

To repent is to deny ourselves (to deny the lusts of the flesh). That helps to stem consequences, but does not remove crosses. The Savior’s atonement can remove the eternal suffering of the consequences of sin, but only after repentance. (Even after repentance, we sometimes must continue to suffer in mortality for the consequences of our sins.) To be really intelligent is to bear both patiently and humbly, letting both crosses and consequences be constant reminders to remember the Savior and to repent, thus to put ourselves firmly in the narrow way of total obedience to his commandments until we have endured to the end.

Mortal life is a handicap race. We do not race against each other. Indeed, we can greatly help one another. We race against time, to see if we can learn to keep every one of Father’s commandments while carrying our individual crosses and the burdens of our own sinning before our mortal probation expires. This race is not to the swift. Victory comes only to the humble children of God who are willing to bear all things Father sees fit to inflict upon them.

For any who are tempted to think that this race is too much to bear, the voice of the Master is heard:

“Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me for I am meek and lowly in heart and ye shall find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” (Matthew 11:28–30)

And again:

“He that will not take up his cross and follow me, and keep my commandments, the same shall not be saved.” (D&C 56:2)