Mormon Thinking

Why I Decided to Become a Mormon - Part Nine: Back to Church (for good)

2011-07-04T19:22:00.000+03:00

After making the dreaded promise to attend church, I did. And it wasn’t that bad. It was, of course, the first time in several years that I had actually attended religious services. And to be honest, there was nothing that took me by surprise. In fact, it was almost exactly as I remembered it. I sat as one face among many in the congregation, not really listening as the various ward members shared their prepared sermons. I was reminded all too well of my experiences in Sunday school, as I watched the frustrated teacher trying to capture the imagination of uninterested youth.

The truth was, I really only went to make good on my promise. At this point, I still had no desire to truly learn. I felt I had already gone through that process in seminary and in my previous years of church attendance as a child. That boat had come and gone, and I was no longer interested. Moreover, I was super conscious about giving the false impression to anybody that I was “back for good.” So, I tried to remain as neutral and nonchalant as possible when I was asked what I thought about church.

Attending church this one time inevitably led to attendance on subsequent Sundays. I had been afraid this would happen, but I realized I had brought it upon myself by agreeing to attend in the first place. At first I held strong in my neutrality and successfully maintained my status as an uninterested observer. However, despite these initial feelings, being in church had the inevitable effect of awaking some of those now dormant thoughts I had previously entertained regarding the purpose of life and religion in general. It simply was a topic that I found too fascinating to ignore.

While I still shared little in common with these Mormons regarding beliefs, for the first time, I began to analyze the Church as an institution. It became clear to me that for many the Church was a priceless asset, both in terms of temporal benefits and as a sense of spirituality and purpose in life. I began consider whether I felt the Church might actually offer anything of value to me.

I began to think particularly about the experience of missionaries. Many of my friends were beginning to leave to spend two years on missions throughout the various nations of the world. While I was still utterly opposed to the idea of proselytizing one’s religion, my love for all things international sparked feelings of envy as I watched my friends going off to foreign countries and learning new languages. I began to recognize how much value one could gain from such a trying experience. I even toyed with the idea of using the missionary program as a means of satisfying my personal quest for international adventure for the mere sake of the experience. But of course, these thoughts were not very serious.

As summer came, I prepared to enter my senior year of high school. I had attended church for several weeks in a row, but only as a guest of my friend in her home congregation. I was tremendously conscious of being seen as someone attending church only to impress a girl. Perhaps my paranoia was unfounded, but at the time, it seemed that everybody was viewing my church attendance with a healthy dose of suspicion.

At one point, something happened in our relationship that caused this complex to flare. I realized that I stood at an important turning point in my life. With only one year of high school remaining, my life was about to go through a number of significant changes, whether religion was in the picture or not. I longed to know where I was going. Seeing the next year as an opportunity to “find myself” in this way, I thought I could use it to really search for answers to some of my pressing questions, including those that had arisen regarding the doctrines of Mormonism.

I therefore determined that I would no longer attend church with my friend. I informed her of this decision, though I no longer recall how she reacted. I also made another important decision. I decided that I would continue attending church – on my own, and in a different congregation closer to my home.

I developed a strong desire to learn for myself what I really believed, and to pass a more educated judgment on the gospel believed by members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There was something there, and I would find out what it was.

Why I Decided to Become a Mormon - Part Eight: Wading in the Water

2011-06-20T04:17:00.002+03:00

When I was sixteen years old, to the surprise of everyone (most especially myself), I went to church. It was a big change for me, one I had been absolutely certain I would never make. But, through the serendipity of a series of seemingly unremarkable events, I was led down a path I never expected.

Much of this began when I met a girl on the track team. At this time, I had largely given up on finding a non-Mormon girl in my school, but was surprised when after a few weeks she began to show interest in me. I didn’t know if she was a Mormon or not. Common sense told me that she was, but I held onto hope that perhaps I had been lucky enough to actually find a non-Mormon girl I could date.

I couldn’t just ask her if she was a Mormon. Well, I probably could have, but good form told me that such a question was rude. And, I was probably afraid of what the answer would inevitably be.

Since asking “the question” was out of the picture, I took a more clandestine approach to remedy this lack of vital intelligence. Casual espionage. As registration for new school term took place, I nonchalantly asked if I could see her schedule. I knew this subtle technique would provide me with all the information I needed to know. And sure enough, there it was. Seminary! She was, to my great disappointment, a Mormon after all.

I was frustrated, but not surprised. I wasn’t sure how to react to my heartbreaking discovery. So, I did what any normal, mature sixteen-year-old would do. I began to make fun of her. “Seminary!?” I said. “Why would you want to take that? It’s full of Mormons!”

At first she looked like she was ready to turn around and run. It was clear that she didn’t know what to do, but after a moment of dilemma flashed in her eyes, a sort of calm passed over her. I don’t remember exactly how she responded, but she casually addressed the topic, as if probing to see how serious I was. I don’t know how much she already knew about my lack of religious beliefs.

For whatever reason, her learning of my secular and agnostic beliefs didn’t scare her away. Perhaps she saw me as a missionary opportunity, a chance to influence me to become a church member.

My initial reaction was to drop it. I knew that if I pursued any type of relationship, religion would inevitably become a major sticking point. However, I really did like her, and was impressed by her initial reaction to me. And who knew? Maybe I would ultimately be the successful “missionary,” helping her to see that she didn’t need religion in her life.

As expected, it wasn’t long before the Mormon issue came to a head. We had a number of conversations. They weren’t especially deep, but they were definitely enough to push a panic button or two. On more than one occasion, these conversations were enough to scare her away from me for a few days. But for whatever reason, she kept coming back. Either she really liked me, or the desire to be a positive religious influence on me won out over her fear of me corrupting her.

As her comfort level regarding religious conversations raised, she eventually asked me the dreaded question. Would go to church with her? Her rationale was that if I really wanted to take an objective view on religion, I needed to come and learn for myself what it was all about. I tried to explain that I had already been exposed to the Church, and therefore had already gone through this process. But she insisted otherwise, and continued to press.

Luckily, I was armed with a great excuse, as my father and I were already planning to attend a Sunday afternoon Utah Jazz game that particular weekend. So I informed her that I wouldn’t be able to join her at church. To soften the blow, I loosely agreed to attend church with her another time.

A few weeks later, she mustered the courage to ask again. Without any excuse, and held by my earlier agreement, I reluctantly told her I would go. However, during the week, I was thrilled to learn that my father had again obtained tickets to a Sunday game! I felt I had dodged a major bullet.

When I informed her that I wouldn’t be able to go to church after all, I could easily see the sadness that came over her. Compassion touched me. I may have been a heathen, but I was still human. And so, taking a deep breath, I did something I was sure I would regret. I promised that I would attend church with her the following week.

Why I Decided to Become a Mormon - Part Seven: A Few More Years before Returning

2011-05-09T00:04:00.000+03:00

Despite the feelings I felt that day in seminary, I ended up deciding that the feelings were just some strange psychological occurrence within my own mind, and that they could not come from a divine, external source. Clinging to this assumption, I pushed these experiences from my memory as best as I could, and sought to continue my previously-chosen, religionless life.

I didn’t repeat seminary in the 10th grade. By that point there were far more classes to choose from. Though I maintained an interest in religion, I developed even stronger interests in other topics. I particularly enjoyed foreign languages, and chose to study German, which quickly became my favorite course. I didn’t realize at the time how large of a role foreign languages would one day figure into my life.

As an aside, I remember one particular instance, when I was discussing foreign languages with a classmate. She mentioned she had enrolled in a new internet-based Russian course. I remember a distinct thought suddenly penetrating my mind: “You need to learn Russian.” I subsequently forgot about the experience, though years later I, one day, unexpectedly recalled the interchange while I was serving as a missionary in Russia.

It was in high school that many of my classmates were beginning to really uncover their religious identity. I found this process fascinating to observe. Some of them clearly struggled, vacillating back and forth between the spiritual and secular worlds. Many completely shed their attachment to religion during the week, whether or not they continued to attend church on Sundays with their parents.

There were also many others who obtained distinct confidence in their religion. While such students were yet the minority, more and more of them began to demonstrate a clear independence in their personal beliefs. These students seemed happier, and had little difficulty standing apart from the swirling demands of popularity and recognition that often seem so necessary to high school students.

It was among these individuals, those most unfettered by their perception in the eyes of others, that I was most often confronted about my own religious beliefs. One of my friends was a very devout Mormon, and he and I would often spend time together, whether skiing or participating in other activities. To his credit, he was very polite about my own religious beliefs. He never talked directly about religion or preached to me, but I felt that he perhaps wanted to.

Because I had failed to re-enroll in seminary, I began to get frequent calls from seminary teachers and other students inviting me to return. One night, a group of students even came to my door, members of the “Seminary Council,”* who personally challenged me to come back to seminary. I politely declined.

During this period of time, I also began to recognize what living in a heavily Mormon community meant for me. I would, like it or not, be affected by Mormon culture. Like all youth during this stage in life, young members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints begin to give significant contemplation toward the issue of dating and romantic relationships. Despite my opposing religious beliefs, I was physically no different than any of my Mormon peers. Naturally, I developed similar interests in members of the opposite sex. I began to realize, however, that Mormon standards for dating and relationships** would most certainly affect my own social life. There was nothing I could do to change that.

There came a point in time when most of my friends began to “date.” I was left desirous to join in, and by age 15, I was eager to begin. Age 16, the age Mormon youth are taught they should wait for before dating, had no special significance in my own moral codes. But as I began to ask girls to go out with me, I was refused on several occasions, and told that such refusal was because of my age.***

I felt like it was discrimination, and used this as fuel to further justify my own reasons for not believing that there was any validity in what church members claimed to believe. I thought that perhaps I would get lucky, and find that one non-Mormon girl who would be perfect for me. But these were nothing more than fantasies. The reality was that the types of girls I had any interest in were almost always devoted Latter-day Saints. I started to look forward to college with great enthusiasm. I could last a few more years, couldn’t I?

* In places where Latter-day Saint students are permitted to take seminary classes through release time, there is often a student leadership council developed among the seniors. These individuals are often chosen by the seminary instructors, and tend to represent those individuals which the instructors feel best represent commitment to the gospel, and who will subsequently set a strong example for their peers.

** Mormon youth are counseled not to date before age 16. They are also counseled not to engage in exclusive romantic relationships while still in high school. For more information, see the brochure, “For the Strength of Youth.”

*** At least this is what I was told. I fully accept the reality that they may have been using this as an excuse.

Changes to Mormon Thinking

2011-05-01T22:23:00.002+03:00

Dear Readers,

For the past several months, I have been considering how I can "revive" Mormon Thinking. When I first started, I was in the Peace Corps, had a lot of free time on my hands, and wasn't a father. Now, with a full-time job and family responsibilities, I have found it difficult to make the time necessary to write articles for the blog.

In addition, I've long considered that I would like to have a more clearly defined purpose to my writing. In the early days of writing, I would jump from topic to topic, without much of a sense of organization and order.

Therefore, I've decided to take a closer look at what I am trying to do with Mormon Thinking. I've tried to define this more clearly in the "Objective of Mormon Thinking" tab you can find at the top of this page.

I'd like to look at Mormonism from a more doctrinal point of view. While discussing culture, history, social issues, and the relationship between Mormonism and politics can be fun and interesting, I don't feel I was necessarily adding anything new or of value with these posts. There are plenty of other Mormon blogs out there with that objective.

However, I have been engaged in a number of spiritual conversations lately which have led me to look at Mormon beliefs and doctrines from a slightly different perspective. First of all, I have many of my friends, family members, and acquaintances are non-religious, agnostic, or even avowed atheists. Trying to explain to them what I believe and why I believe in it is often quite difficult, especially when I am not particularly accustomed to explaining it from the context from which they are coming.

Likewise, I have found similar experiences when talking to friends, family members, and acquaintances who are believers from the various Christian denominations and belief systems of the world. This includes what I generally classify as the "traditional Christians" (Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and even many of the more traditional and long-established protestant denominations), as well as some what I call the "Neo-Cultural Christians" which include many of the evangelical or "born-again" branches of Christianity.

I have found these discussions to be fascinating, and it not only has helped me to learn about other people and how they come to their own beliefs, it has helped me take a closer look at my own process of coming to develop faith in the doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Based on these experiences, I’ve developed some ideas of how I might be able to provide something I feel can add value. I plan to systematically write articles explaining my beliefs in the fundamental doctrines and principles of Mormonism, and how I came to believe in these things.

And, in addition to simply talking about what we Mormons believe, I will make an attempt to explain what these beliefs mean to one coming from either a non-religious or a Christian worldview. I will seek to answer some of the common questions and doubts that come up when seeking to understand the doctrines and principles of Mormonism.

I should say from the beginning that I don't expect this to be either an "apologist" blog, or a place to try and debate controversial issues. Therefore, if you are interested in seeing fireworks and arguments, this isn't going to be the place for you. I am not seeking to prove one way of thinking over another. Simply, I will seek to explain why I, and many others like me, have come to believe what we do, and explain it in a way that (hopefully) makes sense to another person coming from a non-Mormon set of views.

So there you have it. These changes are still in the adjustment phase. It may take a few months before I am able to organize myself in such a way that actually will allow me to make regular contributions to the blog. In the meantime, however, I would very interested in receiving your feedback. Please let me know how you feel about this new approach to Mormon Thinking, how I might improve upon it, organize it, etc.

Thank you!!

Why I Decided to Become a Mormon - Part Six: 9th Grade Seminary

2011-04-03T21:40:00.001+03:00

For members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the religious education of youth is a topic which taken very seriously. For those of high school age, typically consisting of grades 9-12 in the United States, a program called “Seminary” exists.

In most places in the world, seminary classes take place in the wee hours of the morning before school begins, or as part of an after school program. Typically, classes are held daily, though in cases where distance makes daily gatherings excessively burdensome, they are held only once or twice per week.

In Utah and other communities with large Mormon populations, school districts offer what is known as “release time,” in which students are permitted to leave their campus in order to attend these religious education courses during the school day, instead of waking up early or clogging their after-school schedules. Seminary buildings are often built adjacent to high schools in order to preserve the separation of church and state.

Growing up in a Mormon community, seminary was taken by most of my peers. However, as high school approached, I had no inclination to enroll myself. As I sat down with a counselor to register for my 9th grade classes, he, assuming I would be taking seminary like most of my Mormon classmates, asked: “I suppose you will want to take seminary as well?”

“No,” I said curtly, throwing him off guard. I offered no explanation, and he appeared on the verge of asking why. But suddenly, he seemed to realize that he was representing the school and not the Church at the time, and that so asking would be inappropriate.

I began my 9th grade school year with a variety of classes. However, a few weeks into my first term, I decided that I no longer wished to participate in the school band. I don’t really remember the precise reasons behind my decision to quit. Likely, my adolescent cravings for popularity and acceptance, coupled with the reputation band members held of being “dorks,” pushed me to make the change.

Leaving the band left holes in my schedule that needed to be filled. In our school district, 9th grade was separate from the rest of the high school, and in terms of curriculum, our choices were extremely limited. The only way to fill my schedule was to opt for “release time” during this hour, joining seminary for two consecutive terms.

And so I began my adolescent religious education, despite my current disassociation from the Church. My parents were not opposed to my taking seminary, though I remember on several occasions telling them what I had learned. This often led to discussions of whether the content fed to us was true or not. Though unbelievers, my parents had a sound understanding of Mormon doctrine, often surpassing that of most active church members.

These discussions taught me the art of skepticism, in which nothing should be taken literally for face value. As I considered these things more and more, my already active thought process regarding religion greatly expanded, at times leaving me to believe that it would be impossible to actually define and identify “truth.”

As the year went on, seminary involved reading the scriptures, watching videos, and listening to the lectures prepared by the instructors. Some lessons felt profound, while others did not, leaving me with a decidedly neutral opinion as to the value of seminary. But still, my spiritual pondering did not cease. Many a night I would lay in bed, unable to sleep, mind alert, wondering if perhaps there was something that I was missing.

I even made attempts to pray. Sometimes I asked God to show me a sign or send me a vision to know if it was all real, assuring Him that if it was, I would change my life to comply with His laws. I didn’t really believe I would receive an answer, but a few times I actually remember frightening myself, fearing that I actually would receive a response. My lack of belief was coupled with a sincere hope that I was actually right, and that no God heard my prayers.

But, another part of me did want to discover something new, as was demonstrated by my attempts at prayer in the first place. I hadn’t the faintest idea what I was actually looking for, but I carried a deep desire for wisdom, or perhaps, to be seen and numbered among the wise. So I sought for truth, assuming it was somewhere, out there, to be found.

At the time, I received no answers to my prayers. I came to the conclusion that I was searching in the wrong place for wisdom. I made the decision that I would not repeat seminary in the following year, and that my brief foray with religious education would come to an end.

The end of the term came, and I sat in what I had predetermined to be my last day of seminary. The teacher announced that for our final class, we would be hold a “testimony meeting,” that is, all participants were encouraged to stand before their peers and express their belief in the gospel of Jesus Christ.

I was curious to see how my classmates dealt with this exercise. Since I had no testimony, I had no intention of sharing my own. The hour was mine to sit and observe ninth graders nervously deal with their public speaking fears. As I sat in the back and listened to other students give fairly standard testimonies, my attention waned. However, at one point, a young acquaintance of mine stood up to bear his testimony.

He was a nice guy, a kind of country type, not incredibly articulate or outspoken. I respected him for his kindness and modesty. To say the least, he was pretty much your average Cache Valley cowboy. He stood up, and at once I noticed that his testimony was very different than those of the others.

He did not give the impression of standing up out of habit or out of some desire to follow the crowd. I could tell at once that he had an unmistakable sincerity about him. There was something that he truly wanted to share. I watched his eyes dart back and forth, perhaps as he searched his mind for the vocabulary necessary to share his feelings.

Suddenly, as soon as he spoke, he began to weep. It wasn’t something completely abnormal. After all, I had witnessed others crying in church meetings when I was a child. But here was a kid my age, at an age where the pressures of ego and popularity were swarming around us, and he could not withhold his own emotion as he expressed his simple feelings concerning his religion.

Ironically I don’t remember anything he said. What I do remember unmistakably, however, was something that concurrently happened to me. During the midst of his simple testimony, I felt something changing within me, like an intrinsic pressure that was stronger than anything I had ever felt before.

It wasn’t a physical sensation. It felt as if I had suddenly and seamlessly become an inhabitant of some unseen spiritual dimension. I felt sensations around me, strong and precise. The world seemed to slow down, and my rapid thoughts cleared away, leaving a pure and clear mental canvas. As the boy continued to speak, I could no longer hear him. At peace, I felt nothing aside from this strong emotional blanket which continued to wrap around me tighter.

It felt good – in fact, it felt wonderful. It was at this moment when I recall very distinctly in my head hearing my own voice repeat this question over and over again: “How can this not be true?” Though in my own voice, it didn’t feel as if it were coming from me. Rather, I distinctly felt as if it were emanating from some external source. For what seemed like several minutes, all I could hear was the echo of these words, repeating again and again.

Suddenly, I was shocked back to reality. The feeling was gone, and it was quickly replaced by a surge of utter panic. I knew that I had touched the wisdom I had long sought, in some unknown and incomprehensible way. And that is precisely what I feared. After all, it seemed to be in direct opposition to the decisions that I had already made.

Within my own mind, I began to argue, right then and there. One side boldly declared that I had indeed discovered a real pearl of wisdom, while the other side insisted that it was nothing more than some strange psychological reaction within me. As the argument raged on, a wave of questions began to inundate my consciousness. Did this mean I had to start going to church again? Did it mean that the gospel of Jesus Christ was true? Did it mean I was just a pubescent kid with my pituitary gland squirting all sorts of crazy ideas in the form of religious chemicals on various parts of my brain?

I truly feared that there was more to these feelings than pious hormones. Such a discovery would mean completely restructuring my entire way of thinking. I didn’t want to do this, since after all, I felt had been perfectly sane and normal up until this point. But I couldn’t stop those words from repeating in my head. I knew that something had occurred, and that something significant had changed within me.

For the remainder of the class, I sat and tried to reason with these feelings. The teacher stood up after all the students who had desired to express their feeling had done so. He then proceeded to share his own testimony, though not of the Church specifically. He shared his feelings concerning us as students, going through each class member one-by-one and saying what he felt he had seen in us as individuals.

My emotional battle still raged as he went through every class member. In the back corner, I was one of the final students to be spiritually analyzed. He looked at me squarely, and feelings of both excitement and dread crushed me in anticipation for what he would say. Inside of me, I could feel what I knew he would say, I just did not know what the words were that could express that feeling.

What he said seemed to confirm exactly what I felt. He claimed that he had personally witnessed my conversion to the gospel of Jesus Christ. I felt myself smiling stupidly, despite the confusion within me. Was his statement just a cliché, or was he referring to something that had truly just happened to me? Could he have possible seen the feelings I had felt? The answers remain unknown to this day.

I believe this to be the first time I recognizably received a witness of truth directly through the Holy Ghost. In the intervening years, this event stands out as one of the key turning points that contributed to my eventual decision to become a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Why I Decided to Become a Mormon - Part Five: Separation of Church and Nils

2011-03-12T22:12:00.002+02:00

Once I decided that I no longer desired to be affiliated with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I made an effort to separate myself from the Church. The closest connection I had to the Church was playing for the church basketball team during the winter months.

I wanted others to see me as being “outside” the Church. For whatever reason (likely a narcissistic desire for attention) I have always enjoyed feeling like the minority. Perhaps this is why I have enjoyed living abroad. In a very non-diverse, nearly 100% Mormon community, being the kid who didn’t go to Church and wasn’t afraid to admit it made me different.

Ironically, despite my public separation from Mormonism, it was during this period away from the Church that I sincerely began to really ponder religion in my own life; not simply Mormonism in particular, but the big questions about life. Who am I? Who are we? Why are we here? What does it mean?

Most of my religious knowledge was based in Mormonism, though I began to develop beliefs that such specific dogmas, particularly those based on extraordinary stories recounted in scripture, were largely fantasy, if not altogether ridiculous. Other religions were no different than Mormonism in this regard. I didn’t believe that Joseph Smith had experienced all that he claimed, but I accepted that no less than say, the stories of Noah, Adam and Eve, or the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

But thoughts like these didn’t dominate my mental exercises. I spent a lot more time trying to discern and understand the behaviors of others. With my peers beginning to discover their own faith around me, some more so than others, I was faced with the idea of explaining to myself why some believed so fervently, others so latently, and others who went out of their way to counter-act the dominant faith.

I was asked by others on many occasions to come to church. Though I hated confronting the awkwardness of telling them no, I relished the fact that it gave me an opportunity to show how I was different in some way. Beyond just telling them no, I would give them a reason why I chose not to go to church. They weren’t based on sophisticated anti-religious arguments, and they were never blatantly negative or anti-Mormon, but they were enough to kill any assumptions my peers might have had about the way all others ought to view religion, and they would seldom invite me to church again.

Other thoughts concerning religion would frequently cross my mind. While I wasn’t sure I believed in the existence of God, I thought that certainly there had to be something beyond this life. How could a person die and have that energy, which constitutes their life, suddenly cease to exist? I wasn’t sure what I thought, but I believed that something of who we are would continue to exist forever.

Another frequent topic of thought involved making plans for what I thought could eventually be my own “religion” when I got older. In my mind, it consisted of a group of friends getting together once a week or so, and discussing the needs of others in the world or the community, something akin to the philosophical societies we often read about from the youths of great thinkers, such as Ben Franklin and his Junto.

According to imagined rules of my future religion, the group would gather, discuss, and plan in an organized fashion. The plans would be flawless, and implementation would go perfectly. It would not be necessary to add God in the picture, though a belief in a supreme being would be something left to the members of the society to decide. There would be very little theology, even minimal philosophy, but more social interaction, problem solving, and positive personal change to the individual, the group, and the surrounding community. To me, this is what I thought "organized religion" should be.

In subsequent years I have actually had the privilege to attend groups which are similar to what I had imagined in my youth. Unfortunately, I have been largely unimpressed. Most of what I have seen in such groups involve young people who gather, complain about what they see wrong with their society, and then congratulate one another on being smarter than the rest in their community, while never actually getting around to doing anything substantial.

Very little real structure accompanied these imaginations, but they did exist. It was an ongoing battle between idealism and realism with the meaning of life thrown into the mix. Perhaps those very thoughts were some of the first seeds that eventually led to my choice of a career in international development, hoping to work together with others to solve the problems of the world by implementing working solutions. Though I failed to realize even a fraction of the magnitude of what the world really held at the time, all the same, it felt right. To me, it felt “righteous.”

All in all, this was a time in my life where I was left with a complete lack of desire to participate in any existing organized religion. In fact, I honestly believed that the time was coming when organized religion, in the traditional sense, would wholly cease to exist on the earth, and that we would be completely content to rely on our own selves and strengths to answer the questions before us.

I rarely discussed these ideas with others, and when I did, it was very cautiously, more speculative than authoritative. I didn’t realize at the time that there were many out there who also held these same types of views. While subsequent life experiences have obviously altered these views, I feel I understand quite well how many are led to believe that God does not exist and how organized religion should be seen as a negative byproduct of humanity. The arguments are quite convincing, and on the surface, seem completely logical.

Nevertheless, I believe going through this line of thinking eventually helped me approach religion in a much more honest and straightforward way as I went through the experiences which I cumulatively view as my conversion to Mormonism.

Why I Decided to Become a Mormon - Part Four: Family Exodus and Early Thoughts on Missionary Work

2011-03-06T04:52:00.002+02:00

It wasn’t long after I turned twelve that my family completely ceased all participation in church activities. No sudden or abrupt change took place, but the transition seemed to occur over a relatively short period of time. However, I recall not being surprised. I don’t remember why I felt this way, but it had seemed to me that our retirement from the Church was an inevitability that was one day bound to occur.

My family didn’t all leave together, but rather, seemed to slip away one at a time. It came to the point where only my mother and I continued to attend meetings. She was a teacher for the young women, which required her presence each Sunday. Why I continued to attend church with her remains a mystery to me. I knew I didn’t have to go, but for reasons unknown, I felt the need to be present.

Eventually, the day came when my mother also stopped attending church. There were no family announcements, nor was any final consensus reached. It happened naturally. In the years since, I have held numerous conversations about this topic with my family members, attempting to better understand the causes of our exodus. I feel I have learned much, but I won’t presume to explain their reasoning here. For many, leaving the Church is a deeply personal decision. At times and for some, this decision can even be as hard as the decision to join the Church is for others. Sharing such personal decisions is an act best left to the actual decision-maker.

Even after my mother stopped attending church, I continued to go alone, though this only lasted a few weeks. While my parents still were willing to drive me to the church house on Sunday mornings, I soon followed suit, and officially became an “inactive”* member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

At the time, I really didn’t understand how profound the decision I was making truly was, and how much it would ultimately affect my life. In subsequent years I have strained my thoughts, trying to recall my feelings and sentiments of the time, curious to be able to better understand my own personal mental and spiritual development. In truth, this time of my life is rather hazy in my memory, though a few scattered recollections remain.

I remember that there was something that I actually did like something about church, even beyond the social benefits. I actually liked learning and thinking about things of a spiritual nature.

I never received what one might call “spiritual insights,” and I still gave my Sunday School instructors a hard time. But, despite my façade of smart-mouthed comments, I really did pay attention to the information we were fed. I would analyze it in my head, accepting what I thought made sense, discarding what I thought was meaningless, and remaining neutral on a number of topics. I began, probably for the first time in my life, to create and form my own personal opinions regarding God, religion, life, the universe, and everything.

It should be noted, however, that just because I enjoyed learning about these things didn’t mean I agreed with them. Pertaining to one topic in particular, I developed a rather strong opinion. This topic was one that was increasingly being put before the young men in church. Missionary service.**

As a younger child, I looked forward with great anticipation to the day when I could go on a mission. At one point I remember telling my grandparents that I wanted to go on five missions – India, Africa, Australia, South America, and one more that I have since forgotten. These choices had nothing to do with any personal desire to share the gospel with the people in these places. Rather, they spawned from my absolute fascination with the tales my grandparents would tell me of their travels to these exotic corners of the world. I really liked animals at the time, and it seemed that going on a mission would be as good an opportunity as any other to see wildlife.

But as I verged on adolescence, my thoughts on missionary work changed drastically. On one occasion, a church instructor asked members of my class to indicate, by raising their hands, who was planning on going on a mission. I was the only one who defiantly did not to raise my hand. When my leader asked why I had not, I told him the truth. “I don’t want to go on a mission.” Seeing that it was an option, a couple other young men lowered their hands to join me.

The truth was, by this time, I considered the idea of representing the Church as a missionary was one of the most ridiculous concepts imaginable. Why would I want to sacrifice two prime years of my life to talk to people about, of all things, religion? Could they not come and find out that information on their own if they were interested? Could it not be possible that they were perfectly happy in their lives, and didn’t need my brand of religion to make them happy? Such were my thoughts of the time.

Perhaps the instructor thought I was just an annoying kid ruining his lesson plan, but I was being honest. It was something I had decided for myself. I would never serve as a missionary. Not a chance.

Oh how things would change. But for the time being, I was separated from the Church, happy to carry on with my new life, void of religion, and void of Mormonism.

*The term “inactive” is typically used in Mormonism to denote someone who does not attend weekly church services or otherwise participate in church-related activities.

**At the age of 19, all Mormon men are taught that they have the responsibility to serve as a full-time missionary for two years.

Why I Decided to Become a Mormon - Part Three: My (Mostly) Mormon Childhood

2011-02-28T01:59:00.004+02:00

Growing up, as far as I can remember, there were only Mormons in the world. I remember learning in school that there were far more Catholics, Muslims, Hindus, and others in the world than Mormons. But still, as a young child it was difficult to actually interpret this information. Some of my friends were Mormons, and others weren’t, though I cannot recall ever categorizing my friends as “Mormon” or “Non-Mormon.” People were people, and religion meant little in how I interpreted their identity.

Like most Mormon children, I was baptized at the age of eight by my father. I remember the baptism quite visibly, being concerned about getting my baptismal clothes wet, especially the white socks I was wearing. I remember being immersed in the water, and being surprised at how warm the water was, just like a bath. I came out of the water, and felt my wet hair go back across my head.

A number of other children my age were also baptized on the same day. Following the ceremony, we received copies of the Book of Mormon from an older couple from the area who I did not know. They spoke to us children directly, encouraging us to look forward to our confirmation*, saying “the gift of the Holy Ghost is the best gift you will ever receive.” I had a hard time comprehending how the Holy Ghost could possibly be better than a Nintendo, which I greatly coveted at the time.

As I grew a bit older, I discovered, little by little, the subtleties and nuances of Mormon culture. I came to learn that my family was not “typical” in the sense of Mormon families in Utah. Though my family continued to participate in church activities regularly for several years during my youth, they did not participate in all aspects of what normally constitutes an “active faith.” For instance, my parents did not ever attend the temple** following the time when we were sealed as a family. Also, I recall regularly getting dressed to go skiing after church each Sunday during the winter. I did not think this was odd at all, but I remember being puzzled when my mother told me not to talk about our Sunday afternoon excursions to others from church. She explained that some might frown upon our weekly Sabbath outings. I wondered to myself: How could they feel that skiing was a bad thing?***

When I was nearly nine, my family moved to a different part of the valley, about 15 minutes away from where we had lived previously. We joined the new ward**** in our new town. The people were different, but church seemed the same. I never grew particularly close to any of the other kids my age, but I continued to attend with my mother, who regularly attended, and my other family members who attended church sporadically.

As I reached the pre-teenage years, I lost whatever childlike innocence I may have had (it is debatable if I had any to begin with) and I decisively and willingly jumped into the role of mischief maker and devil’s advocate in my Sunday School classes. To be completely honest, I felt intellectually superior to both my church peers and instructors, and disliked what I interpreted as unfairly “being treated like a child.” I found myself often being asked to leave classrooms, and hoping my mother would not find out that I caused problems. My behavior mutually reinforced the behavior of others with similar attitudes, thus rendering useless the spiritual advances made on us by frustrated instructors.

At the age of twelve, I received the Aaronic Priesthood*****, as is customary for Mormon boys. My father, who at this time attended church only periodically, preformed the ordinance. This experience became one of my first memories of actually feeling a hint of spiritual power. The manifestation was small and seemingly insignificant, but it impressed me deeply. As my father preformed the ordinance, hands on my head, he pronounced the words of a blessing, individualized and contextualized for me, yet delivered clearly, with confidence. The words which came from his mouth carried a unique essence of authority which didn’t quite seem to be what I would expect from him. It was as if my father had teamed up with some divine speech writer, together crafting a blessing specifically designed to hold profound significance for me and my life. I wondered how he had known what to say during the blessing. Truly, it had sounded like scripture, and I assumed it was something he had prepared and memorized. I asked him afterwards how he had accomplished this task, but he just shrugged and said that the words simply came to him as he gave the blessing.

* The ordinance of confirmation is performed in conjunction with baptism. One is confirmed to be a member of the church by one or more Melchizedek Priesthood holders (typically all actively participating Mormon men over the age of 18 or 19) laying their hands upon the head of the person being confirmed, and pronouncing them to be a member of the church. During the ordinance, the newly confirmed is also given “The Gift of the Holy Ghost,” which Mormons believe to be the unique blessing from God that one can have the Holy Ghost (or Holy Spirit) as a “constant companion” in life, directing the faithful members in all things.

** After receiving temple ordinances for oneself, Mormons can return to the temple and participate in the ordinances (including baptism, confirmation, sealing (Mormon temple marriage), and the “endowment” (an educational ordinance symbolically representing both the creation of the world and the spiritual progression of human beings)) as proxies for their deceased ancestors who were not Mormons during their lifetime. Mormons are encouraged to attend the temple often.

*** Mormons believe in “keeping the Sabbath day holy,” which is generally interpreted to mean that they do not engage in certain activities which are not spiritually-inclined on Sundays (or whatever day the Sabbath is recognized, which varies by local national customs). Mormons who follow this commandment typically do not engage in sporting events, entertainment, or other activities which involve spending money.

**** A “ward” is what Mormons call the congregation in which one attends Church. Wards are divided according to geography.

***** The Aaronic Priesthood is also called the “preparatory priesthood,” and it is given to Mormon boys at age twelve. It allows them to participate in certain ordinances which have a temporal (pertaining to life on earth) significance. The Melchizedek Priesthood, is considered to be for use in those things which have an eternal significance beyond this life. The priesthood is received through an ordinance which involves another priesthood holder laying their hands on the head of the new priesthood recipient, similar to confirmation, as explained above.

Why I Decided to Become a Mormon: Part Two - My Religious Pedigree

2011-02-23T03:07:00.001+02:00

Mormonism has played a role in the religious pedigree of my family. I’ve met plenty of Mormons with ancestors dating back to the American Mormon Pioneers from the mid-1800s on either side. I’ve known far more who are the first and only church members of their family, thus creating an entirely new pioneer generation.

My religious ancestry falls somewhere in between these two extremes. I do have some long lines dating back to the early days of Mormonism. These lines derive in the family of my paternal grandfather, Harold Max Bergeson, who was born just south of the Idaho border in Logan, Utah in the year 1919. His mother, Reba Miranda Butler, indeed came from a pioneer family, with her predecessors being among those who crossed the American plains in exodus of the Mormons from Illinois.

His father, Harold Ephraim Bergeson, was the grandson of another Mormon pioneer, though not one of those who were displaced within the borders of American continent. His grandfather, Niels Bergeson, the man after whom I was named, was born in Sweden, and moved to Denmark as a child. He would later convert to Mormonism as a young man, and elected to immigrate to the United States, as was customary at the time for many new converts who joined overseas. He settled in the far north of Utah, which at the time was still being settled by the first generation of American Mormons.

As such, my father came from a legacy of Mormonism. As a child he was raised according to Mormon customs, traditions, and beliefs. Because of my grandfather’s career as an officer in the U.S. Air Force, my father spent his childhood moving from place to place around the globe.

My mother, on the other hand, was not raised in a Mormon family. She grew up in South Carolina, where her family regularly attending the Episcopal Church in her youth. Growing up she knew very little, if any, about the Mormons, along with their culture that would one day profoundly impact her family life.

She and my father met in Charleston, SC, marrying some three years following their acquaintance. About three years after marriage, they gave birth to a son, Nils Radford Bergeson. At the time of my birth, my parents did not regularly participate in religious services of any kind. Nevertheless, according to the traditions of my mother’s family, I was baptized in the Episcopal Church. Likewise, according to the traditions of my father’s family, I was given a Mormon baby’s blessing by my grandfather.

Although my father had been raised as Mormon, at the time of my birth and in the years immediately following, he did not actively participate in the religion. My mother had since learned some about Mormonism, after marrying into a Mormon family. As I grew beyond infancy and into childhood, my mother felt the need to make religion part of our family life. She later explained to me that this desire came from her belief at the time that it would be the best way to help instill moral values in her children. So, she considered the options for family church attendance. To her, the best solution seemed to join her husband’s church, so she started meeting with the missionaries, and was later baptized.

In 1986 our family, which now included my younger sister, moved from South Carolina to Logan, Utah. Originally settled by Mormon pioneers, Cache Valley is now the home of approximately 100,000 people, with roughly 90% claiming membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In short, Mormonism not only dominates the culture, but affects every aspect of the life for those who live in the valley. Shortly after moving to Utah, my parents, who had begun attending church services together regularly, along with my sister and I, were sealed together as a family in the Logan Temple.*

*"Sealing" refers to the Mormon marriage ceremony which takes place in temples. Among Mormons, being sealed to both your spouse and family members is believed to offer the promise of the family living together in the afterlife.

Why I Decided to Become a Mormon - Part One: Introduction

2011-02-16T03:04:00.001+02:00

Throughout the time I have spent as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, this question has been posed to me on countless occasions: Why did you decide to become a Mormon?

While it seems like something I should be able to answer quickly and without any hesitation, whenever the question arises, I find myself asking myself the very same thing. Why DID I decide to become a Mormon? It isn’t that I find myself lacking confidence in that decision, simply that I feel I lack the proper vocabulary to provide an answer which truly does the question justice.

That fateful decision that would forever alter the very course of my life wasn’t one I made suddenly, nor was it a decision I made lightly. The decision didn’t arise out of some singular and transformative spiritual experience, though admittedly, some such experiences did indeed play a role in the conversion process.

The truth of the matter is, there is only one way I can think to answer that question. It’s about as simple of an answer as I can give. That decision was made merely because it felt like the right thing to do. In the years that have passed, I have renewed that decision over and over again, all the while gradually and consistently feeling assured and reassured that it was indeed the right thing for me to do.

The prospect of me converting to Mormonism, when compared with the ways in which I used to think and view the world, seems quite unlikely. Sometimes I still wonder how it even occurred. Yet at the same time, I can scarcely imagine who I would be, had not this life-altering decision been made.

Despite the implausible idea of me actually becoming a Mormon, I believe that one key element that made conversion possible was my tendency to think deeply and consider life and the world around me on many levels. As a youth, predominantly during the teenage years, this tendency was particularly pronounced. For as long as I can remember, a unique and resounding question has seemed echoed continuously in my mind: Who am I?

Attached to this simple yet infinitely complex query is the follow up question: For what purpose do I exist? As far as recollection can take me into the past, it seems as if nearly every waking moment of life has been spent pondering these questions. They have become as much a definition of me as anything else.

Some may ask if I feel I have discovered the answer to these questions. The only appropriate one word response I can think of is somewhat. Yes, I feel that I have, without a doubt, uncovered a number of necessary sub-answers which help build the foundation upon which these larger questions are built. But as every new revelation and answer has come, they have contributed to the constant evolution of how I see perceive the world.

Despite this habit of pondering unceasingly, I am prone to keep such thoughts inside of me. Therefore, when the question – Why did you decide to become a Mormon? – is offered, I often revert back to thought, trying to articulate the substance of the reason. Rather than sit back and meditate life away, I have decided to offer this written account as an attempt to express the knowledge and understanding I have discovered.

The following are true life stories and experiences. Some serve the purpose of providing necessary background and context. Others share significant turning points which, while at times subtle in the moment, compounded to alter the very path of life.

I attempt to offer these excerpts in a manner that expresses my recollection of these experiences as well as I am able. At the same time, I seek to be frank and open about many of the challenges and struggles that one often faces as they seek to nurture and grow individual testimony.

While everybody follows a distinct path of spiritual development, I do believe that one can find similarities in learning of the path of another. Everybody who has ever traversed the roads of life knows that even the most seemingly insignificant events can change a life completely.

Therefore, as you read the experiences I share, I hope that you will reflect upon those experiences and events which have shaped who you are. Perhaps you have asked the very questions which I posed above. Who am I? For what purpose do I exist? Maybe, we can discover some answers to these questions together.

Understanding Islam

2010-09-12T02:24:00.002+03:00

Today, per reader request, I write some about a religion other than Mormonism. With today being the 9-year anniversary of the September 11th, 2001 attacks on the United States, and with recent related controversies in the United States, including the proposed Islamic Center planned to be built near the site of the World Trade Center and the Florida pastor who had proclaimed “burn a Quran day,” I look forward to sharing thoughts on one of the most fascinating religious belief systems in the world – Islam.

A particular memory from my mission still stands out vividly in my mind. As some of you may know, I was a missionary in Russia from 2002-2004. What some of you may not know is that Islam is the second largest religion in that country, with an estimated 16 million plus Muslims living in Russia, making up about 12% of the population. Islam is considered one of Russia’s four traditional religions, along with Orthodox Christianity, Judaism, and Buddhism.

On one particular summer’s day, which happened to be our missionary preparation day, another missionary asked if I would be interested in accompanying him to an Uzbek market on the outskirts of town. It was fascinating to visit this cultural enclave of Russia, where an unfamiliar language was being spoken, and where agricultural and other products imported from Central Asia were being sold. At one end of the market stood a modest wooden Mosque. Our curiosity piqued, we ventured over to the mosque to have a look.

The mosque’s imam, a middle-aged Uzbek man in traditional Muslim dress, was very cordial, and invited us to come and sit with him on the mosque’s veranda. After taking off our shoes, we sat on the padded floor, and commenced having an enlightening discussion with the religious leader. Four or five other men, some former imams themselves, joined us, and answered our questions about their religion, including sharing experiences such as the Hajj, or Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca. They also asked us questions about our religion as well, including how we viewed Isa (Arabic name for Jesus), and the role of prophets.

Some time into our discussion, the call for prayer came. It was my first experience with a Muslim prayer call, and I remember being fascinated as one of the older men recited the prayer in Arabic in an almost song-like tone over the loudspeakers so that every corner of the market could hear.

Since that experience, I have been fortunate to have had many other which have exposed me further to Islam. I have visited Muslim countries (I haven’t yet had the opportunity to live in one yet – but I have my eye on Egypt, Jordan, and Kazakhstan), visited and admired a number of beautiful mosques, and made dozens of Muslim friends from all over the world.

What saddens me, however, is seeing the ongoing prejudice Muslims face in the United States. While I certainly share no sympathy with religious extremists of any sort, including terrorists who manipulate religion to serve their own dastardly and cowardly purposes, I can’t help but regret all the anti-Islam sentiment that I see burning bright in my home country.

This anti-Islamic fear and prejudice, like most prejudices, comes from a clear lack of understanding and exposure. It is a classic example of the “fear of the unknown.”

There are many who still believe that a majority of Muslims are anti-American, and in their hearts they support the acts of terrorism carried out against the USA and other countries by Muslim extremists. There is no notion that could be more dead wrong – period.

Often, when I see this point made by others, I hear a common response. “Have you actually read the Quran? Do you realize that it supports acts of violence against non-Muslims?”

As a matter of fact, I have read it. I read it as a missionary, wanting to gain a better understanding of the Muslims with whom I interacted on a nearly daily basis. While it is true that some passages of this book could be interpreted as such, my answer to critics is, “Could not passages of the Bible be interpreted in a similar way?”

The fact is, extremism, whether religious, anti-religious, or of any other kind, is the true evil in the world. People have tapped into extremism of all sorts in order to justify terrible actions throughout every chapter in history.

Nevertheless, we are more likely to notice extremism coming from those who do not believe like us. Would there have ever been a controversy in the building of a Christian church near the site of the Oklahoma City bombing? Why not? Did not the terrorists in that attack act based on notions of Christian extremism?

In contrast to Islam, we as Americans have all been exposed to Christianity in its true sense. The majority of us claim to be Christian, and so it is easy for us to recognize that some fringe group doing terrible things in the name of Jesus does not represent all of Christianity.

Is it not conceivable that the same principle applies to Islam? The vast majority (and when I say majority, I don’t mean like 55%, I’m talking like 99.999999999999% here) of Muslims are opposed to terrorism, and are insulted by those who take Allah’s name in vain through such acts. Yet because Muslims are still a largely hidden minority in the United States, and because most of our exposure to “Islam” through the media is either related to terrorism or turmoil in the Middle East, we have created a very false picture of what Islam is in our minds.

Rather than entertaining such a false and harmful paradigm, I encourage you all to seek a deeper understanding of what Islam actually is. You don’t have to become a Muslim or believe in everything they believe to appreciate them. But I encourage you to seek out your local Islamic community center or other means of learning. I promise you that Muslims you meet will be very happy to share their identity with you. For one, hospitality plays a very prominent role in Islamic culture. Secondly, they are the direct recipients of the negative consequences of ignorance and bigotry, so they tend to be quite eager to clear up misconceptions about who they are (does this sound like any other religious group you know of?).

I promise you, that if we as Mormons and as Americans will take a proactive role in understanding and appreciating Islam, the world will be a vastly better place. We won’t need to worry about relatively meaningless arguments such as whether an Islamic Center should be built in a certain place, or whether some pastor is acting within his first amendment rights to burn the Quran. Rather, we will recognize that all are God’s children, and that our imposing upon them a false identity based on the actions of others is wrong.

The Church's Reputation: Progress, Challenges, and Opportunity

2010-08-18T16:26:00.003+03:00

The following is an article recently released by Michael Otterson, the managing director of Public Affairs for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

In it, he discusses his views of Mormon Public Affairs in the time to come. What do you think?

August 09, 2010

During the past few years, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has navigated a period of intense public attention and scrutiny rarely seen during any other time in its history. In 2008, nationwide media attention was focused on the Mormon faith during the presidential campaign of Mitt Romney (a Mormon). A few journalists named the period "The Mormon Moment." For a year or more, media attention far exceeded even the considerable interest generated during the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.

That particular Romney-specific "Mormon Moment" came and went (although it could easily resurface if the former Massachusetts governor decides to run for the White House again). But beyond politics, those of us who interact daily with the news media and other opinion leaders sense a more fundamental and long-term shift in public fascination with Mormons.

Several factors contribute to this. Certainly the Church has reached a size, especially in the United States and some parts of Latin America, that prompts people to pay attention. While remaining distinctive as to beliefs, as the fourth largest church in the U.S. it has become an integrated part of American religious life. In 2005, Newsweek profiled a number of prominent Latter-day Saints from the arts, industry, and other fields, suggesting that Mormons are everywhere. A month ago, the prestigious British newspaper, the Financial Times, devoted considerable space to the fact that Mormons seemingly crop up regularly -- and are much sought after -- at the top of the business world, partly due to the discipline, language skills, and reputation for honesty that arises from missionary experiences. Then again, the Church's strong stance on such moral issues as defending traditional marriage has earned it substantial praise from other churches as well as criticism from its detractors. Either way, Mormons are becoming harder to ignore. Other faith groups, including Catholics, Jews and Muslims, have already experienced the pluses and minuses of growing out of obscurity to a place prominent in the public's mind. Now it's the Mormons' turn.

Some commentators have pointed persuasively to the "Mormon Diaspora" to account for this growing interest. Once seen as a religion confined mostly to Utah, the faith's adherents now live in every state in the Union and in virtually every country of the world. While public opinion surveys still show a marked lack of understanding of the Church's core principles and beliefs, neither the Church's leadership nor its members are particularly discouraged by that fact. Monumental progress has been made during the past century, and particularly in recent years, in gaining respect in the public's mind. Significantly, studies show that people who know Mormons on a personal level typically have great respect for them, even if they occasionally baulk at an institutional church with which they may not readily identify.

Nothing in the future is more important in helping the public break through remaining misconceptions about Mormons, to come to an understanding of who they truly are, than the lives and examples of individual Latter-day Saints. As people come to recognize that the real Church is its 14 million Mormon neighbors, friends, and coworkers, their respect for and understanding of the religion will grow. In fact, the cumulative effect of Mormons who endeavor to follow Jesus Christ in their daily living and interaction with their communities is the most powerful reputation-building effort the Church has.

For years the Church has publicized messages to explain what it is, what it stands for, who its people are and what it is not. But with the fracturing of the news media and the explosion of publishing on the Internet, combined with the confusion that results when movies, books, plays, or other commercial works of fiction try to depict Mormonism, inaccurate and even negative perceptions persist. We will not be successful in changing these perceptions of the Church in the future by simply sending out messages alone. Perceptions will change only when people see Christlike actions of the Church in its individual members in matters of family life, personal integrity, neighborliness, and personal standards of honesty and morality. What really matters most is the way we act, not what we say. That's part of the reason why I'm greatly encouraged by the new web site, Mormon.org, which features thousands of real Latter-day Saints, unscripted, expressing what their faith means to them.

When the public understands that Mormons are a people whose practices and doctrine are rooted in Christ and that Mormons really do try as a whole to live their religion, we have reached a starting point. Joseph Smith himself, who organized the Church in 1830, said, "The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it."

In the years ahead, segments of the public may not always agree with stances the Church takes on social or moral issues as it strives to teach its doctrine, and its members exercise their right to practice their religion freely. But even though some may disagree, they can still respect the Church as an institution for the good it does in society.

Such was the experience of English novelist Charles Dickens, at first a critic of the Church, but who, after visiting a Mormon emigrant ship in 1842, wrote of the Church that "some remarkable influence [has] produced a remarkable result." In short, the example and actions of the ordinary members of the Church carried enough weight to remove his misconceptions. In 1842, the Church had less than 25,000 members. Today, there are 14 million. In 1842, the world relied on a few newspapers and periodic journals. Today, we have the internet, social media, and a host of other opportunities. No surprise, then, that most Mormons living today believe that the Church's best days are ahead of it.

Michael R. Otterson is the managing director of Public Affairs for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Born and educated in Britain, he entered journalism in his native city of Liverpool and later worked as a journalist in Australia and Japan. In 1976 he left journalism to work in public affairs for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Dealing with Public Opinion

2010-08-14T18:41:00.002+03:00

Last week, the Deseret News published an article addressing a recent public opinion poll conducted by Gary Lawrence. Mr. Lawrence, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, has long set out to find what people in the United States, the nation where Mormons are more prominent than anywhere else in the world, actually think and/or know about Mormons. Here are some of the results he discovered:

• More Americans have a “strongly unfavorable” impression of Mormons than “strongly favorable” impression, by a ratio of 5-to-1
• 12% of Non-Mormon Americans know that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claims to be the restoration of the church that Jesus Christ founded
• 67% are unsure if Mormons believe in the Bible
• 77% are unsure if Mormon are Christians
• 75% are unsure if Mormons practice polygamy
• In general, 37% have a favorable view of the Church, while 49% have an unfavorable view
• 37% do not even know a Mormon
• 55% have never met an active church member

Are you surprised? To some, particularly those who live in very heavily Mormon communities, it may seem that these numbers are surely wrong. Others who are not Mormons, or those who live in communities where Mormons are the novelty, likely see that these statistics are indeed much closer to the truth than many Mormons would like to believe.

When I was a missionary, I remember having sort of a “breakthrough” when thinking about my responsibilities as a missionary, as a member of the church, and as a human being in general. All my life I had been taught “it doesn’t matter what others think about you, all that matters is that you be yourself.” I realized how misleading this seemingly innocent bit of advice meant to boost one’s self-confidence can actually be.

It does matter what others think about us and how they view us. And it is our responsibility, no matter what identity we represent, to be the best example of ourselves and our identity as possible. Of course, there will always be those who are just prone to dislike, and no matter how well we carry ourselves or how much we try to be likeable, we still end up getting the short end of the stick. But for the vast majority of people, they base their likes and dislikes on some form of logical framework for coming to their ultimate conclusion of preference. We have the ability to control our behavior, which means we also have a certain measure of control over how others view us.

Not long after coming home from my mission, while participating in a Sunday School class, this discussion came up. I decided to share what I had come to learn as a missionary. After sharing my points, another member of the class stood up to share his response. “All I care about it my own salvation and that of my family,” he said. “If anybody else gets offended because I’m the way I am, that is their problem – not mine.”

Now, certainly not all Mormons carry this extremist attitude. But I fear enough of them do, and as a whole, our religious “brand” comes across as being exclusionary, holier-than-thou, and downright arrogant, among other things.

So, how can the Mormons remedy this situation? I would like to study the possibilities more in-depth, but in the meantime, here are some suggestions given by Mr. Lawrence:

• Mormons should actively participate in their communities without “an agenda.” According to him, our community participation should be “simply because we believe in their cause and what they are trying to accomplish.” Lawrence added, “…we make friends, not because we are trying to lead them to the waters of baptism, although it would be wonderful if we could do that, but simply to be their friend."

• Our primary objective in making friends “should not be referrals and baptisms, but rather spreading information, correcting distortions, and improving others’ understanding of Mormonism.”

• Mormons need to “cut the jargon.” In other words, we need to un-learn “Mormon-speak” and use words and concepts that are understood outside of Mormonism.

• Church members should replace the traditional “three-step paradigm of conversion” (with the steps of find, teach and baptize) with a more realistic six-step model: 1) awareness, 2) awakening, 3) curiosity, 4) interest, 5) investigation and 6) conversion.

Perhaps you can think of more suggestions of how the Mormons can improve their overall public opinion, while at the same time finding ways to better get the message across of who they are and what they believe?

The Three Deadly “Isms” Part I: Racism

2010-02-22T01:08:00.001+02:00

Many have heard of the “Seven Deadly Sins” often talked about in Catholic teachings. While Mormons don't have their own set of “deadly sins,” I would like to suggest three different attitudes which are extremely detrimental to modern society, as well as completely in opposition to the doctrines of Mormonism.

Incidentally, these three sins can all be defined with words that end in the suffix “ism.” They are: Racism, Nationalism, and Extremism. Over the next few weeks, I'd like to look at these deadly isms one at a time, and show how these attitudes take one further away from the blessings of the Gospel.

Today I will talk about racism. While the definition of “race” may vary, it general refers to one's skin color, or a group of people from similar nations. In the United States we often categorize people into certain racial groups. White, Black, Asian, Latino, American Indian, and others are the most common categories we use in the USA.

There is no excuse for racism in the world today. Most would agree without questioning such a statement. Still, I think it is important that we understand what racism actually is. Is it a strong dislike for those of another race? Is it discrimination in school or the work place? Is it using racial slurs when referring to another race? Or is it simply making racial jokes?

All of the above are forms of racism. However, the measuring stick I use for racism is this: When one, either consciously or unconsciously, considers one race (usually theirs) to be superior to another.

It's been said that “everyone's a little bit racist.” While there are some who feel no shame in making there racism known outwardly, there are others who keep their racist feelings within. Perhaps they only let them show in certain environments. It is true that one can be completely be respectful to members of another race, yet in their hearts still believe that their race is superior.

In 2006, President Gordon B. Hinckley, during a church-wide conference, made a very clear stance against racism. He said:

“...no man who makes disparaging remarks concerning those of another race can consider himself a true disciple of Christ. Nor can he consider himself to be in harmony with the teachings of the Church of Christ...we must make an effort to accommodate that diversity.

Let us all recognize that each of us is a son or daughter of our Father in Heaven, who loves all of His children...there is no basis for racial hatred among...this Church. If any within the sound of my voice is inclined to indulge in this, then let him go before the Lord and ask for forgiveness and be no more involved in such.”

Pretty strong words if you ask me. For those who believe that Gordon B. Hinckley was a Prophet of God, in this case speaking on behalf of the entire church, there can be little doubt on how racism relates to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Yet nevertheless, I still see threads of racism still surfacing among church members from time to time.

Racism is an ugly thing, and as church members, we should do whatever we can to root any hints of it out of our hearts. Often, we have racist sentiments because of the environment in which we grew up. Sometimes, it simply comes from a lack of exposure to those of other racial groups. Whatever the case may be, it is important that we do whatever we can to eliminate this deadly ism from among us.

The Crossroads of Faith

2010-02-11T04:11:00.000+02:00

I want to thank my mother, Janet, for her article which gave insight on what “leaving the Church” actually means for many. Being the only member of my family who currently participates in the life of the Church, this topic is very important to me. I hope Janet will be willing to continue to contribute articles in the future giving this topic more attention.

As Janet explained, there are many different reasons that people leave the Church, and those reasons are as different as the members themselves who leave. For those of us who are active or participating members, knowing how to react when our close friends or family members have their faith tested can be a challenge. How we react can make a big difference in how they are able to weather the storm.

Recently, a friend of mine, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, was faced with a challenge to her faith. While she remained a committed church member, there were some aspects within the life of the Church which lead her to ask some serious questions. Her first reaction was to ask those questions to those she trusted most – her family and her friends.

Not everybody reacted in the same way. Some listened patiently, allowing her to express her thoughts and views without making her feel rushed, judged, or foolish. Others, as soon as they heard any hint of doubt or concern in her voice, felt it was their duty to quash any such feelings by coming out hard against it before she even had the chance to fully express how she felt.

Luckily, she had enough people in the first category to outweigh those in the second. In the end, her faith was solidified and she remains an active participant in the cause of Mormonism. But, after hearing her recount this experience to me, I couldn't help but wonder if many of those who do end up leaving the Church have their process expedited by well-meaning members who feel that it is the mandate of heaven for them to destroy all doubts whenever the see them sprouting. While such a reaction might be well meaning, it more often than not leads the person to feel that their feelings are invalid. Could such individuals unwillingly be helping them down the path that leads away from the Church?

I wish to make one thing clear before discussing further. Ultimately, the decision one makes about their Church activity rests in their own hands. Agency and personal responsibility are major tenants of the Gospel. Nobody can be forced to remain in the Church or to leave. Moreover, as Janet expressed, leaving the Church is not an easy decision for many. There are those who, even in the most ideal circumstances, will choose to leave. If one truly does not believe the Church is true in their hearts, there is very little that we as church members can do to change that.

Nevertheless, I believe that those of us who are active and believing members of the Church do have a responsibility, or at least the ability, to influence those who are dealing with struggles of their faith.

It is my belief that the vast majority of church members at some point in their experience of religious development are faced with a “crossroads of faith.” Questions and doubts arise. Ultimately, there are three possible paths one can take. Some move away from the Church and the Gospel completely. Some have their faith solidified, becoming deeply committed members of the Church. And finally, there are those who remain stuck, unable to move one way or the other. For some, this period of trial may be relatively short. For others, it may last years before they move on to the next step.

For those who have already passed this meaningful crossroads at least once, we may feel eager to recruit people down the same path we have taken, whether that it is in the Church or out of the Church. Our eagerness to do so may be convincing, or it may have the opposite effect. Nobody should ever feel forced to go in one direction or the other.

What do you think is the best approach to deal with people at this crossroads of their faith? Imagine it is your child, your spouse, another family member, or a close friend. How do you think you would react? How do you think your efforts would be received?

We Are All Haitians

2010-01-17T23:47:00.002+02:00

First of all, I want to thank Emily again for her article last week. We hope to hear more from her in the future.

I had originally planned to write a post with a theme similar to hers concerning the role of the priesthood in the Church. However, given the terrible events which happened this week in Haiti, I decided to alter my plans and dedicate today's post to encouraging you all to do what you can to help alleviate the suffering of millions of Haitians in what is most likely the worst humanitarian disaster since the tsunami in late 2004.

Whenever a significant international event occurs, I inevitably get e-mails and calls from family and friends curious to know what is really going on. I suppose that is something that comes naturally from working in international affairs, sort of like doctors having friends and family call them with medical questions. It is something I don't mind in the least. I take it as a compliment that others view my opinion on international issues to be valid.

Tuesday evening I learned of the devastating earthquake in Haiti. Natural disasters occur yearly, often in those places we are less familiar with. Countries many have only heard of suffer calamities which affect the lives of thousands of people, and while we may feel some compassion for those in need, we rarely feel significantly affected by such events unless they touch us personally.

I've never personally worked or even been to Haiti. I know some Haitians, though none very well. Yet, as I began to look more and more into the situation, my heart went out to the Haitians. Humanitarian assistance and response to crisis makes up a significant part of my work, and all the indicators show that the the situation in Haiti is particularly dire.

Tens of thousands died in the initial quake. Many more continue to die from trauma suffered during the earthquake. Many thousands more will likely die from starvation, thirst, and worst of all, disease, which will inevitably ravage the country in the aftermath of the disaster. Even with all the efforts of the international world to prevent such losses, it is not a matter of if more will die, but a matter of how many more will die.

Over three million people were directly affected by the quake. That is nearly 1/3 of the entire nation of Haiti. In essence, the Haitians have lost their country.

In recent months, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints came out with an official statement which put “caring for the poor and needy” at the forefront of the mission of the church as an organization. While the Mormons have long provided humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, officially inserting this objective into their organizational mission statement indicates how it is not only something that Mormons should do on the side, but that it should be a fundamental part of their worship.

The Book of Mormon teaches: “...are we not all beggars? Do we not all depend upon the same Being, even God, for all the substance which we have...?” (See Mosiah 4:19)

It often feels that there is little we can do at times like these. We may feel compassion towards those who have lost so much, yet not know what we can do to help.

Luckily, there are plenty of organizations whose mandate is to deal with situations like these. LDS Humanitarian Services, the humanitarian aid wing of the Church, is already on the scene, distributing much needed hygiene kits and supplies for infants and children. They have proved their meddle in the past to deal with such situations, and if you are looking for a legitimate organization to whom you can provide assistance, they are worth a look. Truly, hygiene kits will be priceless as infectious diseases begin to set in. They cost very little, but a single kit could very easily save a life. To donate click here.

The Mormons are certainly not the only ones on the scene who are providing needed help. All aid organizations are on the same team. Below is a list of additional organizations which are also trustworthy, effective, and accountable which are all providing aid to the earthquake victims. Their links are included below. If you have other good organizations you would like to suggest, feel free to put them in the comments section.

Oxfam International
The American Red Cross
Catholic Relief Services
CARE
Save the Children

At a time like this, I hope we can all put our effort forward to make some difference. To paraphrase the words of King Benjamin, “are we not all Haitians?”

P.S. I learned that my dad's cousin, Carol Smith, was in Haiti at the time of the crisis working in an orphanage. She is an experienced ER nurse, and was lucky to survive the quake. To learn more about her experience, click here.

Merry X-Mas and Happy New Year!

2010-01-03T06:52:00.002+02:00

I hope that everybody enjoyed their holiday break. Monday is just around the corner, which means time to go back to work. Christmas has come and gone and now it is on to 2010! I commend you all on your survival.

Before I start ranting to you, I invite you all to take a look at our personal blog if you are interested in catching up on the goings on in the life of Emily and myself during 2009.

As for today, I would like to take a minute or two to reminisce on yet another recently departed holiday season. Since, for us Americans, Christmas is “the big one” when it comes to holidays, there is always a lot to talk about. Christmas, originally beginning as a Christian religious holiday, has evolved over the years to meet the need of a religiously-diverse nation. Therefore, there are always plenty of opinions that get stirred up regarding what “Christmas is all about.”

To begin, allow me to share a story. I remember several years ago being cautioned by a seminary teacher to never write “Merry X-Mas.” Doing so, he said, would take Christ out of Christmas, and be an insult to the Savior. Imagine my surprise years later, when, while studying languages, I discovered that X is the first letter in Χριστός , that is to say Christ, in Greek. A bit more investigation, and I learned that the reason “X-mas” ever came about in the first place was to emphasize the Christ in Christmas, rather than to take Him out of it.

Every year, as the holiday season draws nigh, you hear heightened pleas from the Christian segment of our nation to not forget the reason for the season. They condemn the secular holiday that they feel has supplanted the religious meaning of Christmas.

While, as a Christian I see Christmas as a holiday of worship, I must admit that I am okay with the secular holiday as well. Coming from a mostly non-religious family, my concept of Christmas growing up had more to do with family, togetherness, and memories. I was certainly familiar with the story of Jesus in Bethlehem, and I knew all of the religious Christmas songs, these were just a few among many elements which made Christmas magical for me. Our Christmas traditions all focused on the family (a societal unit not exclusive to Christians, I might add) and could all be defined as “secular” in nature. However, I doubt even the Christian preachers would say that these elements of Christmas detract from the true meaning of the holiday.

Particularly as a Mormon, I suppose I feel that the Christian elements of Christmas should be part of life year round. If there is a need to turn one's thoughts back to Christ during the Christmas season, than I wonder, what has been happening during the rest of the year?

True, there is the factor of materialism to deal with. Worrying too much about decorations, shopping, etc., can detract from both the religious and family aspects of Christmas. But again, I wonder why we start caring so much about materialism so much more during Christmastime? It seems that materialism just as detrimental at any time during the year.

Since I live in the United States where there is no national religion and we all share a diverse mixture of religious (and non-religious) ideals and morals, I am happy that Christmas can be both a religious and a secular holiday for me. It is a time to reflect on another year gone by, and anticipation for a new year to come. It is a time for being with my family members, making more memories that bring happiness to my life. Yes, it is also a time to reflect on my religious worship and on Jesus Christ and His divine role in my life.

But, rather than being paranoid about Christmas being ruined by the heathens, as my X-Mas hating teacher did, let us all enjoy Christmas in our own way. Despite how it has evolved over the years, it is still something special and meaningful to millions of us with each passing year.

Merry X-Mas to you all, and a Happy New Year!

The Mormon Missionary Part X: Enthusiasm!

2009-12-20T03:35:00.001+02:00

A few weeks ago, a coworker found out that I'm a Mormon. She immediately proceeded to tell about another church member with whom she had recently worked in another country. As she described him to me, she couldn't refrain from smiling. You could tell her esteem for this gentleman was very high. “He has one of the biggest personalities I've ever seen. He was always a fun person to work with,” she told me.

Hearing success stories like this always makes me happy. It means that some Mormon somewhere made a positive and lasting impression on someone. And this is not an isolated incident. There are many successful Mormon diplomats out there making similarly positive impressions. I often hear observations about Mormons that go something like this: “They are always so happy,” or “They smile so much” or “Even if they have no rhythm it is entertaining to watch them dance.” As members of the church, one of the best ways we can represent the Gospel which so defines our lives is to be seen as happy, positive, and most especially, enthusiastic people.

Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid. Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven. (Matthew 5:14-16)

Another way to put it is like this:

I believe this memorable scripture refers, in some part, to the type of personality we should all try to foster. Granted, not all of our lights will shine in the same way. But nevertheless, if we are the kind of people who leave lasting positive impressions on others, we are doing the missionaries a wonderful favor.

There are a few caveats, however, when it comes to being enthusiastic Mormons. First of all, we can make all the good impressions we want, but it won't do squat for the cause of Mormon diplomacy unless they actually know that we are Mormons. Believe it or not, Mormonism is a religion and not an ethnic group (well, with Utah possibly being an exception...). Our fellow earthlings probably won't know we are church members unless it is brought to their attention by us or somebody else. That doesn't mean that we have to suffocate others with declarations of religion. “Hi, I'm Joe, the Mormon” may not be the best first greeting. However, there are more natural ways to fit it into a conversation.

Also (and I may be primarily talking to myself here) it is best to give an impression that is more substantive than simply entertaining. While entertainment is fine, alone it seldom wins real respect. Showing enthusiasm in other regards, such as in our work ethic, in helping others, etc., will paint a better picture of who we are as a religious people.

As I missionary, I was once presented with a riddle: “What's the difference between a geyser and a mud pot?” The answer: A geyser has enthusiasm. Enthusiastic people make friends. People who make friends make better missionaries.

If you are like many who have more naturally introverted personalities, the idea of enthusiasm might not sound as appealing to you. That's okay. Again, there is more than one way to skin a cat. One doesn't need to standing on tables and singing in crowded cafeterias to exhibit enthusiasm. But, little things do make a difference. It could be a conscious effort to open up a little more when talking to others, striking up simple conversations with strangers, or even making an effort to smile and say hello to people you pass by in public.

I hope we all can be a bit more enthusiastic as members of the Church. After all, we have a lot to be happy about.

The Mormon Missionary Part IX: The Life After

2009-12-14T03:49:00.001+02:00

Of all the fascinating changes one experiences as a missionary, the most challenging are often met head-on during the first few days (or weeks, or months) after returning home. Within a matter of days, one relinquishes their full-time dedication to missionary work, replacing it with a platter full of real-world concerns, such as school, finances, dating, and in many cases, hours of endless boredom.

Every returned missionary (or RM) ends up dealing with their post-mission life in a different way. For some, they take the kid-in-a-candy-store-approach, jumping from one shiny toy to another, catching up on movies, music, friends, and food they haven't had for two years. In many cases, catching up on sleep is also involved. There are others who go through a stage of denial, almost refusing to admit that their mission is over. I've heard stories of RMs coming home and continuing to follow the missionary morning study schedule, wearing a suit and tie, and keeping other missionary habits, all because they know of no other way to react.

In addition, RMs face the challenge of being the only person who really gives a rip about their mission experiences. They find that others are unable to grasp the magnitude of their adventure, and while some show polite interest, they and the friends that went through the experience with them, are the only ones who really “get it.” No matter who they are, and how adaptable they may be, every RM must face this inevitable transition. It can be a time of depression, confusion, anxiety, or resentment.

I am a big fan of Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings film trilogy. These movies all were released during the course of my mission, and I may have been the only person on planet Earth who hadn't seen them when I got back. When I finally did watch them, I identified very personally with a particular scene from the end of the final installment. After their long, trying adventure, and after destroying the one ring of power (and by so doing, saving Middle-earth), the Hobbit heroes return home to their quaint Hobbit-village in the Shire. Their friends and acquaintances from childhood had continued to live their lives, oblivious to the turmoil happening in the world (note that this is one of the major diversions the movie takes from the book). They find that they simply no longer fit in with the simple life they had left behind. They had toiled and suffered, stood in the presence of kings and watched good triumph over evil, while their village went about their day-to-day, mundane lives without a clue.

"Hobbit RMs"

I guess you could say I felt like a taller, only slightly less hairy version of our Hobbit friends. I hadn't saved the world, but I had been through an experience that changed my life in nearly every way. My friends and family were kind enough to show some interest in what I had done, but having not experienced it themselves, they couldn't fully understand what had happened to me.

While it didn't bother me too much, I did feel in some regards that I had taken a significant step backwards in my life. Why, for instance, was I able to do some many things as a missionary, yet still be unable to get a job for $6.00/hr.? Why had I been able to strike up deep conversations about life and eternity in Russian with strangers, but still feel so ridiculous when trying to talk to girls?

Reconnecting with old friends was nice, but compounded the difficulty of the situation as well. Many of them had also had their own missionary experiences apart from mine. They had changed too. Others had made even more significant changes in their lives, such as being married and even having children. It's amazing how much can change in two years.

Little by little, I acclimated to a new life epoch. Step by step, I regained my normal life skills and abilities. In the short-run, it's as difficult as any transition, but in the long-run, it's a good and necessary change. No matter what, something remains changed in the heart of the RM forever. The experience will go on to influence the remainder of their life. With each passing day, my mission becomes an ever-more-distant memory. But still, not a day passes where I don't reflect on what happened during that time of my life. The life after extends well beyond those few awkward months. A mission has the potential to forge the RM's path for eternity.

The Mormon Missionary Part VIII: Issues of Geography and Spirituality

2009-12-06T05:25:00.002+02:00

There are missions (the Mormon name of the geographic unit in which a specific group of missionaries work) known for being “high-baptizing” missions. In this category are missions in Latin America, the Philippines, and parts of Africa. Most missionaries in these countries find success in teaching and baptizing new church members.

At the other end of the spectrum is most of Europe, parts of Asia, and other countries known for having “low-baptizing” missions. Some missionaries even spend two years hard work without ever teaching a single person who converts. Why? At the risk of comparing apples to oranges, what makes one mission more successful than another?

Many are quick to point to the economic prosperity of a nation (or lack thereof) as an indicator of how willing the citizens might be to consider new religious ideas. They say that this helps to explain why the more prosperous countries of Western Europe are less interested, while the “developing countries” are open. Certainly, there seems to be some evidence demonstrating this, yet there are also many outliers which suggest that the economy is only one correlative factor. For example, missionaries still have considerable success in more wealthy countries such as the United Kingdom, Chile, Argentina, and of course, the USA, while having less success in some poorer countries, particularly in Eastern Europe.

Another possible reason is the political and/or cultural power and influence of traditional and national religions in some countries. This might explain lower conversion rates in some countries. In many nations, there are citizens who consider their religion to be an inseparable part of their national identity, thus further consolidating any traditional commitment they have to their religion.

This would make sense in explaining why conversion rates are higher in some of the poorer countries who have strong national religious identities. Yet still, there are outliers. For example, Greece is notorious as being one of the countries with the lowest missionary success rates in the world. Greeks, in general, devoutly identify with their traditional Greek Orthodoxy, to a such a level that is unrivaled by almost any other nation. But then consider Armenia. Armenians are perhaps one of the only nations where their citizens identify themselves with their national religion (the Armenian Apostolic Church) more intensely than the Greeks. Yet, Mormon missionaries have found considerable success in Armenia, much more so than many of the other countries in the region.

Considering many of these different countries, I believe that the characteristic most influential on the success of any mission is the native culture of hospitality. In Latin America, missionaries find themselves often invited into the homes of strangers out of pure hospitality, in a manner less culturally common in other countries. Armenians too, perhaps culturally influenced over the years by the neighboring Arab countries, are renowned for being among the most hospitable people in the world.

Why would this make the difference? Having seen missionaries at work in different corners of the globe, I've noticed something that makes all the difference in a missionaries success. When missionaries are able to build a personal relationships with an individual AND provide an environment in which the Spirit of God can testify of truth, they undoubtedly finds success that overcomes any other obstacle, including traditional religious affiliation, income disparity, etc. If the missionaries are able to find a way to connect to others on a personal level, they will have more chances to teach. With more chances to teach in a proper environment, there will be more instances in which the Spirit does His job.

In places where this built-in hospitality system isn't inherent, missionaries are pressed to stretch their minds and be creative. Depending on where you are in the world, there might be very means of how this might be accomplished. In Russia for instance, we found tremendous success through teaching English classes. There are many other ways in which connection can be made. Help the missionaries be creative!

Ultimately, the the Spirit is the only proper means to true conversion. The Spirit functions, irrespective of geography. The missionary's primary responsibility should be to find a way to create an environment in which the Spirit can do it's work.

The Mormon Missionary Part VII: If You Build It, They Will Come

2009-11-28T18:28:00.001+02:00

Before becoming a missionary, I considered myself an outgoing person. I enjoyed talking to new people, and friends told me that this would be useful as a missionary.

They were partially right. I was fine talking to strangers about many things. However, I quickly found that the standard “missionary small-talk” was difficult for me. Starting a conversation with a question like “Do you believe in God?” seemed horribly awkward. I knew that if I felt awkward asking, the other person probably felt doubly awkward. I would often consider how I might react if somebody struck up such a conversation with me.

As missionaries, we were told to “open our mouths.” In other words, we should always be talking to others. In order to fulfill my mandate, I tried a number of different approaches. I wanted to find a way to approach people that didn't have the awkward feel, but would still allow me opportunities to teach the Gospel. But it often continued to feel unnatural and forced.

At one particular point, there was a great push to get missionaries talking to people. We were trained on how to “open our mouths” everywhere we went. For a few weeks, I made real efforts to do so, using all the tricks of the trade I had learned so far. It was both exciting and frustrating, still often associated with awkward connections, dirty looks, etc. But I made an effort.

Then, one morning while on the bus, I struck up a conversation with a woman sitting next to me. I didn't bring up anything initially about religion or try to pry into the person's life. We engaged in a genuine, real conversation. Within a few minutes, she had opened up to me. “Where are you from?” she asked. “What are you doing here in Russia?” and “A missionary? What church do you represent?” That lead to further questions, such as “How is your church different than the Russian Orthodox” and “What do you believe in?”

It was amazing. Suddenly, I wasn't the one asking the questions. Rather, this stranger was showing interest in me and what I was doing. Now she didn't end up becoming a convert to the Church, but this particular exchange taught me a very important lesson about human nature.

Have you ever gone into a store, not sure what you are looking for? Then, a salesperson approaches you and asks “Can I help you find anything?” What is your reaction? Perhaps it is different for you, but I have the tendency to decline any help at first. My initial reaction is “I can find something on my own, why would I need any help?” However, when I am the one approaching a salesperson and asking for help, my attitude drastically changes.

I believe missionaries face a similar challenge. There are many people they approach who, in the right context, would probably be curious and interested in learning more about the Gospel, if for nothing else than for the sake of learning something new. However, many of these same people, when they feel the Gospel is being handed to them unasked, will push it away out of reflex. I believe that often missionaries are too eager to impart their knowledge upon strangers, and so doing, build automatic walls that may eliminate any chance there may have been to teach.

The solution is fairly simple. It still involves opening one's mouth. But rather than immediately trying to push the person into the deep end of the pool, let them wade in on their own. Missionaries have a wonderful advantage in that they are representing the Church full-time. Often, they are in a foreign country. The idea of 19-year-olds traveling across the world to talk about religion is very curious indeed, and a great conversation starter.

When it comes to true conversion to the Gospel, the person must make that decision on their own. By building a genuine relationship of trust, many who otherwise would decline a forced religious conversation will open up to the idea of the Gospel. Missionaries will end up with more opportunities to teach, more conversions to the Gospel, and more friends to the Church. If they build it, they will come.

The Mormon Missionary Part VI: The Lord's Work

2009-11-15T04:39:00.002+02:00

I felt pretty inspired as a missionary. At times, it seemed that ideas would come to me as if from on high. I thought these ideas were so amazing, so earth-shattering, that they would revolutionize the face of missionary work itself and, in so doing, the entire world. Most of the time, I forgot about these epiphanies within a day or so, once reality brought be back to earth.

Nevertheless, despite the would-be revolutions which were born and died in my own head, there were a few lessons I learned which, to this day, strike me as profound. While they pertain to missionary work, many of them are also applicable to life in general.

I should also note that these moments of “seeing the light” were not solely creations of my own understanding. In fact, they came as lessons that I heard repeated over and over again. In most cases, it simply took a while for them to finally penetrate my skull.

The first of these delayed revelations came from a phrase I heard repeated annoyingly often. The most common variation of the phrase is this: “Missionary work is the Lord's work.”

In the MTC, one evening upon returning to my dorm, I overheard another missionary making an audiotape for his girlfriend. “I know that missionary work is the Lord's work,” he said fervently into the tape recorder. My own silent mental response went something like this: “That's the obvious yet lame attempt at sounding spiritual that I've ever heard. Of course missionary work is the Lord's work! That's like saying 'I know that running the country is the president's work' or 'I know that raising pigs is a farmer's work.'”

Many months later, after nearly a mission's worth of trying to figure out what being a missionary meant, it hit me. Missionary work very literally is the Lord's work. My entire mission, I had been operating under the assumption that MY mission was MY work, and therefore depended on my own efforts, knowledge, skills, and abilities. I saw the Lord simply as the boss, and if I worked hard and figured out how to be the best missionary I could, He would give me a good performance evaluation at the end of the fiscal year. (It's a joke – if you work for the government then you understand).

What I was missing was the actual meaning of that phrase. I had been taking it to mean that missionary work is something that the Lord wants us to do. In fact, it means “missionary work is something the Lord is doing” (See Moses 1:39). Our role is that we can help Him out, if we so desire.

Recognizing this changed how I mentally viewed my role as a missionary, and even, as a human being. Rather than feeling fully dependent on my own abilities, it helped me see the interconnected nature of humanity. Furthermore, it helped me understand the necessity of our interconnectedness, or “oneness” as Jesus calls it, with our Father in Heaven (See John 17:11). He does have a plan for us, and He is in the middle of implementing that plan.

I thought my own bright ideas were so creative and profound. And perhaps they were, relative to my peers. But relative to God's wisdom and planning ability, they were but shadows of theories of good ideas (See Isaiah 55:8-9).

Especially in Western culture, we have instilled into us from childhood that individual effort and success are most important in life. We are taught that we should reach for the stars, and that anything we put our mind to doing, we can accomplish. This may be true, but for which stars we should be reaching? To what we should be putting our minds? We use our abilities to find success in the best way we know how, but at the end of the day, we are left asking “what's the purpose of life?”

From the simple phrase I once thought was so cliché, I felt my mind finally wrapped itself around the greatest question humanity has ever considered, at least in some small measure. The Lord's plan is real and it is taking place. Somewhere in that plan, we all have a distinct role. Discovering that role and being part of it brings clarity and purpose to life. And for me, it has also brought more happiness than I ever thought possible.

The Mormon Missionary Part V: Tracting

2009-11-07T16:48:00.002+02:00

If you were to ask someone who isn't a church member what their first impression is when they think about the Mormons, you would probably find many whose first response goes something like this: “Aren't they those young guys who go around knocking on doors, trying to talk about religion?”

This process of “knocking on doors” has an official name – tracting. While known by other names as well (bloc-knocking in Romania was my favorite), the action is the same. Missionaries fill their time going from door-to-door, seeking anybody who might be willing to listen to what they have to say.

I'll cut right to the chase. In most cases, tracting is a complete waste of time. In many cases, it may end up being more detrimental than helpful to missionary work.

True, in some cultures, it isn't strange to invite in a stranger who has come to your door, no matter their reason. Many former missionaries who served in parts of Latin America, or in nations close to the Middle East which have been heavily influenced by the well-known above-and-beyond hospitality of the Arab world, know this to be the case.

Others have been in places where there is no door-to-door culture whatsoever, such as in Russia, where I was a missionary. There, nobody comes to the door unexpectedly. Moreover, the Communist history has fostered an understandable distrust for strange men in suits who suddenly appear at one's door. Nine times out of ten, the door wouldn't even open. Individuals would simply peek through the peephole, then slip back into their home without a word.

So, as I was saying, in most places of the world, I believe tracting is all but useless. Moreover, if you read official missionary literature distributed by Church leaders, you'll find that they too have counseled against excessive tracting. In a satellite broadcast in 1999, President Gordon B. Hinckley said: “So many of us look upon missionary work as simply tracting. Everyone who is familiar with this work knows there is a better way.” As a tool for finding people who are interested in religion, tracting is simply a statistically ineffective method.

Why is it so ineffective? I'll let the master of human behavior, Jerry Seinfeld, explain that one. Remember that episode of Seinfeld where Jerry gets a sales call, then offers to call the salesperson back at home? “We're not allowed to do that,” the salesperson says. “Oh, I guess don't want people calling you at home?” Jerry replies. “No,” the salesman says. Then comes Seinfeld's infamous comeback: “Well now you know how I feel.” People don't feel control over the situation when somebody comes into their personal space unasked and tries to impose their opinions on them, no matter how sincere the intent.

Yet, there are still many missionaries who tract hours upon hours each day. Some missions even have rules that missionaries must tract a certain number of hours per day or per week. Such a notion makes little sense to me.

Giving thought to tracting over the years, I have determined that there are only one really valuable result that comes from it. Tracting can be a great way to help build confidence in young missionaries. I only tracted a handful of times as a missionary, most during my first few months. This practice did indeed help me conquer certain fears. Nevertheless, it didn't take tracting hours out of every day of my mission to get the desired effect.

Some missionaries who are “super-tracters” feel that their hours of tracting translates into diligence. This too, I believe, is a fallacy of the mind. While they may be harder workers than the missionary who does nothing, I feel that tracting itself is usually becomes a subtle form of laziness itself, disguised as hard work. One feels diligent while tracting, but truly, this repetitive action doesn't take much mental effort once you get into the rhythm of how it is done. A short introduction is memorized, and recited at every door. Missionaries learn quickly to brush off rejection, and it becomes the expected outcome. As a result, missionaries spend hours feeling they are hard at work but without accomplishing anything at all, except perhaps annoying people. Does tracting really help spread the Gospel?

In the long run, I suggest that an effort be made to encourage missionaries to see tracting as an optional activity, only to be used in special circumstances. I suggest that an effort be made to help missionaries disassociate tracting as being the “default” method of missionary work. This will encourage missionaries to focus on more effective methods of missionary work, as well as improve the overall image of the Church.

Any thoughts on the matter? And while we're discussing, be sure to share any hilarious tracting stories.

The Mormon Missionary Part IV: The Glorious MTC (2 of 2)

2009-10-31T16:40:00.000+02:00

Last week, I spoke of struggles faced during my time in the MTC. Learning to cope with an environment where “serving the Lord” took on extreme definitions in the minds of some, led me to question my purpose for being there.

I was a fairly new member of the Church. Even growing up among Mormons in Utah, I had only attended church activities for two years when I embarked on my mission. I was the only practicing Mormon in my family, and was still growing accustomed to my new life as a Mormon.

Nevertheless, more than a year prior to leaving on a mission, I found a strong desire to do just that. For several months prior to departure, missionary service was my primary goal in life, and I was determined to see two years consecrated to spiritual activity.

Being in the MTC, and dealing with its associated trails, caused me to truly question whether I had made the proper choice. I had – though that realization didn't come at once. It came as the MTC yielded a number of life-changing experiences. I share just a few.

Sometime during my first few days at the compound, then First Counselor Thomas S. Monson paid a surprise visit. Missionaries by the thousands flocked to the largest meeting hall, to hear the leader's sermon. He spoke of the influence of missionary work on families. His words were so powerful, that they cultivated a nearly overwhelming sense of gratitude within me, the likes of which I have never felt before. My gratitude was primarily for my parents, as I truly recognized for the first time all the personal effort they had sacrificed on my behalf. Emotion overcame me, and I could not refrain from weeping after his sermon.

I also had some great leaders in the MTC. One, a counselor in our unit presidency, took special interest in me, and went out of his way to share meaningful conversations and experiences. He had a rich background, both academic and ecclesiastical, and I found communicating with him to be mutually uplifting. I remember another unit leader sharing his personal views on our potential successes as missionaries. His words carried conviction more powerful and sincere than I had ever witnessed before. As I walked from the room, I literally felt like I was flying, with such overwhelming happiness swelling within me.

The feelings associated with the Holy Ghost, joy, love, etc., where everywhere. It felt like living in an orchard of low-hanging spiritual fruit to be plucked at leisure. After toiling all day at language study, we would come home tired, treasuring every ounce of sleep, yet even my dreams felt spiritually uplifting and meaningful. At times I awoke during the night, certain I had just learned something valuable and feeling the need to immediately record the thoughts. Recently I re-read some of the written accounts of dreams, and realized how truly significant they have been in my life.

In addition to the feeling of spiritual satisfaction, the MTC was a place for good friends. Despite our youth, inexperience, and at times blatant immaturity, I made true friends for life. Even among some of those whose self-righteous behaviors make me want to vomit in the beginning I found friends. After a few weeks I recognized that they were simply trying to serve in the way they best understood, just as we all were.

The biggest blessing, however, came from being driven to truly discover what I believed about certain points of doctrine. Most specifically, I personally tackled my thoughts on Joseph Smith's calling as a Prophet of God. I realized that I had never really believed this to be true, despite my belief in the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon and the divinity of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This was concerning, and led me to read Smith's personal account several times, all the while while asking difficult questions and seeking answers. When the conviction finally came, I felt as if I had reached the summit of a mountain.

So you see, the MTC, though difficult and culturally odd in many ways, was still a wonderful experience, a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity I am unlikely to face again. Never have nine weeks of my life held more long-term significance than did my time in the Missionary Training Center.

The Mormon Missionary Part III: The Glorious MTC (1 of 2)

2009-10-24T16:55:00.002+03:00

Missionary service began for me on June 5th, 2002, as my family left me at the Provo Missionary Training Center (MTC), some 50 miles south of Salt Lake City, UT. Though I have since traveled the world, having many unique cultural experiences, my 9 weeks spent in the MTC were the most curious of them all.

When swapping MTC experiences with other former missionaries, a common theme inevitably emerges. It is best described by the opening phrase to Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities: “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times...” Truly, the MTC was one of the most meaningful experiences in my life. Conversely, it was also one of the most personally and spiritually challenging experiences.

After a somewhat awkward and tearful goodbye from my family, where we new missionaries were herded from auditorium as our parents were left alone (my mother later described the cruelty of the moment), I found myself a full-fledged citizen of a world I knew very little about. Though I had my fundamental understanding of the Gospel, not to mention an upbringing in Utah and exposure to Mormon culture, I still felt like a tourist.

Me saying my goodbyes to Mom and Dad in "the weaning room"

Somewhat dazed, I stood in a line, waiting to receive logistical instructions. One new missionary stood in front of me, his new suit perfectly pressed, his hair freshly trimmed. He wore a wide smile across his face, and looked like he was having the greatest experience that he had ever known. I, perhaps, appeared a bit more shocked, or at least wary, of this strange situation. He held out his hand to me forcefully and said “Hi! What's your name?”

“I'm Nils,” I said, instinctively.

At that, a strange look crossed his face, a mixture between pity and relief that he wasn't me. “Oh...” he said, eagerly withdrawing his hand. “I'm Elder So-and-so.” Missionaries are supposed to use the title “Elder.” For me, it took some getting used to.

And so it began. The MTC compound is almost completely sealed off from the rest of the world. At any given time it houses up to a few thousand young men and women from age 19 to their mid-twenties. Each day, rising early, missionaries find themselves all day long in language classes, gospel lessons, or other training meetings in preparation for their inevitable deployment to all corners of the earth. From dawn until dusk they are at work, with few breaks for meals, exercise, and sleep.

In addition to the rigorous schedule (compared by some to a type of “missionary boot camp”), a strange cultural phenomenon understandably occurs. Nearly ever single missionary is trying desperately to prove their seriousness about their missionary service. This results in a clash of immaturity and diligent effort, which in turn yielded to an over-abundance of self-righteousness among peers.

At first, this was particularly difficult. Like my peers, I too desired to be a successful missionary. I had no desire to rebel or make myself an exception to the rules. But, perhaps because of my disinterest in scrutinizing the behaviors of my colleagues, or perhaps because of my reluctance to pronounce my “righteousness” publicly, I found myself “marked” for critique.

If was too loud, or cracked a joke, somebody would inevitably scold, “quiet dignity Elder!” If I wore sunglasses (it was summer) or tried a new knot on my tie (yeah, I know, blame it on necessity-induced nerdiness) I was taken aside and urged to remember “the reason I was there.” Worst of all, if I showed any sort of friendliness to the sister missionaries, I was tagged as a troublemaker for sure.

Truth to be told, within a few weeks this started to wear on different aspects of my efforts. While I brushed most of it off and went on my way, it began to seep into my spirituality as well, bringing forward some heavy questions about my belief system in general.

Fortunately, among the gray there was pure silver as well. In addition to being the worst of times, the best of times were not far behind. Stay tuned, as next week I'll talk about what made the MTC glorious as it was. For now, feel free to share your own MTC stories or thoughts.

The Mormon Missionary Part II: Time on My Hands

2009-10-17T21:42:00.002+03:00

I often reflect on the unique ways I felt as a missionary. The missionary lifestyle provides a singular cultural experience. For me, it led to more personal introspection and growth than any other experience I have ever had. While there were many things which made this experience such a curious one, if I had to choose one aspect which influenced me more than anything, the answer might surprise you. Time. Time, as a missionary, took on a completely unprecedented meaning for me. Never before have I been so aware of time.

Missionary work was constantly coupled with an unquenchable sense of urgency. Every moment of every day was highlighted by a mightily noticeable feeling, ever present in the depths of my skull. It felt as if I were systematically asking myself: “Are you using time in the best possible way?”

Though I reminisce on my missionary experience with pleasant memories, it wasn't all happiness and sunshine. There where times when I felt frustrated, inadequate, and unsuccessful. Never was I made to feel these feelings from others in the mission (I know this can't be said for all who have been missionaries). These feelings came from myself. These were the times when I felt that time itself got the better of me.

In addition to being a periodic source of frustration, time also became one of my most trusted friends. Sometimes my missionary relationship with time provided positive motivation and pushed me to stretch myself and go beyond my perceived abilities. These moments were anything but frustrating or self-destructive. Quite on the contrary, I recall many nights going to bed with such an intense feeling of joy and happiness covering me like a blanket. In these moments, I remember feeling overwhelmingly happy to be alive. These feelings, almost without fail, came after my concept of time pushed me to my limits, and showed me that I could accomplish far more than I otherwise would have thought possible.

When I didn't respond to the beckoning of time, I would feel that I had let myself down. I would feel that I had chances to push myself, yet shied away from these opportunities for growth. Often, this feeling of personal guilt would lead me to make extra effort the following day, while other times, it felt like a captive cycle that I could not bring myself to break.

In the end, the negative experiences were no match for the wonder of the positive ones. In fact, the negative experiences were essential in recognizing how this process worked, and being caught up on both sides of this coin helped me gain a better, albeit still growing, understanding of time. Indeed, there are few moments of joy in my life that I cherish as much as some of these missionary experiences which center on my relationship to time.

I even had an odd and almost ritualistic experience which occurred to me the day I returned home from Russia, which metaphorically echoed my missionary relationship with time. As I stepped into my parent's home for the first time, my wristwatch, which I had worn daily as a missionary and used to manage this heightened sense of time, unexpectedly broke at the band. It fell from my wrist and onto the kitchen counter, never to be fixed. I have not worn one since.

In my post-missionary life, remnants of this phenomenon of time-awareness have remained, though they have never felt quite the same as they did during that two-year period. Nevertheless, whenever I feel I am being idle, that voice within me still suggests that I should not be using my time in a wasteful manner.

Ultimately, I believe this was one of the most important steps in my personal maturity. It demonstrated clearly to me the value of consistency and the importance of using one's time wisely. It is still a path of discovery for me, but one that would likely have not come about, save for the lessons that time taught me as a missionary.

The Mormon Missionary Part I: Introduction

2009-10-10T16:34:00.002+03:00

I am now a proud member of the Washington DC Deaf Branch. Never mind the fact that I don't really know how to sign. Upon joining the branch, I was somewhat concerned about what calling I might receive. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy having responsibilities, but I somewhat concerned that I would once again being tapped as a clerk of sorts. It seems that once you get into the administrative callings, it is sometimes difficult to escape, and in Romania I was the "everything clerk." So, a few weeks ago when the Branch President called me into his office for an interview, I was extremely happy when I learned that I was offered a calling as the Branch Mission Leader.

Perhaps you might not leap for joy at this calling, but I am quite excited about it. There are two main reasons for this: 1) Even though it has been more than five years since I was a full-time missionary for the Church, I still enjoy the idea of missionary work and think about it regularly, and 2) I hold a lot of strong opinions about missionary work, and look forward to making those opinions heard. Frankly, I feel that many go about doing missionary work with a, shall we say, “less-than-ideal” approach.

In honor of my new calling and in an attempt to bounce ideas off all of you, I would like to dedicate the next several posts to different aspects of missionary work. Please feel free to make your opinions and feelings known, both Mormons and non-Mormons alike.

For today, I want to assess the idea of what a missionary actually is.

Depending on your background and experience, you might have a very different view of a missionary than I do. For some, a missionary is a Jehovah's Witnesses knocking at your doors or leaving pamphlets. For others, missionaries are the Jesuits from centuries ago who went and spent the rest of their lives in foreign communities. Others think more along the lines of the conquistadors, the crusaders, or others who used physical force to compel others to religious conversion. Others might think of the evangelical youth or retirees of today who go on short “mission trips” to parts of the world, handing out Bibles and the like. And of course, many of you think of the young men and women with name tags who represent the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Even with this short but incomplete (and admittedly Christian-centric, sorry to my non-Christian friends) list, it is visible how one type of missionary work differs significantly from the others. Moreover, depending on your view of missionaries or missionary work, even the word “missionary” might carry with it a very positive or negative connotation.

It seems that the occasion arises often where my past experience as a missionary has led to interesting discussions with my friends and colleagues, the vast majority of whom are not Mormons, about what it means to be a missionary. As a development worker, I draw close parallels between what we do around the world in terms of development and humanitarian work. We go to a foreign community, offer up new ideas and concepts, and hope that those new ideas and concepts take root and grow.

In essence, a missionary does (or should do) the same thing. They go among those who are different than they are, offer up new ideas and ways of living life, and hope that those new ideas and habits take root and expand. This is the process often called “religious conversion.” The only real difference is that God is directly factored into the equation.

So why then do people generally have a positive view of humanitarian work, yet often carry a negative view of missionary work? While there are many different possible explanations, I feel there is one reason which may be more significant than others: Too many missionaries have gone about their work in the entirely wrong way.

As I have reflected on how to classify the “wrong way” and the “right way” to do missionary work, the most useful element I have identified can be expressed as a question: “For whom are you working?” Are missionaries working for their own spiritual well-being, or for that of others?

When a missionary is concerned primarily with their own well-being, they get lazy. They start resorting to questionable techniques, giving sales-pitches, using fear tactics, etc. In short, they try to make people fear that if they don't accept their message, they will be in danger of some unseen peril in the life to come. They essentially take any option out of the conversion process.

To me, it seems that missionary work is only useful if it is genuine and truly focused on the well-being of others. This means it must be completely open-ended, and that those who convert must choose to do so, without being unnecessarily compelled by a missionary. Any more thoughts on how this can possibly be measured? Any other thoughts on the right and wrong ways to be a missionary?

Mormon Diplomacy Part IV: Understanding Public Perception

2009-08-01T20:21:00.000+03:00

These past couple of weeks I have been in training for my new job as a Foreign Service Officer. While for now I live in Virginia, it seems that for the next few decades I will continue my trend of living in relatively obscure countries throughout the world. While I have plenty of concerns about such a life, concerns of being able to practice my religion is not one of them. As a Mormon, there has never been a more convenient time to live the life I do. We live in a time when Mormons are spread throughout the entire world, when English is no longer the most common first language for church members, and when there are more Mormons outside of the United States than in it.

For many Mormons, these and other indicators would seem to suggest that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is now a truly global church. And they are correct to think so. In every sense of the word, Mormonism has truly penetrated the globe. While there are still a few countries in which there are no functioning congregations, these countries are indeed very few. As a citizen of the world and a proud member of our fantastic global community we call planet Earth, it makes me happy to see that my religion appreciates internationalism as much as I do.

However, despite the new and globalized Church, there is still limited knowledge of who the Mormons are among those who haven't had direct exposure. I believe that one of the great misconceptions that often creeps into the Mormon consciousness is this: A global church means that the rest of the world has global understanding of what the Church represents and believes.

The fact of the matter is, most people in the world have still not heard about the Mormons at all. Beyond those, the next biggest chunk of the world's population may have heard about the Mormons, and some may even recognize that it is a church. Nevertheless, it is a fact that relatively few people in the world know anything substantive about the Mormons. Even in the United States, where it is fairly safe to assume that most people have heard about the Mormons, it is a mistake to assume any more than that.

So, why don't more people know about us? There are likely a number of reasons, differing from person to person. However, in most cases I believe the reason for knowing next to nothing about the Mormons is because it has simply never become an issue to most individuals. They likely have no family or close friends who are Mormons, and have had no reason to otherwise study the makeup of various religions.

I have observed, in some cases, that this lack of knowledge can be irksome to some Mormons. At times, they seem to confuse an absence of understanding for mis-understanding or even malice. When somebody shows ignorance in their knowledge about Mormons, they take offense, and automatically assume prejudice against their religious beliefs. Such members may feel the urge to defend what they perceive as an attack on their own mental capabilities. At times we give the wrong impression by the manner in which we “defend the faith.”

While it is true that there may be times when one needs to stand up and truly defend their beliefs, such as in cases where they are really facing outright discrimination, most times do not call for the full defense forces to be united. If we are too sharp, our defense becomes a reproof which tends to only solidify the mis-conception. These then become spoiled opportunities to inform and to teach.

Think of cases when somebody said something to you about Mormonism with which you disagreed. First, did you feel these people meant harm or insult? Second, how did you react? Did you feel the need to correct them immediately? Did they come away with a more positive view of Mormonism?

For Mormons, I believe that understanding that most people know very little about them is a healthy dose of reality. Understanding this may help them be less likely to take offense when others demonstrate a lack of understanding. But even more importantly, we must realize that the ways in which we react will either leave them with greater understanding and respect, or send them away with misconceptions reinforced.

Mormon Diplomacy Part III: Humanitarian Services

2009-06-13T22:38:00.002+03:00

Humanitarian programs are one of the best ways for an organization to improve their diplomatic efforts. Doing so is becoming increasingly popular among all sorts of organizations. In my opinion, however, there is no organization which does this as effectively as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Of course, I may be a bit biased, but, working in the field of international development, I am not completely ignorant on the subject. Today I would like to share a little about LDS Humanitarian Services, including what they do, and what makes them so unique.

Most church members, as well as many others, are aware of the humanitarian efforts of the Mormons. However, I have found that there is little detailed knowledge beyond that awareness. While studying International Development in graduate school, I realized that I too was among those with a very limited understanding of what the Mormons actually do in terms of an organizational development plan, and sought to remedy the solution, a process in which I am still engaged.

My first chance came when I took advantage of an assignment given in one of my courses, which was to conduct an in-depth study of the practices of a major development organization. Dr. Isaac Ferguson, the former director of LDS Humanitarian Services, was kind enough to give me a lengthy interview and gave me tons of information which I was able to transfer into a successful research paper.

Since then, I have continued to learn by viewing Humanitarian Services in practice. As a Peace Corps volunteer, I have been lucky to interact regularly with the full-time humanitarian directors for the Church in both Romania and Moldova, and even have been permitted to participate in some of their projects.

So, what then does LDS Humanitarian Services do? First of all, they focus on five major global initiatives:

1) Clean Water: Helps set up access to clean water for the estimated 1 billion people on the earth who still don't have access to clean drinking water. (For development nerds like myself who want to see how this fits in line with the UN's Millennium Development Goals, see goal number 7).
2) Neonatal Resuscitation: Provides profession training which helps greatly reduce child mortality. A few months ago, a great Neonatal Resuscitation training took place in Romania. (See MGD number 4).
3) Vision Treatment: It is estimated that nearly ½ of the people who go blind in the world (over 20 million people) could have their blindness cured through a simple surgery for cataracts. Thousands of local doctors in developing countries are trained on how to treat these problems.
4) Wheelchair Distribution: This is one of my favorite programs. Just a couple of months ago I was able to be present for LDS Humanitarian Services distributing 80 wheelchairs in the area.
5) Emergency Response: Perhaps what Humanitarian Services is known for best, the Mormons have made a name for themselves both by the level of post-emergency aid they provide, as well as the organization and rapid response they are able to provide.

In addition to these major programs, the the Humanitarian Services general fund allows for thousands of small projects around the world. The manner in which these projects are identified is about as grassroots as you can get. Many funding organizations require those seeking funding to come to them with specific requests. LDS Humanitarian Services, does just the opposite. Humanitarian representatives independently seek out and offer assistance to organizations which they identify as most deserving. Their criteria is based on both need and the level to which representatives feel the organizations are truly providing a positive social change.

All aid given through these small projects goes directly to material goods, thus ensuring that all donations are used for their intended purposes. In just the last year in our area alone the humanitarian representatives have provided equipment for a sports club for handicapped people, as well as replacing the transmission on the only van used by a struggling aid organization for children.

A few other interesting tidbits about Humanitarian Services: Some may be familiar with two different names, “LDS Humanitarian Services,” and “LDS Charities.” In fact, these two organizations the same. The name they use depends upon the country in which they work. Countries in which the religious organization of the Church has been officially recognized work under the name Humanitarian Services. “LDS Charities” is the name of the Church's non-profit organization which functions in those countries without official church presence.

Another thing I found very interesting was the fact that no tithing is used in conjunction with LDS Humanitarian Services programs. All funding comes from individual donations, which, for those who have ever made donations to the Church of Jesus Christ, are found on the “Humanitarian Aid” line on a standard tithing slip.

LDS Humanitarian Services is also unique in the fact that none of the public donations go toward overhead costs (salaries, rent, utilities, etc.), and all donations go directly to humanitarian aid. This is possible for a number of reasons. Firstly, operations are run in conjunction with existing church infrastructure (sharing offices, etc.). Secondly, the vast majority of LDS Humanitarian Services “staff” are in fact volunteers. Most of the in-country humanitarian representatives are retired couples opting to serve are missionaries for 1 ½ – 2 years. The small full-time staff which does exist is funded through separate, non-donated funds coming from the Church's for-profit management corporation.

All in all, I have been quite impressed with the Church's Humanitarian Services program. I hope you have found this very brief description of LDS Humanitarian Services to be interesting as well. If you have other questions, please let me know!

Further Reading:

And Who Is My Neighbor
Talk given by Presiding Bishop H. David Burton in the April 2008 General Conference, outlining many of the humanitarian efforts of the Church.

Mormon Diplomacy Part II: Public Affairs

2009-06-06T22:47:00.004+03:00

I enjoyed writing about Mormon Diplomacy so much last week, I decided I wanted to write a small series on the subject. I felt it might be interesting to point out some of the Church's major institutionalized diplomatic efforts, as well as discuss some of the diplomatic needs of the Church.

Today I want to focus on what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints refers to as “Public Affairs.” This wing of Church-sponsored diplomacy has become particularly interesting to me since coming to Romania. This interest, in part, stems from one of the callings I have received in our small branch: public affairs representative. Basically, my job is to help coordinate any and all church media efforts in our area.

As part of my calling, I have been lucky enough to receive some training in the public relations system of the Church. They have a very grand objective: To bring the Church out of obscurity. In other words, they seek to help more people who don't know anything about the Mormons know something about them, and most preferably, something positive.

The calling and trainings have led me to take an even deeper interest of some of the various efforts the Church makes around the world to help promote themselves. Using the power of the internet, I began to search for more information. Being aware of much of what goes on among the Mormons, I didn't expect to be too surprised by what I might find. I couldn't have been more wrong. I have been amazed by the extent and the organization of the Church's worldwide efforts.

Before sharing a couple of examples of these efforts, I wanted to point out two important facts of reality that have helped me understand the purpose of Public Affairs.

1) The first is a reality check. Most people know nothing about the Mormons. Despite the 13 million+ membership of the Church and its presence in most nations, the vast majority of people still know little to nothing about Mormons or their Church.

2) The second is understanding the difference between Public Affairs efforts and the job of the full-time missionaries. While the missionaries certainly do have much influence in representing the Church around the world, their scope is fundamentally different. Their task is that of teaching the religious doctrines of the Church. While they do a tremendous job of this, the truth is that not everybody is interested in learning about what the Church teaches. Public Affairs' direct purpose is not teaching or baptizing religious converts. It's role is purely informative and diplomatic.

Understanding these facts helps us to understand the importance of Public Affairs. While the Church certainly benefits from converts to their religion, it also benefits from genuine friends. These friends are ordinary people from all walks of life who are not members of the Church, but those who nevertheless have positive impressions of the Mormons. Public Affairs efforts promote Mormons as a people and as an organization, and to help people see that “hey, Mormons aren't so bad after all!”

A few of the Public Affairs programs struck me as particularly interesting. The first is an ambassadorial/diplomatic outreach to representatives from other countries serving in the United States. Ambassadors, diplomats, foreign ministers, and other official representatives receive invitations both to attend special church functions in the Washington, DC area, and for visits to Salt Lake City, Brigham Young University, etc. For instance, in 2006, 621 official visitors from 100 different countries came to Utah. In 2007, 562 visitors from 103 countries came. I was very surprised by how many people have participated in this program.

Another interesting and relatively new program is the Church's diplomatic outreach to the United Nations. A few years ago, Olene Walker, former governor of Utah, and her husband Myron, were called as the first “Ambassadors to the United Nations” for the Church. During their time in New York City they met with hundreds of officials from all over the world, and were able to share with them much about the work of the Church. For a more in- depth look at their work with the U.N., check out this video.

These are just two examples of the many institutionalized diplomatic outreach programs promoted by the Church's Public Affairs office. As they continue in their efforts, hopefully we too can all do our part in winning friends for the Mormons. In two weeks, I will talk more about some ways we can do this better.

For further reading, see the following article:
http://www.ldsinternationalsociety.org/isdb/publications/19th.pdf

Next Week: Mormon Diplomacy Part III: LDS Humanitarian Services

Mormon Diplomacy

2009-05-30T13:08:00.001+03:00

Since last week, I trust we are looking to fill the gaping hole in our metaphorical hearts that was once occupied by clever military comparisons to religion. Never fear – I have just the solution. Rather than the enlisting in the Lord's Army, we can apply for service in the Lord's Diplomatic Corps!

I know what I said about repetitive metaphors, but in this case, I make an exception. The reason? This isn't a metaphor at all. In every literal sense of the word, as Mormons, or as representatives of any group, we automatically become diplomats to the rest of the world.

I admit that I have an unusual passion for diplomacy. I believe that good diplomacy is an essential tool for progress in the world. In fact, my own career goal is to become a diplomat for the United States. I believe this fondness for diplomacy stems from the diplomatic opportunities I have had in life, including visiting 35 different countries, and living in four, and representing both my religion and my country as a missionary and a Peace Corps volunteer, respectively. Countless time I have been the first American that somebody has ever met. Even more frequently, I have been the first Mormon that they have ever met.

Perhaps this is a scary thought. But the truth is, it could be any of us. Whether the impressions we make are good or bad depends on our diplomatic efforts.

For whatever reason, Mormons stand out sharply wherever they go. Maybe it's because of our “peculiar” way of life, maybe it is because of a glowing countenance, or maybe we just smell different, I don't know. Whatever the reason, it usually takes less than fifteen minutes after meeting somebody before they find out that I'm a Mormon. No matter where I am, I find that my job as a Mormon Diplomat is unceasing.

There are many different definitions of diplomacy. One of my favorites that I learned in graduate school is this: “Diplomacy is telling someone to 'go to hell' in such a way that they look forward to the trip.” While it makes me laugh, I'm quite certain that isn't the message a religious organization wants to send. To me, true diplomacy is being open and honest about who you are in a way that helps people 1) respect you for who you are, and 2) desire to know more about you. It is building relationships of mutual trust and cooperation.

Some might say that missionaries are the diplomats of the Church. True, for many, the face of Mormonism is found in the faces of these young men and women. However, I think even more far reaching are the diplomatic impressions made by members everywhere. Sometimes those impressions are good, and other times, well, let's just say they need to work on their approach a bit.

To make it even more difficult, it seems that for some reason Mormons are held to a higher standard of scrutiny. Former church President Gordon B. Hinckley described this as a sort of “back-handed compliment.” Suffice it to say, the impressions we make as Mormon Diplomats can have long-reaching effects.

I have witnessed the handiwork of successful Mormon Diplomats in the past. I recall moving into an apartment. During my first conversation with the landlady, she found out I grew up in Utah. Immediately, she asked “oh, are you Mormon?” I admitted that I was, and was met by an awkward pause. I thought I had lost the apartment. However, after a few seconds she said “Well why didn't you say so? I am happy to rent to a Mormon!” She even refused to accept a deposit from me, saying “I know I won't have to worry about you.” Her respect for Mormons, she claimed, stemmed from having a Mormon roommate in college who left lasting positive impressions on her. A great diplomat.

Mormon Diplomats are always facing pre-conceptions, many of which are negative. Indeed, other groups have similar obstacles they face when making their diplomatic case to the world. No matter who we are, if we improve our skills of diplomacy, the difference will be amazing. Whatever cause you represent, do so with the heart and mind of a diplomat.

What diplomatic experiences have you had? Have you benefited from the diplomatic skills of others?

The Lord's Army

2009-05-23T21:29:00.000+03:00

Like anybody, I am always up for a good metaphor. Metaphors make wonderful learning tools, and they help us understand concepts more clearly. Even Jesus Christ was a big fan of metaphors, using parables to explain spiritual concepts to His disciples.

Another great learning tool is repetition. Repetition seldom has negative side-effects, and often helps us improve memory. I generally need to hear something several times before it truly sinks in.

Despite the value of these two great tools, I think they can become dangerous when they are mixed together too frequently. Like a concoction which slowly affects our ability to think clearly, when the same types of metaphors are used over and over again, the metaphor can have the affect of losing its metaphorical value, and becoming just a little too real.

For instance, sports metaphors seemed to be used and reused in the business world. True, competition is an inherent part of a capitalist system, but there is a great difference between competition with yourself and competition against another person. When a businessman or businesswoman applies the first type of competition, they can make great things happen. However, if they get caught up in the second type of competition, such determination may lead them to compromise their integrity. Now I am not saying such is caused by sports metaphors, I am saying that perhaps they don't help prevent unhealthy competition. But that is a different topic altogether. Let's look at a repetitive metaphor associated with religion.

Perhaps, because along with religion, war has been another constant in human culture, it gets used quite frequently in religious metaphors. Whether it is the “Lord's Army,” the “Armor of God,” or fighting in the “battle against evil,” militaristic metaphors are used again and again in demonstrating religious concepts.

I have nothing against the military, but I wonder if repetitive use of such metaphors at times leads us to mistakenly view religion as a genuine military action.

We are all aware that acts of war have been committed, motivated by religion, throughout history. While this horrible misuse of religion continues even today, I think even lesser forms of associating religion with war can become damaging.

The major negative side-effect I have seen coming from such metaphors is the “identification of the enemy.” For instance, I hear again and again that we are in a “battle” against evil. I fully agree that there is always a conflict of interests between good and evil in the world. However, I feel that viewing this battle in a militaristic sense can lead towards the need to create a tangible enemy.

In a real war, you must inevitably fight against opposing armies, which, until we invent robot-only warfare, means real, living, breathing people. However, in this “battle against evil,” we are not fighting against other people. In fact, if you want to be specific about it, we are fighting FOR the well-being of ALL other people. In reality, it is not a fight against anything, it is the struggle for peace, righteousness, and good.

Nevertheless, it seems that those who view this life as a battle against evil seem to need to assign people as their antagonists, whether they be Muslims, Mormons, Democrats, Atheists, Republicans, Catholics, Jews, etc. Rather than seeking to fight for the well being of these people, they become “the enemy.”

Ultimately, such thinking is destructive to the true purpose of religion. When we allow ourselves to identify other people as our enemy, how will we ever be willing to “fight” for their well-being, if such is actually required for us?

So, maybe we could lay off the military metaphors just a bit?

Keystone

2009-05-09T22:13:00.001+03:00

Continuing on the subject of scripture, I wish to use the Book of Mormon as the explanatory tool for today's post.

In recent years, I have gained appreciation for good literature. I am certainly not “well read,” but I have read dozens of great books and hope to read hundreds more throughout my life. Out of all these books, however, only one has drastically affected the course of my life. That book is the Book of Mormon.

The Book of Mormon was written by prophets living on the American continent from about 600 B.C. until around 400 A.D. 180 years ago, a young farmer named Joseph Smith received their writings and translated them into modern English. The translation period lasted just under three months, and the Book of Mormon was first published in late 1829. Since that day, over 130 million copies of the book have been distributed throughout the world (the 9th most distributed book in history), and it has been translated into over 100 languages.

I have been aware of the Book of Mormon for as long as I can remember. However, despite growing up in Utah among Mormons, I never read the book until I was nearly 17 years old.

One day, a friend suggested that I read the Book of Mormon. This was not unusual, with most of my friends and neighbors being Mormons. I usually changed the subject when challenged to read what seemed an inevitably boring book. But for some reason, on this occasion I reacted differently. I decided to ask him questions about the book. He provided some basic answers, and for the first time, I felt the desire to read the Book of Mormon.

Over the next several weeks, I began to read it bit by bit. I found the initial stories interesting, and from time to time a passage would strike me as profound. About 100 pages into the book, one thing stood out to me abruptly. It was the name “Jesus Christ,” used by one of the prophets in reference to the future Messiah who would come some 500-600 years in the future.

Now, I didn't consider myself to be a Christian at the time, let alone a member of any religion. Nevertheless, I had read parts of the New Testament, and was aware of the basic history of Jesus Christ as told therein. I knew that Jesus lived in Jerusalem, continents and an ocean away from this Book of Mormon prophet. It struck me as odd how he could name someone who wouldn't be born for hundreds of years, moreover in a completely different part of the world. For whatever reason, this notion peaked my curiosity, filling me with an intense desire to read on and to understand.

It was after this that I felt I had unlocked some secret compartment of the book. As I read, I felt like there was a light slowly growing brighter and brighter, filling me with a holistic sense of understanding that I had never before experienced. Reading only a few passages seemed to open into a huge volume of wisdom, which taught me profound life lessons. These ideas that I had never before considered were not only laid out in the clearest possible way, they stayed with me too. These lingering thoughts carried with them a certain confidence of truth.

At the end of the book, a passage (which I would later learn is one of the primary scriptures used by missionaries when teaching) stood out to me: “...when ye shall read these things...ask God...if these things are not true...he will manifest the truth of it unto you by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.” (Moroni 10:3-5)

At that moment, I felt assured that I had discovered an essential key of truth that would unlock the door to the rest of my existence. I have never since felt so certain about anything else, and I have not been able to forget that feeling.

I understand why Mormons call the Book of Mormon the “keystone” to our religion. By gaining this personal conviction of truth, logic follows that other Gospel teachings merit a closer view. For millions, the Book of Mormon has been that key which has unlocked the door to their perception of God-revealed truth. This experience becomes the solid foundation, the stone, of their understanding of the meaning of life.

I continue to read and enjoy many wonderful books, but none of them has influenced my life as the Book of Mormon. It is a bottomless spring of wisdom. In the years since that first reading, each subsequent read has yielded similar results.

For those who have read the Book of Mormon, I am curious to hear your experiences. Mine has led me to all things in my life, both religious and secular. In your own lives, have you found a similar “keystone” which has led you to where you are now?

The Good Book, or the Perfect Book?

2009-05-02T19:07:00.001+03:00

Not long ago, I shared a polite conversation with a missionary from another Christian church concerning his religious beliefs. He particularly stressed the importance of understanding scripture, which, he claimed, contained the inerrant word of God. The Bible, he highlighted, is the only true source through which we can learn the will of God.

A few days later, I read an article about a man whose profession as a Biblical researcher brought about a life transition which led from being an evangelical Christian with a literalist view of the Bible to becoming agnostic. This change began with the scrutiny of a single scripture. He discovered a Biblical verse which was contradicted in multiple places throughout the Bible. Finding no satisfactory rationalization, he was left to conclude that some mistake had been made in recording or translating the Bible. This discovery was the stone that shattered his belief in a 100% infallible and inerrant Bible.

These situations led me to think more about this idea of the Bible being the “infallible word of God.” The definitions of the words “perfect” and “infallible” differ from person to person. There are many who consider the Bible to be 100% accurate in every aspect. Some even go so far as to conduct extensive apologetic research aimed at rationalizing scriptural details which contradict historical, scientific, or other evidence.

For others, the Bible is not a “perfect” book, according to the literalist definition. I put myself into this category. I truly value the word of God I believe is contained therein, but also believe that “perfection” isn’t necessarily found in 100% inerrancy.

According to Joseph Smith, the first president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: “We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly” (Article of Faith 8). In other words, there might be errors in the scriptures.

The Bible and other scriptures were at some point written or otherwise recorded by human hands. In most cases, they have not only gone through one translation, but through many. Moreover, the original authors of the books of scriptures wrote based on their own understanding of their surroundings.

All these individuals who participated in the creation of scripture, just like you or me, were imperfect. The title page of the Book of Mormon even contains this caveat: “…if there are faults they are the mistakes of men…” There is admittedly room for error, even in scripture.

For some, this notion is troubling. However, this needn’t be the case. Two key considerations of scripture are important in confronting such a challenge:

1) Focus on the big picture, not on minute details or semantics
2) Recognize the true purpose of scripture

First, keeping the “big picture” in our perspective is always healthy. A Church leader once shared a parable concerning this concept. Imagine the Bible as a wonderful tapestry or masterpiece painting. As you view this beautiful work of art, you notice some flaws. In one corner there are some loose threads, or perhaps flaking paint. Do such errors negate the greater beauty?

Second, the true purpose of scripture should always been considered when reading them. Just a few months ago, Elder Dallin H. Oaks, one of the Apostles in the Church, visited Romania. One of the messages which he shared was this very principle – understanding the true purpose of scripture. He declared that if we read the scriptures for the purpose of understanding history, science, archeology, sociology, etc., we will be left wanting. The primary purpose of scripture is to record doctrines and prophecies, not travelogues or narratives. The word of God means the principles by which we should live.

In conclusion, I leave you with some questions. Do you feel the Bible, or any other book of scripture, requires literal accuracy? If so, why? Even if the Bible were infallible, would it be of use to us if we didn’t understand its true purpose?

I value the words of the Bible. This wonderful book, errors and all, contains truth, which, if properly applied, can lead along the path of perfection. However, before scriptures can become “perfect books,” we must first recognize “the good book” within them all.

Mormon Monks

2009-04-25T19:20:00.004+03:00

Last week I had the fantastic opportunity to visit several Greek Orthodox monasteries located in the central-Greek village of Meteora. It was a marvelous place, with monasteries perched high upon massive stone outcroppings along a small mountain range. As we stood on the porch of one of these magnificent structures, enjoying a breathtaking view, my brother Pete and I couldn’t help but feel a tinge of envy for the monks who spend their lives in such a beautiful place. We discussed how it would feel to spend out lives seeking greater understanding of God, the meaning of life, or any other higher form of wisdom. It would certainly seem to be an easier task from such a place.

As appealing as such a life seemed in the moment, I later gave more thought to how it would surely include much sacrifice as well. One who dedicates their life in such a way willfully sacrifices many of the aspects of life that seem normal or even inconsequential to the majority of us.

As I considered the life of a monk, comparing it with my own, I realized that Mormonism has its own type of “monastic order,” albeit quite different than that order which exists in other religions. Mormons even have a phrase which defines this order: “To live in the world, but not be of the world.” This phrase is designed to describe an expectation among church members pertaining to their way of life. In short, they are expected to be fully engaged in the secular affairs of the world, while at the same time remaining true to the faith and constantly seeking more spiritual wisdom, growth, and understanding. When it comes to the secular world and the religious world, Mormons are expected to find a balance between the two, so that they might participate in both 100%.

As it may seem, this indeed is no small task. Secular duties include employment, civic participation, commerce, rearing families, and other elements of our society which are not exclusively religious. Mormons are taught to be active participants in all of these duties. At the same time, church members volunteer their time to serve in various positions within the church leadership and protocol. To put it this way, a “Mormon monk” could be a lawyer, businessman, actress, janitor, pizza delivery person, politician, father, mother, etc., and at the same time serve as a Bishop, auxiliary president, Sunday School teacher, or in a myriad of other ecclesiastical positions. Truly, Mormons living in the world who are not of the world tend to have very busy schedules.

As wonderful as it would be to live high in the mountaintops and have each day to devote to study and meditation, I feel I would miss the satisfaction that comes from toiling in the secular world. Indeed, finding a balance between living in the world, while finding time for fostering personal spiritual growth can be challenging and takes daily effort. But I am convinced that it is possible.

For those of you who are church members, I am curious to know how you feel about this concept of living in the world yet not being of the world. What do you do in order to balance the two? What have been the greatest challenges for you?

For those of you who are not Mormons, I am curious to know how you feel about this concept. In your observations of Mormons, have you seen this? Do you have any good suggestions stemming from your knowledge of other religions or traditions?

Author’s Note: This comparison of the lifestyle of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to other religions which have a monastic order is not meant to critique. It is done to provide contrast, with great respect for those who dedicate their lives to their religion.

Because I Said So!

2009-03-15T22:27:00.000+02:00

Since today’s topic is obedience, I am going to begin by giving you a command:

“Thou shalt post comments”

According to Mormon doctrine, obedience is the “First Law of Heaven.” There is also the “First Principle of the Gospel,” which Mormon-savvy readers will identify as faith. These are two important firsts in the teachings of Mormonism, and this is no coincidence. I believe the two words – “faith” and “obedience” – for the most part are one-in-the-same. But we’ll get to that in a minute.

While we’re on words, let’s look at the word “obedience” a bit closer. I admit, for most of my life, the word “obedience” sounded like nails on a blackboard to my ears. I don’t think that I am the only one for whom that is the case either. This definition of obedience meant being compelled to do something that I would otherwise have no interest in doing.

Since Mormons emphasize obedience so much, it is easy to understand why critics claim that Mormons are a bunch of “sheep,” being compelled to live according to a relatively strict moral code. In this definition of the word, obedience is blind.

This is how I thought for most of my life, including during my first few years as an active Mormon. Of course, there are many church members who are seemingly bound by laws that they would otherwise be inclined to break. I have heard many Mormons claim: “it’s a good thing I’m a Mormon, because if I wasn’t, there’s no telling all the bad things I would be doing!”

However, upon closer examination, I noticed that a significant portion of Mormons did not share this same sentiment. Sure, they were obedient to the commandments. But there was a fundamental difference – they did so willingly, and without any complaint or without seeming to have desires to do anything but be obedient. I began to realize that this was a different kind of obedience, which was nothing like the blind or compelled obedience that I thought made up the very definition of the word.

According to this second definition, a synonym for obedience could be “loyalty,” which still tends to carry a more positive connotation amongst Anglophones. Church members who willingly obey do so because the desires of their heart are to act in accordance with the will of God. This doesn’t mean that they do everything without question. In fact, Mormons are encouraged to seek greater understanding through prayer, study, discussion, and deep-thinking or pondering.

Now, this is where “obedience” and “faith” become the same thing to me, in terms of how they are properly defined in the language of Mormonism. Faith is acting upon a partial knowledge and understanding. As we exercise faith in something (religious or not) our understanding pertaining to that thing increases. In other words, if we obey some law, we gain understanding of whether continued obedience to that law is worth it. Therefore, faith/obedience is defined as the action we take.

When I have used this principle, it has never failed to prove successful for me. Not every law I have obeyed has been a good one. I have certainly exercised faith in things that didn’t merit my faith, but in most cases, I have thankfully gained understanding from these experiences. However, I have yet to identify any law from God, as set forth in the Gospel, to which obedience hasn’t resulted in a greater knowledge that what I have done is right.

In conclusion, obedience can be a very good thing. It is not something that is meant to be done blindly. It should be done with full consciousness and willingness, according to our agency. So, I guess that means you only have to leave comments if you really want to.

P.S. I watched Star Wars Episode III last night, and as I was about to fall asleep, I thought of an absolutely awful Star Wars/Obedience joke, which I will share with you now:

What was Anakin Skywalker required to recite over and over again to his Master during his Jedi obedience training?

Master – Obey, One Can Obey

I warned you it was bad.

Guilty as Charged

2009-03-08T20:14:00.001+02:00

When I was sixteen, I stood before a judge and entered my plea. “Not guilty, your honor,” I said, my adolescent voice trembling with apprehension. Though I felt nervous being arraigned, I knew that I was innocent. My day in court was all thanks to an over-zealous highway patrolman, who decided to wrongfully issue two tickets. I went on to win the case and was cleared on all charges, in part because of my overwhelmingly convincing evidence, but mostly thanks to the fact that Mr. Tough-Guy-Cop didn’t even show and the judge cancelled the trial.

There have been other times in my life when I haven’t felt innocent. In fact, I have felt down-right guilty at times. For instance, once as a teenager I called my sister a bad name and pushed her on the ground. There was the time in middle school that I spread a rumor about a classmate that ended up with me in the principal’s office. Another time I shot a bird with a pellet gun and watched it fall dead from the tree.

In all of these cases I felt guilty, and rightfully so. I learned from these experiences, and the feelings of guilt persuaded me not to repeat the same mistakes. However, other times I have felt guilty for reasons which were likely more harmful than helpful. In these times I have twisted my religious beliefs into guilty feelings of “inadequate righteousness.” These feelings are most often self-inflicted, but they are, unfortunately, all too often used by others as a tool of manipulation.

A difficult period in my life took place over two or three months when I was a missionary. Along with the harsh realization that all responsibility for work was now in my own hands, I began to feel very alone. It wasn’t like early in my missionary service, where I had felt inspired, and had felt the Spirit of God guiding me in what I was doing.

When these feelings of inspiration and the Spirit had evaporated, I began to harbor irrational thoughts that perhaps I had done something wrong to deserve this change. Was I was guilty of some great transgression of which I was unaware? Surely, I thought, this had to be the reason for feeling so alone!

Luckily, these pointless feelings of guilt were extinguished when I read an article which offered me novel wisdom on the subject. I read that God often gives us opportunities to “go at it alone” in order to develop our character strength. I needn’t feel guilty of some great and hidden sin. On the contrary, I could feel the honor of being trusted to make my own choices and take personal responsibility for my actions. Within a few months, my mission was transformed, and the feelings of the closeness of God and His Spirit were stronger than ever.

Unfortunately, guilt can become a destroying side-effect of misused religion. People feel they are lacking, that they are unsatisfactory before God, etc. Even worse, at times one may attempt to instill feelings of guilt and despair in others. This is often a byproduct of these individual’s own feelings of guilt. It is as if they feel that if somebody else were to experience the same guilty that they are, the burden would somehow be transferred away from them. Hate to break it to you, folks, but it doesn’t work that way.

The type of guilt which destroys us rather than molds us into something better is in direct opposition to the principle of agency. God does not want us to feel guilty in this way. Certainly, if we recognize that we have done something wrong, some feelings of guilt are natural and a sign of our changing as a result. However, the lingering feelings of guilt and unworthiness can be very damaging, if we allow them to consume us.

We believe in a loving God, not a being who is spiteful and full of wrath, as some religious extremists would like to portray in order to control others. If you or somebody else is using religion to cause you too feel guilty for some un-identifiable sin, know that this isn’t of God. Learning the lesson that we are worthy and trusted children of God can cause us to feel happiness like we have never felt before.

Apples, Oranges, and Churches

2009-03-01T22:18:00.000+02:00

As a missionary I spoke to thousands of people about my church. Some conversations were brief, while others included a series of lessons in which we would talk in-depth about the doctrines of the Gospel. Among all these people with whom I spoke, there was one question that far and away was asked most frequently than any other: “What’s the difference between your church and my church?” (Actually, that is not entirely accurate. “What in the blazes are you doing in Siberia?” was probably a contender for that title).

In my case, most who asked this question were referring to the Russian Orthodox Church. I’m sure this same question is asked in all parts of the world. There is some part of our human nature that just loves to make comparisons. We all see life through our own lens, and when something new is introduced, we immediately compare it to whatever seems to have the most similarity.

My common response was probably the same approach that many missionaries use throughout the world. I would begin by answering the opposite of what they asked. Rather than talking about what is different, attempts were made to build common ground by beginning with things that are the same. After building that common ground, the things which were “different and new” were introduced.

While there is nothing wrong with this time-tested approach, in the years since my mission, I have though more about how to better answer this question. I have come to believe that the question itself is less than ideal. Some things simply can’t be compared in a meaningful way. As the saying goes, it’s like comparing apples to oranges.

Lumping all churches into a single category limits our ability to effectively evaluate their purpose. One wouldn’t compare a shoe store and a grocery store simply because they are both stores. A milk lover might say “I don’t see why anybody goes and spends their money at that shoe store, they don’t even have milk! Why does the shoe store even exist?” They are both stores, but that doesn’t mean their purpose and their product are the same. Why then do we categorize churches like this?

For some churches, tradition and culture are the primary driving forces. This is often the case in places of the world where Orthodox Christian or Catholic faiths are predominant. Other churches focus on the concept of community, social interaction, and congregation. This is often true for many Protestant groups, where the congregation itself is bigger than the denomination.

One could say that in a tradition-based church, identity with the church is about the equivalent to one’s national or ethnic identity. In a congregation-based church, identity might be more similar to being a member of a club. I am not implying that there is anything wrong with tradition-based or congregation-based religious groups. Both types can be very effective in serving the needs of their membership. However, I don’t believe they provide accurate variables for comparison when trying to understand the purpose and scope of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

While the Mormons definitely have their own traditions and have developed their own culture, and while a social system and congregation approach certainly exist, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is based on another concept which, in my opinion, is unique among churches. The Church is mission-driven, much like a corporation or a non-profit organization which uses a mission statement to define their purpose. “To bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” (Moses 1:39) is often stated as the mission-statement of the Church, and all policies, procedures, and programs are designed to serve this purpose.

Because of the mission-driven nature of the Church, Mormons find that their religion penetrates every aspect of their lives. It therefore, becomes a “way of life-based church.” Becoming a Mormon is no small commitment. It is a full-time, life-long promise that one makes to give freely of their time and their means to serving this over-arching mission.

Perhaps asking the question I was oft asked as a missionary may provide for some interesting theological considerations. However, as far as comparing churches go, I believe this can lead to inadequate conclusions. Comparing them is truly like comparing apples to oranges.

The Ethics of Religion

2009-02-22T22:49:00.001+02:00

Four years ago, I had the unique experience of visiting the Alfred Nobel museum in Sweden. Alfred Nobel was a scientist and engineer who invented dynamite. While he died in 1895, the story goes that in 1888, a mistake was made in a French newspaper, which erroneously published Nobel’s premature obituary. It was very critical of Nobel, calling him the “merchant of death,” and saying he “became rich by finding ways to kill more people faster than ever before…”

This premature obituary apparently was very trying on Nobel’s conscience, and he vowed to leave a more constructive legacy after his death. He is now famous for having donated the bulk of his sizeable estate to the Nobel Prize program.

Learning about Alfred Nobel made me consider the concept of ethics. In every discipline, there is an ethical code. While there may be some grey area in the debate over the location of the ethical fulcrum, there are some practices which are always seen as unethical. Things like life, property, etc., are generally universally respected.

Business has a code of ethics. Giving bribes, stealing patents, and false advertising are examples of ethical breaches. Science has a code of ethics. Doing research on subjects without consent, destroying the environment, or other life-destroying research practices are looked down upon. Religion definitely has a code of ethics, though it is often not spoken of as such.

I have met many people who have said that they are not religious because “religion is the cause of so much bad in the world.” In the same way that one might cut corners or cook the books in the name of business, or one might test a nuclear weapon in the name of science, a person might declare war, discriminate, or otherwise harm people in the name of religion.

In Nobel’s case, he invented something which was ultimately used by many for ill. Nevertheless, dynamite has been used for many useful purposes. Nobel himself didn’t use his creation to take the lives of others, yet in the wrong hands, it has been very dangerous. In the case of religion, its purpose isn’t to destroy, yet misused and in the wrong hands, it has caused a lot of sorrow throughout history. Unethical indeed.

The fact that unethical behavior is found in every discipline leads me to conclude that religion itself is not the actual cause of all the wrong which is done in the name of religion. Rather, it is just another example of a breach in the ethical code that is such a part of our human nature.

Like science, business, and other disciplines, religion can rightfully be used for good when properly and ethically applied. Alfred Nobel’s purpose as an inventor was to create something that would benefit the advancement of humankind, and not to contribute to the loss of many human lives. Most would argue that the true purpose of religion is to promote good in the world. If somebody takes religion and unethically applies it, does it make the entire discipline worthless?

Focusing on all the bad that has been done in religion’s name, it is easy to see how so many have become disenchanted with the idea of religion in general. However, is the legacy of religion one of destruction? As was the case with the French newspaper and Nobel, has a premature obituary been written for religion, labeling it as a force of evil, because it has been misused by many? Or, will the legacy of religion be one that honors acts of creation, advancement, and peace, like the Nobel Prize?

Science and Religion – BFFs

2009-02-14T22:30:00.000+02:00

During this past week, our good friend Charles Darwin turned 200 years old. While he isn’t exactly a figure in Mormonism, his work has affected nearly every part of humanity. Incidentally, his revolutionary discoveries were being made in the same time period that the Church of Jesus Christ was being restored to the earth. So, in honor of the famous scientist, I would like to discuss the idea of science and religion, and why they are such good friends.

Of course, I am not a scientist, and therefore will not pretend to have a deep understanding of concepts such as evolution. The purpose of this blog is religious in nature, so discussing a topic such as this may seem to make little sense. But, as you all know, evolution often gets used as a chess piece the pseudo-competition between science and religion.

First and foremost, let me say that I think that this so-called battle between science in religion is non-existent and even rather stupid. Sometimes I like to imagine science and religion as two neighbors living in the suburbs. I see them having barbeques together, watching college basketball games, and doing all of the things that good neighbors do. However, because they both have such strong personalities, the other neighbors start gossiping about what they see as differences in opinion. The idea spreads that “religion and science will never get along.” However, in reality, they get along just fine. In fact, they even compliment each other in many ways. The combination of their individual strengths makes the entire community a better place.

As a religious person, I can honestly say that I have never felt the slightest bit threatened by scientific research or ideas. Mormon doctrine at times refers to the “mysteries of godliness,” meaning those things which pertain to our existence that we currently have limited or no understanding of. Any good scientist will also admit that there are unlimited “mysteries of the universe,” that is to say, those things which aren’t currently understood. In fact, science exists as a discipline to study and try and understand these mysteries.

So maybe you can help me understand where the conflict lies? Are those who use religion to refute science simply afraid that life might have too many hidden complexities to handle, and therefore want to use the simplified version of religious belief to explain everything? That doesn’t make sense to me, because religion has been nothing but bottomless and complex to me as I have studied. I learn something new from religion nearly every day.

And what about those who use science to refute religion? I can understand the agnostic approach, saying that there is no conclusive scientific proof to verify many religious beliefs. But, using that same logic, there is also a lack of proof to discredit these same ideas. How do some then try to claim science is an adequate “proof” that religious beliefs are false?

Now, for many people, the conflict between science and religion has long subsided. But, every once in a while, you hear somebody bringing it up again. A couple of years ago, I recall a Sunday School teacher telling of how he recently saw some amazing animal (I think it was an Elephant Seal), and how he “didn’t understand how people could accept the doctrine of ‘Darwinism.’” Or in another case, I remember watching a documentary where a scientist who discovered the body of a pre-historic human ancestor said that his discovery would lead religious people to “get off the fence” and admit that they are wrong.

Maybe we will eventually recognize that religion and science are not enemies at all, just two great parts of our existence that both play very important and necessary roles. But for now, let’s thank the great minds in religion and science alike. Mr. Darwin, this one’s for you.

"Excuse Me, You Seem to Have Spilled some Religion on Your Sleeve"

2009-02-07T21:57:00.003+02:00

I recently read a book in which Orson Scott Card, a well-known Mormon author, referred to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as a “surprisingly secular religion.” I really like this simple observation he offered for our religion, and think it says a lot about how the religion is reflected in the lives of the church members.

At first glance, using the word “secular” may seem to be an oxymoron, as it is not a commonly used adjective when describing a religious group. Sure, you will hear people talk of “secular Muslims” in Turkey or the UAE (meaning they do not have a religiously-tied government), or “secular Jews” (sometimes used to describe the Jewish community which ethnically Jewish but do not practice and/or believe in Jewish doctrines). However, a “secular Mormon” to me, means something very different.

While the interpretations of the meaning may vary, I believe that this refers to a somewhat atypical phenomenon that isn’t witnessed as much in other religions. Many Mormons have seemingly found a way to balance living a highly religious (and even peculiar) lifestyle, while remaining fully engaged in secular affairs. Indeed, Mormons have long been counseled by their leaders to “live in the world, but not be of the world.” They are encouraged to participate in nearly all sectors of public life, including business, education, politics, the military, and so forth.

While this is what is taught, it certainly isn’t always the practice. Some become secular Mormons in the sense that while they are Mormons by birth and/or culture, they do not accept the doctrines of the Church to be true. At the other end of the spectrum, there are Mormons who would never want to be associated with the word “secular,” and who very readily wear their religion on their sleeve.

In an effort to understand the proper balance, I will offer some scripture to compare and contrast. Jesus taught: “Ye are the light of the world…Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 5:14-16). Just one chapter later, He gives another teaching: “…when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray…that they may be seen of men…when thou prayest, enter into thy closet and pray unto thy Father which is in secret;” (Matthew 6:5-6).

Is it possible to “let our light shine before men,” while at the same time worshiping in secret? I think so.

Now, I don’t mean to say that worshiping in secret means to hide our religion. On the contrary, I think one can and should be completely open and honest about who they are, in terms of religion. They just shouldn’t feel the need to advertise who they are at first glance. It is important to learn to demonstrate one’s Mormon-ness in the proper context.

Those who like wear their religion on their sleeve often find that the practice becomes habitual. Such people tend to have a hard time talking about something that isn’t related to their religion. While this isn’t the worst habit one might have, I think that we should all strive for a better balance. We can find our way of worshiping in secret, while still letting our light shine so that others may see.

For everybody this process may be different. Where we live, the number of Mormons in our community, and other factors may affect this balance. For those that are Mormons, what are some suggestions you have for being balanced in representing your religion, while not becoming overzealous? For those who are non-religious, former-Mormons, or followers of another religion or belief-system, what are some of your observations and/or suggestions?

Whose Fault Is It Anyway?

2009-01-31T18:16:00.000+02:00

In my last post, I talked about feelings, and how understanding them and being honest with ourselves are the best ways to understand truth. However, recognizing truth is only part of the battle. Knowing what to do with it is often more challenging.

Since every truth is different, they may require different actions. There is no formula on how to appropriately act on truth once we understand it. However, there is one thing that I feel always should accompany any action we make, and that is a willingness to accept personal responsibility.

Now, I might not be the best person to be preaching this sermon on responsibility. Having been married for nearly two years, I have found that one of the greatest perks to marriage is being able to use your spouse as an excuse to get out of something you don’t want to do. My wife and I have both given one another the green light to “pull the spouse card” when we don’t have another legitimate excuse available.

I know this may not be 100% honest. I sleep at night telling myself that this can only be used for small things (don’t want to come over to the neighbor’s house for dinner but don’t want to hurt their feelings, etc.). Pulling the spouse card is one thing, but when making decisions based on truth which is religious or spiritually based, we need to be strong enough to take ownership of our actions and decisions. In other words, we shouldn’t pass off the responsibility to God. Doing this is one example of what the Ten Commandments calls “taking the name of the Lord in vain” (or, as I like to call it, pulling the God card).

Preparing for this post reminded me of an old Saturday Night Live skit called “Pious Housewife.” Sally Field plays a super-religious homemaker who prays to God about everything, and I mean EVERYTHING. Prays for the cast of her favorite day-time TV program, prays that the rice won’t get sticky, etc. Finally, Jesus (Phil Hartman) appears to her. At first she is overjoyed, but she soon learns that he isn’t there to compliment her ability to pray obsessively. He politely explains that although it is good to pray, he would appreciate if she would “tone it down a bit.” It is a good, humorous example of showing how some people don’t use principle of moderation even in religious worship, and how they use God to justify everything in their lives (For the full transcript of the skit, click here).

Pulling the God card and taking the name of the Lord in vain has often led to very tragic consequences. People throughout the centuries have used God as an excuse to kill others, to commit adultery, to abandon their children, or even to start wars.

Other times, people take the name of the Lord in vain because they want something and they don’t think their own efforts will be legitimate enough to gain it. My wife, a proud BYU graduate, has told me college dating stories, where young men would tell her: “I prayed about it, and feel that God wants us to get married/date/whatever.” Seeing as how more than one person used this one on her, it would seem that a lot of independent decision making concerning her life was going on without her even being part of the discussion.

In other circumstances, people use God as an excuse because they are just plain chicken. Using the same example of the Mormon dating scene, how many break-ups have been formalized by pulling the God card. “The Spirit is telling me that we shouldn’t see each other any more.” (Translation: “I don’t really like you but am too big of a wuss to tell you how I really feel.”)

Now, I am not saying that God doesn’t communicate important, life-changing information to us time to time. I have had experiences where I feel very personal and important counsel has been given to me. However, we are ultimately responsible for how we act in response. God gave us agency to choose so that we would develop our own personal sense of responsibility. While we can learn truth from God, we should never use Him as an excuse.

More than a Feeling

2009-01-17T19:58:00.001+02:00

In a continual effort to explain why I believe in the doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I would like to discuss how I feel that I have come to recognize truth concerning spiritual matters.

But first, allow me to provide a little context. Mormons teach that we are able to know the truth of all things through “the power of the Holy Ghost.” According to Mormon doctrine, the Holy Ghost is a member of the Godhead, and is a distinct and separate individual from Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ. He is a person of spirit; whereas the other two members of the Godhead have perfected and resurrected bodies.

The role of the Holy Ghost in Mormon theology is a very important one. He is responsible to reveal truth unto those who seek it. A commonly-shared scriptural passage which emphasizes this point is found in the Book of Moroni, in the very last chapter of the Book of Mormon.

“…[W]hen you shall receive these things,…ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if you ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things” (Moroni 10:4-5, emphasis added).

When I have shared this scripture with others, a common question is “how does this work?” In other words, how do we know truth?

It is my opinion that most human beings are aware of truth at all times. If we dig down to the source of what we know, we will find that it is rooted in something we all are constantly experiencing: our feelings.

Think about it in this way. Have you ever felt in a certain way, yet when you tried to explain it to somebody else, you couldn’t find the right words? My guess is anybody who has been involved in a romantic relationship has certainly experienced this all-to-common phenomenon.

Everything we say or do must first be premeditated in some way. Sometimes this premeditation takes place in the split second before the action occurs (hence I end up with my foot in my mouth from time to time). However, before we can say or do anything, we must allow it to in some way emerge in our consciousness through thought.

Likewise, before we can have a thought, no matter how complete it is, we must first have a certain feeling that leads to this type of thought. What we feel is one of the greatest indicators of who we are. It is more real to us than anything else. We may not be able to express our feelings clearly, even through thought. However, if we are completely honest with ourselves, we can recognize how we truly feel in any given situation.

The Holy Ghost communicates truth to us through our feelings. Mormon doctrine teaches that in addition to our physical bodies, we also have spiritual bodies, like that of the Holy Ghost. Our spirit body is the source of our feelings, and therefore the source of our knowledge of truth. The Holy Ghost, being a Spirit Himself, is able to communicate with us directly through our spirit. Therefore, when we discover something pertaining to our eternal existence (in other words, a doctrine), we can ask to find out if it is true. The Holy Ghost is able to communicate the truth of these things directly to our spirit through our feelings.

I won’t try to explain this process too much now, mainly because I am not sure I am able to adequately express it through words (it’s based on feeling, remember?). However, I can say with a surety that when the Holy Ghost manifests a truth to our spirit through our feelings, it is more powerful than any other witness we could possibly receive.

So, how do you feel about this?

The Greatest Truth...

2009-01-10T16:28:00.001+02:00

Friends have often expressed curiosity as to what brought me to believe in Mormonism in the first place. I thought it might be a good time to start addressing this question, though it will take more than just this one article to provide a complete answer.

However, if I had to sum it up in a single sentence it would be something like this: We are literally children of God, and as such, have the opportunity to become like Him. The title that Mormons often give to this concept is “eternal progression.”

I don’t know why, but a lot of people, both Mormons and non-Mormons, seem to gloss over the significance of this doctrine, or even ignore it completely. Mormon critics even attack this doctrine and try to say that it is blasphemous to even suggest that we are literally children of God, and have a divine potential to develop and become more like Him. This has always been strange to me, almost as if they are saying that our potential is limited and finite.

Before I developed faith in the other doctrines of Mormonism, I believed in the idea of eternal progression. I didn’t know what we were to develop into, but I believed that there was no limit as to what we could become. I believed that some clearly developed more rapidly than others, and at times, there were even some who seemed to “devolve” in their own spiritual progression.

As I begin to look into the beliefs of Mormonism, I realized what a unique claim their doctrine made. Rather than limiting our human definition, they openly proclaimed their belief in our limitless human potential. They taught of a God who is literally the Father of every human being. They taught that as a Heavenly Parent, He is intimately concerned with our development. While respecting the importance of free will, He has given us every piece of information necessary to become like Him. It is our decision to use this information or not, and thus our progression is determined by us.

I realized that although this doctrine seemed to be preached only by the Mormons, it is laced throughout ancient scripture and the Bible. Take these examples, which stress the literal nature of humans as sons and daughters of God:

The 82nd Psalm says: “…Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.” In the New Testament, Jesus Christ made reference to this scripture when he said: “Is it not written in your law…Ye are gods? If he called them gods…the scripture cannot be broken.” (John 10:34-35).

It isn’t just religion that teaches this principle. We are echoing this truth in what we are teaching our children. Whenever you tell a child that they can become “anything they want to become,” or encouraging them to “reach for the stars,” we are making reference to this fundamental truth about our nature.

Focusing on the importance of this truth helps us to see the world in a completely different light. Instead of problems, we begin to recognize more opportunities. Instead of enemies, we recognize others as our literal brothers and sisters.

I know that we are not perfect, but we have the potential to become perfect. In fact, Jesus encouraged us to become perfect when He summed up His Sermon on the Mount with these words: “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” (Matthew 5:48).

I would be very interested to hear your thoughts on the doctrines of eternal progression and our true nature as divine children of God. For more scriptural references from the Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants, click here.

A Little Less Lazy in 2009

2009-01-03T19:50:00.000+02:00

Happy New Year!

I have indeed been quite lazy in terms of posting during the past month. Since the New Year is a time for new beginnings, I would like to share with you the theme of my New Year’s goals.

Diligence

Diligence is an attribute which all Mormons are encouraged to seek. It is true that hard work comes in handy for people of all belief systems, and Mormons are certainly not alone in their quest to become more diligent. I have always admired people who clearly have a strong work ethic. I have also never been one of these people.

So, 2009 is the year! The Nils you knew before will hopefully fade away, and a newer, diligenter Nils will hopefully emerge. As part of this quest to become more diligent, I will consider consistent weekly postings on my blog to be an essential goal.

In addition, I wish to focus the purpose of this blog. In essence, it is designed to be a place for discussion. All aspects of Mormonism have been touched in the past six months, including the doctrine, the culture, and the history of Mormonism. While they are all fascinating and inter-connected in many ways, I have always been more interested in what makes the Mormon belief system unique. Therefore, I would like to discuss the core doctrines of Mormon belief primarily during the next several posts.

In the meantime, I would be interested in hearing what doctrines are more interesting to you. I would also be curious to hear what character-related New Year’s resolutions you have, if any, and if they are not too private.

All in the Family

2008-12-06T12:33:00.004+02:00

Here in Romania, I had an opportunity to participate in a church training conducted by church public relations specialists. They were speaking to the president of our little congregation in Galati, and giving him pointers on what to say during any public inquiries about the Church. They told him that the most important message that the Church, as an organization, wishes to express is that “the Church exists to help strengthen families.”

Also, while reviewing the most recent General Conference Addresses by Elder Russell M. Nelson, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, one of his statements stood out to me: “All Church activities, advancements, quorums, and classes are means to the end of an exalted family.” (Russell M. Nelson, “Celestial Marriage,” General Conference Address October 2008).

Anybody even remotely familiar with Mormonism knows that the concept of the family play a very, very, very big role in our worship. In addition to being known for big families, Mormons are famous for family reunions, Family Home Evening, the Proclamation on the Family, family history, and basically anything else that has the word “family” in it. Mormon leaders have repeatedly stressed the social value of strong families, proclaiming that that families are the most fundamental and imperative societal unit.

So why the heavy focus on families? In our discussion last week, readers claimed that one of the most important influences on their views of morality came from their parents. Mormons, along with plenty of others, believe that the most important laboratory for learning life lessons is the home. We all learn from our parents and other family members growing up. In addition, our parents learn and develop significantly though experiences associated with raising children. I guess this means we can’t say that “home-schooled kids are weird” anymore, since the majority of us all learned the most in our homes.

In addition to the importance of families here on this earth, Mormons have a more long-term view of the significance of families. The Mormon temple ordinance known as “sealing” is performed both between husband and wife (Temple Sealing, or Celestial Marriage, is the highest form of marriage in Mormonism) as well as between parents and children. This creates a chain from generation to generation of children to parents and parents to children. This inter-connected ordinance is necessary to be “exalted,” which is even higher and greater than salvation, which is an individual matter.

Just to underscore even further how important the eternal perspective of families is to Mormons, I again quote from Elder Nelson’s talk: “celestial marriage brings greater possibilities for happiness than does any other relationship. The earth was created and this Church was restored so that families could be formed, sealed, and exalted eternally.”

In other words, families are the answer to life, the universe, and everything, or at least a fundamental part of understanding that answer. Families are the source of greatest joy. They have the potential to last forever. They are our source of greatest power if they are properly cultivated and developed.

So, we all have families. Some have Mormon families, some don’t. Some, like me, have a combination. Some have big families, some have small families. I now have two families, both my parents and siblings, as well as my relatively new family that current only consists of two people, my wife and I. I am interested in hearing all of your perspectives on families. Just how important is family to you? How do you make the most out of families? This week is dedicated to families, so let your voice be heard.

Our Universal Mentality of Morality

2008-11-30T19:02:00.000+02:00

Reader Request: I'd be interested to know where you think you get your morals from, and if there's a place you think people should get their morality from. Church is obviously a huge source for many people, but not everyone has religion, and even those who are religious sometimes feel more morally flexible than what their religion proscribes.

Thanks for your question about the source of morality. To be honest, I have no idea how to give a definitive answer to this question, but I will give it a shot anyway.

It seems likely that morals come from many different sources. As a Mormon, I would suggest that many morals are consistent with universal laws which come from God. As a human, however, I don’t feel I can discern every one of these laws or morals alone. Many things viewed as “immoral” or socially inappropriate by some probably don’t matter all that much (such as not wearing black to a funeral). Other actions which are condoned by many probably are in fact very immoral (such as supporting the LA Lakers). It’s hard to say, and there are likely infinite possible answers. But before I get too far into what I think, let’s look at some other interpretations of the source of morality.

Once I attended a debate over the purpose and consequences of religion in which an atheist professor proclaimed that morals were likely the result of many years of biological conditioning. For instance, societies function better as a whole when community members were not allowed to kill others, and therefore, murder biologically evolved as being “immoral.”

At the other end of the spectrum, it is claimed that morals come from some higher authority in the universe. Some even go so far as to know what they feel God would see as moral and seek to impose moral mote-removal on others, despite their own eye-beams.

No matter what one’s religious beliefs, it is likely that they subscribe to some moral code. They use these morals as guiding principles in their lives. When they see others breaking these morals, they have some type of negative emotional reaction. Governments and laws are created based on some code of morality, fairness, or justice. In fact, everything we do reflects in this invisible moral force to which we all seem to adhere.

Mormonism teaches that we are all literally children of God. As such, we have inherited certain aspects of godliness which are part of who we are. Considering this, I believe morality comes directly from who we are. Our divine nature follows the same universal code to which our Spiritual Father is subject. Living according to these morals results in increased happiness and peace in our lives, while living otherwise results in the opposite.

But is religion the only way to gain understanding of morality? My Mother told me that when I was a child, she determined that in order to instill morals in me, she would have me attend church. This lasted for a while, but she later shared an experience with me that changed her perception of her “religious upbringing=moral life” notion. While talking to a friend who was not raising her children in a church, the question was raised: “Do children really need to be part of a religion to learn morals?” It was a question she had never considered before.

There are clearly many who have been raised religious who are also good people. There are also many who seem to have never gotten the morality memo. Likewise, many non-religious people live what could be called very moral lives and provide strong examples of morality for others. Since morality is part of who we are, then it matters very little if we learn morality from church, teachers, parents, friends, TV, life in general, all of the above or none of the above. Perhaps some of these provide a better learning environment than others. Personally, I feel Mormonism has given me amazing perspectives on morality that I wouldn’t have received anywhere else. Learning about morality, both in church and outside of church, has given me a chance to help define what morality means to me.

In conclusion: Morality is part of who we are. The more we seek to understand what morality means, the clearer our awareness becomes, and the easier it is for us to live moral lives.

Where the Green Grass Grows

2008-11-24T00:04:00.003+02:00

Today my wife gave a wonderful talk in church. Of course, her talks are always wonderful, and since our branch has fewer than 10 members, I get to hear them at least once a month. But seriously, this one was even better than usual. She spoke concerning the power of gratitude, and how we can harness that power in our own lives. As an insider, I know that she wasn’t planning to speak on this originally, but as she was preparing her thoughts, it took this direction. I thought it was impeccable timing considering that during this week Thanksgiving will be celebrated in the United States.

Thanksgiving has always been a favorite holiday of mine. It may have to do with the fact that my birthday falls on the same day as Thanksgiving every six years. It may also have to do with my love of potatoes and fine poultry. But besides these reasons, I love Thanksgiving because I feel that it represents something that is more powerful and important than we often give credit. Though the holiday itself is based loosely on some historical events, it has developed to be a time for family to gather, and to “give thanks” for the good things in life.

A few years ago, a researcher (undoubtedly from Brigham Young University) took a look at talks given by the General Authorities (leaders) of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints during General Conferences (church-wide meetings which take place every six months). All talks from the past several decades were surveyed and categorized based on the primary theme of each given talk. Many were surprised to find that “gratitude” was a clear winner.

One aspect of human nature is that we tend to be fantastic critics. We have mastered the skills of editing and correcting. If there is something wrong with anything in the world, somebody has found it. This is true for everything – our families, our friends, our leaders, or even our own lives.

A sixteen-year-old with their first pimple is likely to notice the few millimeters of blemish on their face, while ignoring all the clear skin that surrounds it. Likewise, we tend to critique and complain about the “problems” we see in all sorts of things, while ignoring the majority of good that surrounds us. A leader once explained this principle to me as looking at a magnificent tapestry with a beautiful and intricate design, and only focusing on a few strings that have come loose.

Thanksgiving represents a time to forget about all of our problems and focus on what we have. While this may go against our nature, cultivating a grateful attitude in our lives can work wonders. The old adage of “counting your blessings” really works! If we take time to specifically focus on the things we have that are good in our lives, and even write them down regularly if needed, we begin to see how much we truly have. We begin to notice how wonderful the tapestry really is, rather than only seeing the small mistakes. We see that the grass is indeed as green on our side.

Focusing on these problems is simply not a healthy way to live. It creates unnecessary stress in our lives, which carries with it so many unpleasant consequences. Ever notice how emotionally draining somebody who is constantly negative can be? What do you think we are doing to ourselves when we focus on what we interpret to be a problem, and ignore the vast expanses of beauty around us?

So, Happy Thanksgiving everyone! During this week of celebrating gratitude, I would love to hear the things which you are all grateful for in your lives. I will start with a short list:

• My wonderfully brilliant wife Emily.
• The great opportunity to be a Peace Corps volunteer and the experience I am gaining from living in a different country.
• My Mother and Father, for teaching me the value of agency and the importance of using one’s brain.
• My Father in Heaven, for creating such a beautiful world for us and endowing us with limitless potential.

Share your thoughts on gratitude and your lists as well. Often times we forget, and gratitude expressed by another might remind us of something we too tend to overlook.

The Mormon God

2008-11-16T22:21:00.001+02:00

Author’s Note: After the past few weeks focusing on political issues, I would like to re-align this blog in a different direction. Earlier, I talked about the different aspects of Mormonism that would be discussed on this blog – cultural, historical, and doctrinal. We have touched on all at some point. Now, I would like to change the focus for a while to consider doctrinal issues. Hopefully it will be insightful for all, Mormon or not. Comments, questions, and discussion are still encouraged from everybody.

One of the fundamental aspects of every major world religion is a belief in some supreme or higher power. For many of these religions, this power is identified as one or more gods. Mormonism is no exception. God plays a very central role in our belief system.

A few weeks ago, a Mormon missionary related an experience about teaching a young woman about Mormon beliefs and doctrines. Despite her interest, she continued to use the terms “your god” and “our god” when asking questions and making comments on their teaching. Finally, the missionary asked what she meant by these comments. She said that since she belonged to another religion, she thought that meant they believed in different gods.

It is true that the definition and concept of “God” can mean different things to different people. For some, the very nature of God is something that is impossible for humans to comprehend. For others, God is simply a concept of goodness and/or love that we must find within ourselves and others.

The Mormon concept of God includes many of these same elements, albeit to different degrees. We believe that the fullness of the nature of God is indeed difficult if not nearly impossible for mortal humans to understand in completeness. However, unlike some other religious traditions, Mormonism highlights the importance of continually seeking to gain understanding and comprehension of whom or what God is and what He is like. In fact, this quest for knowledge and understanding is viewed as a fundamental human responsibility.

Mormons also believe that love, happiness, and joy are godly characteristics. We believe that we should find and/or develop these attributes within ourselves and recognize them in others. However, we do not believe that these virtues are, in and of themselves, God. We believe that God is an actual immortal and exalted human who has developed to a point far beyond any of us. Love, joy, and happiness are defining characteristics of God.

For Mormons, God is literally the Spiritual Father of every human being who lives or has lived. This is why Mormons regularly refer to God as “Heavenly Father.”

The best descriptive titles I can give in explaining how Mormons view God are these: God is a perfect parent, as well as our greatest role model. As a parent, he is intimately concerned with our happiness. With His developed understanding of life, He knows even better that we do how to gain true happiness for ourselves. As a role model, He stands as an example of the type of people we ought to become to obtain as much of this happiness as possible.

In connection with His intense concern for our happiness, God is also the world’s greatest library. He has gone to great lengths to ensure that everything we need to know about life is available to us. At the same time, like a good teacher, He ensures our own complete agency over this learning process. We obtain and understand this wealth of information only to the degree which we choose to seek. It is through this learning process and through the obtaining of knowledge and intelligence that we can also become like God is.

And so, yes, there is a “Mormon God.” However, unlike the belief of the girl, we do not believe that “our God” is different than the God of any other religion or belief system. He is everyone’s God, not to mention everyone’s loving and concerned Father.

So, tell me all your thoughts on God…

A Word to the Wise

2008-10-05T14:22:00.000+03:00

You may have noticed Mormons steering clear of illegal drugs. Not too strange, right? Others may have observed Mormons refraining from smoking and alcohol. This also is generally acceptable in most cultures. The most astute of you might also be aware that Mormons do not drink coffee or tea. Now we are stepping into peculiarville. All of these consumption-related Mormon habits are part of what is commonly known as the “Word of Wisdom.”

To many Mormons, the Word of Wisdom is simply a footnote within their belief system. However, if a survey were taken among non-Mormons to discover the most recognizable Mormon characteristic, you would likely find many have checked the “no beer” box.

This law of health was received by Joseph Smith in 1833. In it, the Lord counsels abstention from tobacco, strong drinks, and hot drinks. He also encourages Church members to eat meat sparingly, and to eat mostly fruits, vegetables, and grains. He then promises both physical and spiritual blessings to those following this counsel.

The Word of Wisdom as a commandment provides some “bare-minimum” parameters concerning one’s health. These “bare-minimums” include not smoking, not chewing tobacco (do people really still do that?), not drinking any alcoholic beverages (including beer), not drinking coffee, and not drinking either black or green tea. In recent decades, the use of any illicit drugs has also been added.

Naturally, many see this list and start asking questions. “What’s so bad about coffee? I have a cup every morning to help me wake up. And what’s wrong with it? Is it the caffeine? Would that mean you can’t drink Coke or Pepsi either?” (Dr. Pepper is of course encouraged for consumption because if it is of heavenly taste) “And what about having a beer with my friends or a glass of wine with dinner? It’s not like I am a booze-hound or a wino!”

Unfortunately, the Word of Wisdom does not include a detailed “reasons” section. It doesn’t define what the specific reasons are for avoiding these substances. So why keep the Word of Wisdom? And in keeping it, what should we look for?

Amidst all the spiritual and scientific debate, I believe an important rule of thumb to consider when looking at the Word of Wisdom is “harmful habits.” It’s up to us to do the research and determine our own personal limits. Some addictive substances are stronger than others, and therefore are included on the black list of permanent off-limit items. However, everything else is then given to us to use at our own discretion.

I have been told that I have a “genetic predisposition” towards alcoholism. I can’t say for certain whether this is the case, but many of my relatives have struggled with it in the past. Some of my behaviors lead me to believe that it may be true. If somebody puts any drink in front of me I always drink it all very quickly and am left wanting more. If desert is being served, the only limits I have ever discovered are vomiting and running out of whatever I am eating. Something tells me that taking up drinking wouldn’t go well.

And so, the Word of Wisdom is alright by me. No, I don’t believe that beer is the sweat of Satan or that coffee is liquid fire and brimstone. The substances themselves are not “evil.” Furthermore, the people who use the substances are not evil. There are many people I know who use these substances in moderation and are fine. The only “evil” associated with the Word of Wisdom is gross misuse of any substance which ultimately has the potential of impairing our judgment or harming others. And since I can’t really trust myself as it is, I would rather not make myself a liability. Sprite and chocolate pretzels are dangerous enough for me. I’ll stick with the Word of Wisdom.

Mormon Missionaries vs. Peace Corps Volunteers

2008-09-27T11:33:00.001+03:00

A Google search of “Mormon” and “Peace Corps” brings up many links. Several are comparisons of the Mormon missionary experience and the Peace Corps. Some seek to explain the life of a Mormon missionary as a “proselytizing version of the Peace Corps.” Others are critical of the Mormon missionary system and say that Mormons would be better off serving with the Peace Corps. As one of the few people who has actually experienced both, I would like to offer my comparison.

Incidentally, the Mormon missionary program was a significant influence in the design of the Peace Corps. When he first proposed the Peace Corps, President John F. Kennedy expressed his personal admiration for the Mormon missionary program, and envisioned the Peace Corps as a similar volunteer service program.

Today, there are a number of striking similarities between the two programs. The most notable is the two-year commitment. Mormon men serve on missions from 23-25 months (women serve for about 18 months), including anywhere between 3-12 weeks of training at one of the various Missionary Training Centers (MTC). Peace Corps volunteers commit to 27 months of service, and serve between 25-27 months (some volunteers extend for an additional year or two) which includes 10 weeks of language, cultural, and job-related training. The MTC provides a similar training program, though it is significantly more intense.

Unlike missionaries, Peace Corps volunteers are often alone, serving in small villages far from other volunteers. They don’t have companions like Mormon missionaries, and they usually stay in one area for their entire service. Mormon missionaries generally change companions (work partner) every 6 weeks to 6 months. Most missionaries also have the opportunity to serve in a variety of cities and areas.

The goal of missionary service is more clearly stated (bring converts to the Church) than the goals of Peace Corps service, which differ greatly depending on country, assignment, and person. The rules of Mormon missionary service are significantly stricter (in truth, doing anything besides missionary work is basically outlawed). Both Peace Corps volunteers and Mormon missionaries are able to make lasting friendships, but the nature of their service makes this process different. In my experience, fellow missionaries are more unified in their effort, while in the Peace Corps there is more of an “every man for himself” mentality.

Two more big differences: First, Mormon missionaries pay their way to serve, while Peace Corps volunteers are fully financed by the government. Second, there are seven times as many Mormon missionaries in the world than there are Peace Corps volunteers, and Mormon missionaries serve in every country, not only developing countries.

And so, these are just a few examples of the how the experiences of being a Mormon missionary and a Peace Corps volunteer compare. For me, these have been two of the top three most amazing experiences of my life (we can’t forget marriage).

Here is how I would like this week’s discussion to go. I know there are a number of readers who are Peace Corps volunteers, as well as a number of readers who are returned missionaries. I am often asked by Peace Corps volunteers what it was like being a missionary. Likewise, many returned missionaries have asked how Peace Corps compares. There is too much to write in just one article, but I am happy to answer any individual questions that you have. Also, it would be a great opportunity for people who have had either experience to share some of those experiences. And, for those who have done neither, here is your chance to get a feel for both.

Oh Very Young

2008-09-20T14:56:00.000+03:00

I don’t recall the precise moment, but sometime on or around July 2nd, 2004 (incidentally, the day after I finished being a missionary) I began to notice how young missionaries are. They are mere children, sent throughout the world, suddenly finding themselves in a situation much more challenging than anything they have ever faced. I felt glad I was never that young as a missionary.

In truth, I was that young. When I first set foot in the Missionary Training Center in June 2002, I was all of 19 years old. I thought I was older than the other missionaries, but I really wasn’t. Attending two years of college and living away from home for that time perhaps made a difference. But no matter how you slice it, I was just as clueless about life as the rest. And to complicate matters, I was a clueless 19-year-old in Siberia.

Such is the reality of the entire missionary force of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In over 150 countries, there are young men and young women (as young as they can possibly be and still be called men and women) volunteering prime years of their young lives to do missionary work. There are currently over 52,000 of them.

With nearly half of the Church’s members living in the United States, a significant fraction of the missionary force is American. Many world leaders have made comments alluding to Mormon missionaries being one of the primary means of cultural exposure their citizens have to America. Even here in Romania, I have been asked multiple times “are you a Mormon?” Knowing what they mean, it’s a tricky question to answer, “Well yes, but…”

Two years in Russia as a missionary were the most life-changing I have yet to experience. Peace Corps has also been a significant experience, but had I never served a mission, I doubt my chosen career path would have been the same. This same path fostered my desire to serve in the Peace Corps.

Last week, we talked about one purpose of missionary work – “spreading the Gospel.” I mentioned that it was only one of the major purposes of missionary work. Now I wish to address the other purpose, which perhaps is more important.

First I post a question: If Mormon missionary work is focused on church growth, why are their most inexperienced members sent out to represent the religion to the world? I posed this question to some missionaries this past week, and they couldn’t answer it. They had never even considered it.

When a new mission president (missionary supervisor in a given area) is called, they are told that their primary responsibility is to “convert the missionaries,” rather than “convert as many others as possible.” True, missionaries are already fully participating church members, and by definition can’t be converted. However, for Mormons, conversion is more than changing from one belief system to another. It is a life-long process of self-improvement, and the quest to come to know God.

Having the experience to focus 100% of one’s time to a singular cause, with daily reflection on things pertaining to life and the divine, it is a very effective way of jump-starting eternal progression. Doing so at the threshold of adulthood helps to set a course for life.

Therefore, I believe that the ultimate purpose of the missionary program of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not solely to increase their membership. It is to develop conviction among their existing membership, by providing an ideal environment for spiritual development for their youngest adult members.

Would the readers agree with this assessment?

Mormons and Proselytizing

2008-09-13T13:15:00.000+03:00

I have received requests to describe the purpose and goals of missionary work in Mormonism. I am an “R.M.” (Returned Missionary), which unfortunately means I love to bend the ear of others talking about my missionary experiences. However, it has been more than four years since I finished, so my incessant talking about my mission has gone down. I will try not to revert back into my old ways.

Many have admitted to me that when they hear the word “missionary,” they immediately get tense and begin looking for some place to hide. Even though I was one, I tend to have a similar response. Missionaries from all churches, including Mormons, have doubtless contributed to a negative stereotype – the used-car salespeople of the religious world.

Many churches have missionary programs, and I have met missionaries from the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Baptists, Methodists, and other Christian religions, as well as from religions such as the Hare Krishnas and the Baha’i. These experiences have been varied from polite, to neutral, to negative with missionaries quickly judging me and the error of my ways. According to some missionaries, I am in danger of hellfire, and I need to “really think” about my life, because obviously that is something I have never done.

Mormons believe that one of the important principles of their participation in the Church is “proclaiming the Gospel.” However, unlike some churches, the only members who proselytize are the full-time missionaries, and even they aren’t always involved in proselytizing efforts. Regular members are encouraged to share their beliefs with their family and friends, but they are not encouraged to go door-to-door or otherwise try to promote their religion publicly. Even Mormon missionaries are taught that the door-to-door approach is one of the least effective methods of meeting people who would be interested in learning about their religion. When I was a missionary, I doubt I knocked on doors more than a dozen times. I don’t even recall doing it once during the last year of my service. My time was spent on other activities, such as working with church members, conducting missionary trainings, doing service projects, teaching English, and teaching people who were interested in our religion.

Many people are opposed to missionary work because they feel it is detrimental to the existing culture of those who live in a community. Others feel that trying to promote one’s religious belief is insulting, as if it is saying that the existing religious system is not good enough. When a missionary becomes a salesperson, I feel these objections have merit. However, is it wrong to exchange beliefs if it is done in a polite and non-pushy way? If I were to pressure somebody to join my religion, then I would say that I am doing missionary work the wrong way. But is there a right way to share religious beliefs?

The world has always changed based on the exchange of ideas, including philosophical, scientific, political and religious ideas. In the Peace Corps, one of our roles is in a sense being a secular missionary, promoting American culture, absorbing the culture of our host country, and sharing new ideas that might promote development in that country. However, this process becomes more controversial when it is done in the name of religion. Why do you think that is?

Please share your thoughts on this question. Despite all that I have said about “proclaiming the Gospel,” I believe this is only one of two of the major goals of the Mormon missionary program. Next week we will talk about the other purpose.

Defining the Church Part III: Is There a Doctrine the House?

2008-09-06T09:20:00.003+03:00

The last two posts dealt with visible symbols of the Church – membership and history. This week’s post is dedicated to another essential component of “The Church.” In fact, it is the foundation for the Church’s existence as an organization: The Doctrine.

One of the biggest challenges faced when defining the Church is separating what doctrine is from what it isn’t. It’s not easy, and everybody’s path to understanding is different. Looking up a standard dictionary definition of doctrine, I came up with two possibilities:

1) A rule or principle which becomes the basis of one’s belief
2) A body of ideas taught as truth

In the context of church doctrine, both of these definitions are accurate. The first refers to individual doctrines or principles. The second refers the package of these specific principles, or doctrine as a whole. To understand what a principle is, think of an “if…then” statement, or a cause and effect relationship. This can be secular, such as, “if I keep my finger out of my nose, it won’t bleed so much,” or, it can be in a gospel context. For instance, the Book of Mormon repeats the following principle dozens of times: “If you will obey [God’s] commandments, you will prosper…”

Inherent to the concept of principle is the assumption that it should be implemented in our lives. In church-speak, this is often referred to as “faith” or “obedience.” Principles instruct us how to live in ways which result in positive consequences, or “blessings.”

The second definition refers to the concept of truth. Now, we can certainly be as philosophical as we want in speculating the mysteries of truth, but to lay a more simple foundation, let’s define truth as something that is, or exists. You exist, this blog exists, the world, guitars, hippos exist…the list continues. Religious truths are disputed as their existence cannot be determined using the usual methods. This is why religion tends to fair poorly in an empirical setting. Personal understanding of what one deems to be religious truth is obtained only on an individual basis, and we are all free to determine what to accept as religious truth.

Before getting too deep into the discussion of truth, faith, etc., let’s return back to the idea of doctrine. Gospel doctrine, in the Mormon sense, is the collection religious truths established by God and revealed through prophets. Also, some doctrines may be personal, and therefore are revealed to the individual.

I will attempt to combine the two definitions of doctrine to describe this founding pillar of Mormonism:

Church Doctrine: Universal truth which, if followed as a way of life, results in optimal positive results. After all, the purpose of our existence is that we “might have joy.” (2nd Nephi 2:25)

Considering these definitions, I have a quiz for you. Which of the following are Church doctrines:

A) Pioneer children sang as they walked and walked and walked.
B) Repentance is the process of changing one’s life to align more closely to
God’s will.
C) Coke is devil water.
D) Being humble helps us receive answers to our prayers.
E) People are accountable for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.
F) American Indians are the descendents of characters in the Book of Mormon.
G) Noah built an ark which was 300 cubits long and 50 cubits wide.
H) Love one another.

Please turn over your paper when you are done and sit quietly until everyone is finished. For extra credit, name additional doctrines as well as additional non-doctrines that might be confused as doctrines.

Defining the Church Part II: Don’t Know Much about History

2008-08-30T11:47:00.001+03:00

Mormons are proud of their history. So proud, they even do crazy things, such as dress up in clothes from the 1800’s and pull wooden handcarts across the plains. Members love to tell the tales of how the Church came into being and other faith-promoting histories. Even outside of church membership, the remarkable, and often uniquely intriguing Mormon history draws much attention.

Church history is also a source of conflict among Mormon counter-cultures. The most unsettling criticisms are often based on historical scholarship. For many Church members, the doctrines of the Gospel and the history of the Church are seen the same thing. Even discovering some minor aspect of history which offsets a member’s flawless view of Mormonism can be very challenging. Critics also use history as a standard for doctrinal accuracy. Church members and critics alike exploit Mormon history as a foundation on which gospel doctrines are able to stand, or upon which they crumble.

Much of Mormon belief is founded on historical events, namely, the restoration of the Church through Joseph Smith. In response, historians have meticulously scrutinized this man’s life. Unsurprisingly, dozens of published volumes cover his life. It is impossible to find one free of bias, for either the author believes Joseph Smith to be a prophet, or does not. Their respective beliefs are undoubtedly reflected accordingly.

Another source of history-based contention is the Book of Mormon. This book stands as a record of religious experiences among the peoples of the American continent from about 600 B.C. until 400 A.D. Many lives are dedicated to historical, anthropological, and archeological study to either prove or disprove this book’s authenticity. Predictably, tomes of “evidence” supporting both sides of the argument have been uncovered.

I am not a historian and do not pretend to be. I like history, and think we can all gain from studying those came before us. We learn from their mistakes and their breakthroughs. Nevertheless, history is not an appropriate foundation upon which faith or doctrine can be built or judged. For example, I try to read the Book of Mormon as a religious book, not a historical text. I may believe the events contained in that book are based on a true historical foundation, but I do not believe that historical accuracy matters, from a doctrinal perspective. Such books are written for a different purpose.

It is not my intention to be an apologist for Mormon belief. If it seems like that, I’m sorry (oops, there goes the apologizing again!). But, to comprehend Mormon history more easily, I like to put history into two categories. First, there is factual history, or historical events. For instance: World War II officially came to an end in the Pacific on August 15, 1945. Second, there is interpretive history. An example would be: The Japanese surrendered to the Americans for fear that the Russians would move in. There are many historians who believe this, and it may well be true. Nevertheless, it is a historical hypothesis based on pieces of evidence that historians are able to uncover.

Not all of Mormon history is pretty. The same is true for any religion. I would guess that the same could be said about our own life histories as well. Yet still, history is a wonderful learning tool that I hope we will all continually use. It will rightfully forever be a significant part of Mormonism. However, in our attempt to define “the Church,” I hope it can be seen as a component, and not as a foundation.

Next Week: Is There a Doctrine the House?

Defining the Church Part I: We the People

2008-08-23T09:45:00.002+03:00

This week, I will begin a three-part piece entitled “Defining the Church.” Often, when people make reference to “The Church,” they are referring to different aspects. I view the Church as having three unique characteristics which make up what it is. When people talk about “The Church,” they are likely referring to one or more of these factors.

The symbol of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is its members. The late President Hinckley once told of being approached by a minister from another Christian church. The minister asked President Hinckley why the Mormons don’t use the cross as a symbol of their faith, and since they don’t use it, what is the symbol of worship for Mormons. In response President Hinckley answered: “…the lives of our people must become the only meaningful expression of our faith and, in fact, therefore, the symbol of our worship."

Whether church members like it or not, this is true. Most of my work and school circles (outside of Utah) have consisted of very few Mormons (if any). Due to this, I find I am generally identified immediately as “The Mormon.” One friend even used to call me her “second favorite Mormon.” However, soon thereafter her “favorite Mormon” moved away, thus giving me the opportunity for promotion. Every time I saw her I was greeted by “my new favorite Mormon!” Just for reference, if any of my friends who know me as “Mormon” are reading this, I do have another name. It is Nils.

Another friend used to joke about me. A missionary companion, he would often tell me of fictitious teaching experiences when a young person, who was about to become a member of the Church, would ask a question that simply could not be answered: “If Elder Bergeson is a member of the Church, can it still be true?” It has been said that there is some truth in every lie.

I can feel better knowing that I am not alone. Either fortunately or unfortunately, all Church members are the reference by which their non-member friends and acquaintances define the Church. If they have had enough positive experiences with Mormons, generally they view them favorably. I have had many experiences when people, upon finding out I am Mormon, tell me “Mormons are some of the best people I know.” I tell them thanks, and that I let them know at the next big meeting. Other times, the response has not been so favorable.

A former Mormon Peace Corps volunteer who served in Romania told us her story of when she arrived in the country. She had not told anybody of her religion, but she was from Utah. Not long after arriving, one of the staff members took her aside and had a serious talk with her. She was told that as a Peace Corps volunteer, she was not to participate in proselytizing activities. They made her feel very uncomfortable and scared to participate fully in her religion, all without her even revealing her religion. Talk about guilty by association. Fortunately, Emily and I did not meet the same negative attitudes, and we were actually encouraged to participate actively in our Church life (of course, as Peace Corps volunteers we don’t engage in formal proselytizing, but then again, no Mormons do, save the full-time missionaries).

Mormons, like it or not, the world has got their eye on you. People know who you are, and see you as the symbol of Mormonism. I want to know how you feel about this. Is it accurate? As for non-members or former Mormons, please tell me your thoughts on this matter. How much of your definition of Mormonism is based on people you know who participate? What experiences have you had with Mormons in the past which have greatly influenced your perception of them, either for good or bad?

Next Week: Don’t Know Much about History

Mormon Thinking in "Mormon Times"

2008-08-19T10:15:00.002+03:00

On Tuesday, August 19th, Mormon Thinking was featured in the weekly column, "Bloggernacle Back Bench," authored by Emily W. Jensen from the Mormon Times (affiliate of the Deseret News). Take a look and see what you think! Thanks to Emily Jensen for writing about the blog!

How to Lose Friends and Irritate People

2008-08-16T12:31:00.002+03:00

I recall a priceless missionary experience – My companion and I left the apartment one morning and were immediately approached by two Russian “Babuskas” (VERY old women). It was obvious they had something important to tell us. I greeted them and at once one responded: “Boys! You need to know that the book you read wasn’t written by God. It was written by a man who was possessed by the DEVIL!”

I thought this was an odd conversation starter, but being friendly and curious, I questioned them as to what they meant. They said they were missionaries from another church, and during our brief conversation, they frequently made mention of our foolishness for reading a book of the devil. Finally I cut them off with a question. “So, you seem to be familiar with the Book of Mormon. I take it you have read it?”

“NEVER!” they cried with gusto. “We would NEVER read a book written by the devil!!”

Another post-mission experience – It was General Conference time, and together with some returned missionary friends, I attended a couple of sessions in the Conference Center. For those who are familiar with this event, you are aware of the circus-like element which accompanies this otherwise peaceful religious gathering. Many protesters, usually from other churches, come from near and far to express, on behalf of God, His obvious displeasure with Mormons. To ensure their message is heard, they adopt various colorful methods of sharing their feelings. Some yell, others silently display scripture-covered billboards strapped to their backs, and others use creative visual aids such as burning effigies of church leaders. Literally thousands of Mormons pass them each day, but most ignore them. Despite their collective effort, they don’t seem to win many converts or sympathizers. As we walked past them, I turned to my friend and said: “We had a hard enough time getting people to listen to us even when we were polite!”

The moral of these two stories is this: People do not react well to being told they are wrong. And this goes for everybody. If you want to have any type of influence in the eyes of another, don’t go out of your way to tell them how wrong they are, either verbally or non-verbally. When somebody finds out I go to church and rolls their eyes, they lose some of my respect. Family members who don’t go to church don’t appreciate hints that they might not be able to see their friends in heaven, the masked invitations to activities, or the periodic scriptural passages taped to the bathroom mirror. And the list goes on…

I don’t think that we are unable to respect the beliefs of others. I believe the real problem comes from our own delusions of grandeur. We subconsciously feel that others are yearning to have our wisdom imparted upon them. Jesus Christ said “Judge not, lest ye be judged.” We recognize the meaning of not passing judgment on other people, but perhaps He was also telling us not to judge ourselves. If we judge ourselves as superior, supposing that others have never thought about the same issues that we have, and pass premature judgment on our own ultimate eternal standing before God, then perhaps we have broken this commandment.

I would love to hear your opinions.

Ebony and Ivory

2008-08-09T10:42:00.004+03:00

In Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith, Anakin Skywalker says to Obi-Wan Kenobi: “If you’re not with me, you’re my enemy!” To this, Obi-Wan replies: “Only a Sith deals in absolutes.” He realizes that by taking this view, Anakin has become hopelessly corrupted by extremism. Soon after seeing this movie, I was in an institute class where the teacher used a similar phrase in reference to the Gospel: “If you are not with us, you are against us.” I suddenly sat upright, and felt myself reaching for my lightsaber, realizing that the Sith must have infiltrated the Church Education System.

After realizing that I left my lightsaber at home (I do have one, and yes, I have battled many a Sith Lord – see picture below), I pondered this concept, and realized how this statement of “absolute” can be very misleading. It is a concept embraced by those who prefer to see the world in black and white. Black and white thinking is what leads many people to extremism, fundamentalism, racism, and all those other horrible “isms” that plague our world. By putting people into one of two categories, such as either right-wing or left-wing, religious or heathen, saved or damned, patriot or traitor, etc., it gives people little room to express any individual reservations which might lie outside either extreme.

At the same time, it can be used to express that some facts are either true or false. For instance, the existence of God has an element of absolute to it – either a supreme being does exist, or one does not. Though the nature of that fact may be disputable and unknowable, the fact itself has an answer.

To further complicate the issue, there are biblical origins to this concept. In Luke 11:23, Jesus Christ says “He who is not with me is against me…” However, in Mark 9:40 this is expressed differently: “who ever is not against us is for us.” These two similar passages convey very different ideas. Understanding context is vital.

Mormonism, like all other religions, is often faced by this confusion of extremism and truth. In Doctrine and Covenants 1:30, Jesus Christ claims that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is “the only true and living Church upon the face of the whole earth.” This scripture is often erroneously paraphrased as “the only true Church.” To many, both Mormon and non-Mormon, this statement portrays a sense of extremism, that the Mormons are right, and all others are wrong. There are two major mistakes in this thinking. The first is the drop of the adjective “living.” These are not two separate characteristics of the Church. “True and living” is in this regard a single adjective, describing the nature of this church and why it is true. The second is the belief that being the only true and living church, that all others must be false and dead. If Mormons believe that Jesus Christ is the Savior of mankind, and other Christians believe it also, both have a similar belief in the same truth. If different churches, peoples, groups, etc., all share a majority of common beliefs or interests, then it is impossible to say that only one is completely right and the others are all completely wrong. In short, no Church, individual, or any entity can claim sole possession of truth.

Within the world of Mormonism, this same confusion often leads to the struggle between those who believe that the Church of Jesus Christ is founded in truth, and those who do not. With both sides guilty of trying to persuade the other using arguments based on extremism rather than truth, my question for this week is this: Can these two groups accept each other on equal grounds, and if so, how can this be done?

The Taxonomy of Mormonism

2008-08-02T11:31:00.001+03:00

There are many species of Mormon human, or Homo mormonius, which include Mormons, non-Mormons, ex-Mormons, Jack Mormons, Post-Mormons, and Molly Mormons to name a few. In addition, there are various sub-species, which include active members, inactive members, less-active members, and hyper-active members.

Like every religious, social, or cultural genus, there is a great amount of diversity within the Mormon religious and cultural community. There are many members who have grown up in the Church, have attended Mormon religious services and have participated in the church culture for their entire lives. There are many who join the Church later in life and find that the Church represents the answers to life they have been seeking. There are others still who come to the conclusion that they do not believe in the doctrines of the Gospel and/or do not wish to participate in church-related activities. There are other members who become so caught up in the Church that nothing else has any significance in their lives, and they limit their worldview to the finite Mormon universe.

However, with this spectrum of diversity within the Mormon family, certain species unfortunately come into conflict with one another from time to time. In general, the greatest schism exists between those who have chosen to be active and participating members of the Church, and those who have chosen not participate. By the sheer nature of this argument, both groups feel they are in possession of greater truth, and at times may demonstrate feelings of superiority towards the other group.

Though I am not a resident of Utah, I spent most of my childhood in this predominantly Mormon state. During my formative years, I was not an “active Mormon” and thus found myself to be a religious minority. Since I did not share the same faith as many of my Mormon peers, I was often quizzed on my (lack of) faith, scorned, or rebuked for my deficient desire to participate in the religion that many valued so dearly. Together with my non-Mormon friends, we would snicker from the sidelines as we watched our Mormon contemporaries participate in what we thought was fruitless worship.

Later on, I would embrace Mormonism as I learned more and determined that it was a spring of truth that I wanted in my life. Suddenly, the Mormons received me with enthusiasm, claiming a miracle had occurred, while many of the same non-Mormon friends to whom I had been connected suddenly treated me as if I had fallen, and had been brainwashed by religion.

While living in California, a non-Mormon friend told me stories of spending time in Salt Lake City. He was amused by the fact that the community so naturally and willingly polarized itself. Both were visible and obvious, with the Mormons openly showing their pride in their religion, while the non- or inactive Mormons (most often the youth) went to great lengths to appear as “un-Mormon” as possible, even adopting extreme styles of physical appearance. In this way, they were symbolically showing their perceived freedom from the Mormons.

Why is it that these two groups tend to fail in seeking common ground? We will address this question further next week. Until then, I would love to hear what you think about it.

Mormon Minority: An Ode to Diversity

2008-07-26T13:37:00.002+03:00

I currently live in Braila, Romania. It is a beautiful community in the far eastern part of the country, located near the borders of Ukraine and Moldova, and resting along the final stretch of the tranquil Danube River. Braila has an estimated 215,000 inhabitants, comparable to the size of Orlando, Florida, or Rochester, New York. Currently, there are two Mormons living in the city. One these odd creatures is myself. The other more attractive specimen is my wife. Between the two of us, we create a significant demographic statistic – Braila’s Mormon population – approximately at a robust 0.0009%.

Needless to say, this makes us a religious minority so insignificant that nobody but myself would ever waste their time doing the math. There is no church congregation in the city – the nearest one is located in Galati, a larger city near Braila to the North. There have never been missionaries working in Braila, and currently, it is the largest city in all of Romania to have been left “untouched by the Mormons.”

I can’t help but notice the stark contrast between here and my native Cache Valley, Utah. In Cache County, there are about 95,000 current inhabitants, yet nearly 90% of them are affiliated with the Mormon religion, or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In other words, it is impossible to be a Mormon minority there, even if you are a Mormon and a Democrat.

In 2004, after returning home from my time as a missionary in Russia, I lived in Utah for a season while finishing college. I was disappointed to find that suddenly everybody around me assumed that I was a Mormon. Sure, it was the truth, but certainly I didn’t fit the mold that perfectly, did I? The fact that I had just spent two years of adventure in Siberia was rendered meaningless – everybody else my age had spent two years in Brazil, Mongolia, Detroit, or some other exotic place. Feeling like just another copy of the norm didn’t fit too well.

But it didn’t last forever. I eventually moved to Maryland, then to California, and ultimately to Romania, ever becoming part of a smaller and smaller minority. I think now I have become about as extreme as a minority can be. Not only are we the only Mormons in the entire city, we are probably part of a very small minority that even knows what a Mormon is.

One of the greatest treasures provided by the world is diversity. Having the opportunity to learn from those with mentalities so different than ours is one of the greatest gifts we have from God. Not only do I get the chance to learn about those around me who are different in so many ways, they in turn get their first exposure to Mormonism by meeting me. Saying it that way makes it sound like a huge responsibility, but it really doesn’t feel that way. More than anything, it is an opportunity for a two-way exchange of diversity. Having done this many times over, it always inevitably leads to the same conclusion. Those differences we have are the true minority. It is the astonishing amount that we have in common which quietly dictates humanity.