Hello again, everyone! There have been several more Church news stories published since my last update, which I hope to be able to pass along to you all in the days ahead. That said, there have been a few that, to me, need to take precedence and be passed along right away. Those stories detail additional context President Nelson and the Church News have provided regarding the statement he issued last Thursday to reemphasize the importance of using the Church's official name.
To start, as I have previously noted, this is not so much a "new policy decision" as it is a correction and reiteration of policies that have been in place for a long time. President Nelson, who is currently visiting Saints in Canada, provided counsel to the Saints in the regions he visited which clarifies that distinction. (That article was published in the Deseret News).
There was also this article, which contained some similar elements to the previous one. And although in the comments of my post covering the statement's release, I had shared this article (which details 6 reasons we should call the Church and ourselves by the proper name, none of which are related to the statement itself), I thought it would be worthwhile to share it again here.
I just wanted to provide some additional commentary on this, if you all will indulge me. In their responses to this statement's release, there was a lot of public expressions to the effect that the "change" would be too hard, too confusing, or not important enough to implement. Some also took their responses to the extreme, suggesting that the name of the Book of Mormon should be changed.
I even heard some statements to the effect that, regardless of the way in which President Nelson's statement was worded, it was not necessarily incumbent upon any of us to comply with the request. That is something I wanted to address more fully here. Before I do so, I want to be clear on one thing:
I do not claim in any way that I have the right or authority to force anyone into compliance with anything the prophet says, nor would I want to exercise such powers even if I had them., It would be highly inappropriate for me to assume or try to exercise "control, dominion, or compulsion" upon anyone. and if I (or anyone else) were to attempt to do so, then any of us that did would be subject to the penalties the Lord outlines in D&C 121 starting in verse 33 to the end of the section.
That said, it is a fair point, to a certain extent, that our agency enables us to choose whether or not we do follow such directives when they are given. At the same time, what seems to be misunderstood is that freedom to act or not is not in any way equivalent to freedom to escape the consequences for failing to follow the Lord's will as expressed by His servants.
The Lord has said, "Whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same." Our failure to follow the counsel of the Lord's prophet is therefore equivalent to failure to hearken to the voice of the Lord, which, if we continue to do, can lead to grave consequences for us. Round about the time the Church was restored, the Lord gave to the Prophet Joseph Smith the revelations we now have in the Doctrine and Covenants as Sections 20 & 21. In the latter revelation, the Lord shared the following counsel in verses 4-7:
"Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;
"For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.
"For by doing these things the gates of hell shall not prevail against you; yea, and the Lord God will disperse the powers of darkness from before you, and cause the heavens to shake for your good, and his name’s glory.
"For thus saith the Lord God: Him have I inspired to move the cause of Zion in mighty power for good, and his diligence I know, and his prayers I have heard."
In the above passage, the Lord explains that when we follow the prophet, we have the assurance that we will be prospered and preserved, both temporally and spiritually. But the reverse is also true: if we choose to reject the prophet's counsel and continue incorrect behaviors and practices, then the Lord will surely hold us accountable for our failure to follow the prophet's counsel.
There are other elements related to all of this. In the Teachings of the Living Prophet Student Manual, Chapter 2 is well worthy of review, as it covers how highly the words of the living prophet should be prized, cherished, accepted, and followed above and beyond the words of any previous prophet in this or any other dispensation of the world.
Additionally, however, there is also the fact that this is a relatively "small and simple" thing President Nelson is asking us to do, and if any of us have a hard time following the counsel (which, again, is a reiteration and added emphasis of previously-announced policies and procedures rather than a "newly-announced" way of doing things), then each may find it even more difficult to do things that may be seen as more significant or note-worthy that we are asked to do by the living prophet.
Again, while I do not pretend to any authority, power, or influence which would provide ways and means to force compliance with this latest revealed word from our prophet, the Lord and His servants throughout the ages have made clear exactly what the consequences can and will be if we fail to do as the prophet has requested, advised, counseled, and revealed. I for one would not want to chance such things, but the choice is clearly ours as individuals and as the collective Church membership whether or not that should be done.
I testify wholeheartedly that the statement President Nelson has released comes from the Lord. If I can say anything about it, I have gained that witness for myself. My hope and prayer is that each of us may come to gain our own witness on this subject. As we follow the prophet's counsel, he will not lead us astray, and we will be blessed for complying with that counsel. I so testify with a grateful heart in the name of Him whose Church this is, and through Whom this direction has come to His chosen prophet at this time, even the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.
On this blog, I, James Stokes, share insights and analysis covering the latest news and developments reported about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. My specific emphasis and focus is on the ministry of our current apostles, General Conference, and up-to-date temple information. This site is neither officially owned, operated, or endorsed by the Church, and I, as the autthor thereof, am solely responsible for this content.
Search This Blog
Sunday, August 19, 2018
The Church News and President Nelson Provide More Context Regarding Statement About Church Name
Labels:
Church Policies and Major Announcements,
Church President,
Common Consent,
General Church News,
Sustaining the Brethren
I have had a lifelong love for Church history, which has extended to ongoing reports of the ministry of our apostles and prophets, General Conference, and all temple developments. This blog enables me to share that love with all who read my thoughts on these developments, which are sometimes reported multiple times per day as needed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
In addition to my life-long love for the subjects which I cover in the posts of this blog, I have long held the belief that we can disagree without becoming disagreeable. Differences of opinion are natural, while being disagreeable in expressing those differences is not. And in that sense, I have no desire to close the door on anyone who earnestly desires to contribute to the ongoing dialogue on subjects covered in the posts on this blog.
At the same time, however, I recognize that we live in a time when incivility, discourtesy, unkindness, and even cyber-bullying has regrettably become part of online interactions. With that in mind, while anyone who wishes can comment on anything if they choose to do so, I hereby reserve the right to immediately delete any comments which are critical, unkind, lack civility, or promote prodcuts, services, and values contrary to either the Church, or to the rules of online etiquette.
I'd also like to remind all who comment here that I try to respond personally to each individual comment as I feel is appropriate. Such replies are not meant to end the conversation, but to acknowledge earnest feedback as it is submitted.
And in order to better preserve the spirit and pure intentions for which this blog was established, I also hereby request that anyone not commenting with a regular user name (particularly those whose comments appear under the "Unknown" or "Anonymous" monikers, give the rest of us a name to work with in addressing any replies. If such individuals do not wish to disclose their actual given names, a pseudonym or nickname would suffice.
Any comments made by individuals who opt to not give a name by which they can ber identified may, depending on the substance and tone of such comments, be subject to deletion as well. I would respectfully ask that all of us do all we can to keep the dialogue positive, polite, and without malice or ill-will. May the Lord bless us all in our discussion of these important matters.