The Opposite of Pride Is Not Humility; It Is Self-Loathing

I believe the opposite of pride is not humility. I believe the opposite of pride (self-elevation) is self-hatred / self-loathing (self-lowering). The opposite of loving one's self too much (pride) is loving one's self too little / hating one's self. The cure is learning to love ourselves - and we can't do that if we equate loving ourselves with pride.

The second great commandment in the law starts with the foundation of self-love, which then can be extended to loving others as ourselves. That type of self-love comes from love of God - meaning, I believe, in this context, recognizing that God loves us for who we are - since, "We love Him because he first loved us." Thus, accepting that God loves us is the first step toward rejecting self-loathing - and accepting that God loves everyone else as much as He loves us is the cure for the other extreme: pride.

We are children of God, and HE loves us - he LOVES us - he loves US. That is the foundation on which everything else can be built.

Hitler and Stalin: Do We Really Believe in "Judge Not"?

I need to emphasize right at the beginning of this post that I am inclined to believe that Hitler and Stalin will not be in the Celestial Kingdom. However, I have to leave open the possibility that they will - simply because I believe deeply in the concept of, "Judge not, that ye be not judged." It's much less about their eventual fate and much more about my current condition. It's not what becomes of them; it's what "I am and become". It's staying open to accepting that which I can't see - and, in some cases, what I can't imagine.

I don't know what caused people like Hitler and Stalin to be who they were - and I personally have to remember that simple fact.

We talk all the time about those who are not accountable being saved from their lack of accountability. We apply it without reservation to children and the mentally disabled, but we often are less willing to apply it to the "perceptually disabled" - those who have ears and eyes to hear and see but can't do so in the way we want. The best example I know is the psychopath.

We readily admit that there are people who appear to have been born without a conscience. If, in fact, that is true, then I include that condition in the same category as someone who is born "retarded" (the accepted term from my youth), like one of my cousins. The foundational reason why we exempt my cousin from accountability is that he lacks the ability to understand, independently and internally, the difference between right and wrong with regard to most things. In "Mormon-speak", his "obstacle to accountability" can be described as a result of "Adam's transgression"; hence, we teach that he is "redeemed" despite his inability to understand, since his limitations were not of his own choosing and are outside his ability to control and change.

Perhaps Hitler, Stalin, Dahmer, et.al. were just like my cousin - except that their unchosen disabilit(ies) were manifested in evil instead of gentleness and love. Maybe they lacked the ability to feel the type of remorse that leads to repentance. Maybe they are examples of the need for opposition in all things - and, as opposite ends of the same condition, merely represent the touching points of an eternal round.

I have no idea about each individual person, but I like the idea that all of us are on the same circle when it comes to accountability (that all of us are sinners and fall short of the glory of God and, thus, need salvation and redemption) - since it means all of us are more alike than different when all is said and done. That belief helps blunt my natural pride and helps remind me that I'm not really "all that" - except in the eyes of a loving Father.

Influencing vs. Nagging Applies to More than Just Marriage

Influencing occurs through example and kindness, expressed sometimes verbally as encouragement but always in an uplifting manner that is focused on the positive.

Nagging is verbal and judgmental, expressed in a negative way that conveys disappointment as the motivating factor.

It's a fine line - sometimes. Generally, it's pretty clear, however - and it almost always is defined by the recipient. If the person on the receiving end perceives it as nagging, it's nagging in every way that counts. If that person doesn't perceive it as nagging, it still might be nagging - because the recipient might have been beaten down enough to not be able to recognize its nagging nature.

Therefore, I believe it's up to us not only to avoid "objective" nagging (that which any normal person would understand to be nagging), but also to avoid that which causes someone else to react in such a way that we ought to be able to see they feel nagged. That has application not just to marriage, but also to our interactions with others in nearly all social situations - including how we interact with family and members at church and with regard to our religious views.  It takes conscious effort to learn how to eliminate nagging in our lives, and it takes a degree of humility often - since sometimes we have to ask if the person feels nagged and be willing to accept it when they say they do. That can be especially hard when we are in a position of authority, "as (we) suppose".

Spirituality and a Weird Manifestation of Humility

I absolutely believe there is a spiritual dimension of life, but I believe people are "sensitive" to the Spirit to widely varying degrees.  I also believe that, for many people, there's very little they can do to tap into it "on their own" more than they are inclined naturally to do without it morphing into pure emotionalism - and I don't like anything that substitutes pure emotionalism for spirituality.

That's the rub, in my opinion - that those who are more sensitive assume their sensitivity level is the norm and available to all, and, thus, there must be something "wrong" with someone (or in someone's life) if that person isn't as sensitive. It's not the fault of the spiritually sensitive person, and, in most cases, they aren't being arrogant.  They simply don't understand others who feel and experience things differently, so they often think:

If someone as weak and unworthy as I am can feel this, surely everyone can feel it just as well.

It's a weird manifestation of humility in those cases, and it's more common than most people understand, I think.  I can't get upset at them, even though I believe that perspective can harm those toward whom it is focused. 

We Can Be "Wrong in Our Heads" as Long as We Are "Right in Our Hearts"

I've said multiple times in lots of places that our general inability to accept the truly "liberal" parts of our theology is the single biggest reason for much of the misunderstanding we experience from other Christians - and the idea that people outside of the LDS Church can have a "mighty change of heart" and a "true conversion" is one of those "liberal" aspects of our theology.

It's not hard to understand why other Christians get mad at us when the message they hear is,

"Your beliefs are wrong, and your conversion isn't real."

since we get upset at them when they say the exact same to us. 

I think we can believe the first part of that statement and still reject the second part - or, as Joseph Smith once said, I don't think anyone should or will be condemned for erring in doctrine. I believe, as our Article of Faith implies, that we will be judged by the intent of our heart and sincere efforts (for Christians) to "exercise faith in God, the Father, and Jesus, the Christ" - not by the specifics of our understanding of theology and doctrine. In other words, I believe we can be "wrong in our heads" as long as we are "right in our hearts" - even as I believe it is important to try, to the best of our ability, to be right in our heads, as well.

"We claim the privilege of worshiping almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow ALL men the same privilege, let them worship how, where or what they may."

I believe we will be judged primarily by how truly we worship according to the dictates of our own conscience - and that God probably sighs in exasperation over our collective inability to be more charitable toward those who worship / believe differently than we do, especially since all of us "see through our glass, darkly".

Sunday School Lesson Recap: Becoming Like Jesus: Lesson 1

The lessons this month are about "Becoming Like Christ".

We started our class by talking about effective ways to teach. They listed parables, example, object lessons, speaking at the level of the students and discussion. (Last week while I was gone, they talked about parables - using specific examples from the Gospels to show how Jesus taught.) I then told them those were important things and that learning how to teach more effectively using Jesus as an example is important, but I explained that we were going to focus on Jesus himself and becoming like him in a more literal sense.

I asked them how we can learn about someone. After some discussion, we narrowed it down to three things: what is written or said about the person (a description of some sort by others), characteristics or attributes they model and/or teach, and what they do (their actions). I told them we would focus on learning how to become like Jesus by focusing on each of those "study methods", in that order.

I asked them what we know about Jesus, in broad terms - like a timeline:

He was born in Bethlehem. Probably around the age of 12-24 months, his family fled Bethlehem and moved to Egypt. A few years later, after Herod's death, they moved to Nazareth. At the age of 12, his family traveled to Jerusalem, where he surprised educated people at the temple. (Note: There is no indication that Jesus was "teaching" anyone, as is commonly believed. The verses say he was "hearing them and asking them questions" and that they were "astonished at his understanding and answers".) The next 18 years are summed up in Luke 2:51, which says:

Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.

We broke that verse down word-by-word, since I believe it is one of the least understood Biblical verses in all of Christianity.

"Increased" means he "gained or acquired more", and what he gained or acquired was "wisdom" (learning, understanding, ability to apply) and "stature" (size). Thus, Jesus learned things (just like we all learn things) and grew up. He also increased in "favor" (standing, rank, acceptance - especially compared to others) - and that increase was with both God and other people. We talked about what it means to be a "favorite" and how "favor" in this usage implies comparison to others. We then talked about how Jesus could increase in favor with God, especially if he was God's only begotten son AND if he was the God of the Old Testament before he was born.

We talked about the common misunderstanding of what it means to be "sinless" - and I mentioned again my dislike of the following song lines:

"The cattle are lowing, the poor baby wakes, but little Lord, Jesus, no crying he makes."

"He never got vexed when the game went wrong, and he always told the truth."

In the Primary Sacrament Meeting program, one of the children gave a short talk in which he said that Jesus never made any mistakes. I told the students that I understand the need to teach very young children in simplistic terms, but that being sinless does NOT mean never making mistakes. We talked about transgressions being mistakes made in ignorance - things we do that are wrong but not against our understanding or conscience, then we talked about sins being things we do in opposition to our own consciences. Thus, a sin for one person isn't necessarily a sin for someone else. One person's sin often is another person's transgression. If, therefore, Jesus increased in wisdom AND in favor with God and man, he could have made mistakes and "transgressed" some element of eternal law (like lying as a young child) without "sinning" (violating his conscience and understanding).

With this as the baseline, becoming like Jesus does NOT mean never making mistakes (even transgressions) but rather trying not to act in opposition to one's conscience - which, instructively, we call "the light of Christ".

We then moved to what he is said to have taught - focusing on the Gospels (since they are all we have of his purported words during mortality) and, particularly, the Sermon on the Mount - in order to see what he identified as the characteristics and attributes of godliness (or "blessedness", to use the exact word). I told them again about my three-year focus on understanding and living better the characteristics and attributes listed in the Sermon on the Mount and how badly I wished I had started that focus when I was their age rather than when I was in my 40's.

We talked about being "poor in spirit" - and we focused on the need to "value" each person as an equal spirit child of God. Being "rich in spirit" is a negative in that context, so it can't mean "spiritual" in the sense we normally apply. Being poor in spirit has to mean not valuing one's self above others, at the most fundamental spiritual level. I pointed out that one of the students is more valuable as a singer and actor than many others at their school, while another student is more valuable as a mathematician, and another one is more valuable as an athlete. There is something about each of the students that makes them more valuable than others in some "natural" way. However, there also are others who are more valuable in those ways than each of them. The tendency is to see differing value in objective ways and miss the equal value of each spirit child in God's eyes.

We talked about being able to mourn - and I asked them how mourning could be a condition of blessedness. That stumped them at first, but we had a good conversation about how we mourn only for the loss of that which we value highly and those we truly love. People who mourn are blessed for two reasons: they have something / someone in their lives of great value, and they have hearts that can feel deep love. Conversely, the inability to mourn is a sign of lack of value in one's life and an inability to love. We also talked about how much we can gain and give in the process of mourning with those who mourn and comforting those who stand in need of comfort.

We talked about meekness as a blessing. I asked them what they envision when they think of someone who is meek. It was interesting that their immediate pictures were of someone cowering in timidity and fear - or someone who was extremely submissive and weak. I asked them if that picture fit their understanding of Jesus, and they immediately realized it didn't. I said something like, "Dude was a carpenter, and he chased people out of the temple grounds with a whip!" We then talked about meek meaning "gentle, forgiving, benevolent" - which are VERY different attributes than weakness, timidity and fearfulness. We finished by talking about what that means in practical terms in their lives - how they can be more meek in the reality of their own situations without being weak, timid or fearful.

We Should Be Seeking for Goodness, Virtue, Loveliness, Etc. Outside of Mormonism

The Thirteenth Articles of Faith says: 

"if there is anything virtuous, lovely or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things."

Two things:

1) According to our own capstone Article of Faith, virtuous, lovely, good and praiseworthy things exist that we won't have or understand unless we actively seek for them.

2) This says clearly to me that the LDS Church does not have a monopoly on those things - that we have to seek after some of those things to find them.

I love that aspect of "pure Mormonism" - and remaining active in the Church while seeking truth from all sources is something that is very important to me. Some members think they are at odds, but as long as I can do both, there are no conflicts in my own life.

I believe that the ideal heart of one's journey in the LDS Church is getting to the point where there aren't personal conflicts between being actively involved in the Church and seeking virtuous, lovely, good and praiseworthy things outside the Church, as well.  I also believe the journey can be individual and institutional - and that growth occurs best and most conprehemsively when such recognition exists at both levels. 

Realistic Self-Confidence vs. Reckless Self-Confidence vs. Confidence in the Lord

There is a fine line between proper and realistic self-confidence and reckless self-confidence. The latter (recklessness) often appears in the religious as a belief that the Lord will not let anything bad happen to you - that you can do anything without concern for the potential consequences - that you deserve to have good things happen to you and that nothing is an un-necessary risk.

There is realistically being aware of one's strengths and weaknesses, and there is being aware of one's strengths and blind to one's weaknesses - and there is being aware of one's strengths and blind to others' weaknesses (which is a weakness, in and of itself). I do not advocate blind and/or all-encompassing confidence. Even Ammon, who was one of the greatest missionaries in our recorded canon, gloried "in the Lord" - and humans have a tendency to think the Lord will help them get whatever THEY want, rather than what HE wants to accomplish through them.

How Do You Approach Church Leaders and Members When They . . .

The following are three questions that were posed on a thread at a group blog in the Bloggernacle a few years ago - and my response to them:

1) when a leader "calls" you to a position that would require you to do or say things that, frankly, you don't believe?

I'm not sure that can be done. I don't want to minimize the struggle of others getting to where I am with regard to this exact issue, but nothing and nobody can "require" me to do or say things that I don't believe (mostly because I simply refuse to do so) - and I've been on a High Council and in a Bishopric, for example, and been thanked for providing a different perspective on discussions. The key is being comfortable BOTH with my own beliefs AND the responsibilities of the calling in which I serve - and being willing to be open with those who extend callings and assignments to me.

For example, I was asked once to chair the Melchizedek Priesthood Preach the Gospel Committee in my ward. I was clear that my suggestions and leadership would be based on why those committees often are useless wastes of time and totally ineffective - and that I would be proposing some non-traditional approaches that might be seen as radical by some members. The High Priests Group Leader said, "OK." I accepted the assignment, since if he really wanted me he had to accept ME.

The key is that he knew I'm a "faithful member" - that I care deeply about the Church and its members regardless of differences in specific beliefs (and that nothing I proposed would be selfish in nature, and I wouldn't pitch a hissy fit if what I suggested wasn't approved). I might argue privately, but I would never make it a public fight - and I would stop arguing privately once he made his final decision. The one thing I could promise, however, was that I wouldn't teach anything I didn't believe. 

2) when a leader "reprimands" you by quoting a scripture that implies that your actions are against scripture?

I either quote another scripture or prophet back at them with a HUGE smile on my face (if we are friends and he understands my twisted sense of humor), or I thank her for her concern, ponder it seriously and deeply, see what I can take from it to help myself understand her or the principle better, then make a change or continue as I have been - depending on the outcome of all the stuff I just outlined. The key for me has been to assume there is SOMETHING I can learn from the reprimand, even if it only is greater charity and understanding of other good people who see things differently than I do.

A former Bishop told me once that he deeply appreciated two things about working with me:

1) I told him exactly what I thought, both when I agreed and when I disagreed with him;

2) I said, "OK," and supported him when what he decided to do wasn't what I had suggested.

Very few things are worth fighting about, and a reprimand doesn't even come close to that level of importance.

3) in general, when another member (leader or not) talks of you needing to repent of an action that you really don't feel is wrong?

"Thank you. I appreciate your concern and will think about what you have said."

Then I try to act as I've outlined in response to #2 above. I try hard not to be defensive and to try to model for them how I hope they would respond if I ever felt prompted to reprimand them or call them to repentance. After all, I believe the most important aspect of life is repentance - meaning simply "change". If I can't try, at the very least, to be open to observations of others that might point out changes I need to make, then I probably won't change much - and that would be a shame.

Elitism in the LDS Church

Elitism is probably the single strongest natural (wo)man tendency that exists. Therefore, it probably is the single hardest natural (wo)man tendency to eradicate. Therefore, it is the single most deeply rooted "bitter fruit" that corrupts the vineyard. (Jacob 5)

On the other hand, self-esteem and divine potential are necessary, wonderful, empowering principles. They are the only way to fight the opposite of elitism - defeatism. (and that's not an intuitive juxtaposition of opposites) Therefore, we simply MUST be taught that we are of infinite worth.

Mormonism is a fascinating combination of foreordination and universalism (UNIQUE chosenness among the chosen ALL) - perhaps the most fundamental paradox that exists within its theology. We are special, but just like everyone else. There is great need for the Church and the Gospel in this life, but those who don't have it here will have a chance to have everything later.

I don't think "The Church" encourages elitism; I think mortality encourages elitism, and "The Church" is a product of mortality. I think "pure Mormonism" discourages elitism - but it's SO hard to get rid of that blasted natural tendency to separate us and distinguish us and lift ourselves at the expense of others.

It's motes and beams and pruning trees.

Be Charitable to Leaders with Whom You Disagree

Whenever I have a leader who says something with which I don't agree to some degree, I always try to put myself in the position of that leader - then treat that leader and their words like I would want others to treat me and my words.

I don't want others to accept everything I say as God's own word and "follow" or "obey" me blindly, but I also don't want them to disbelieve and doubt everything I say. If I am in a position of perceived authority, I want to be taken seriously and have my words accepted generally - simply out of respect for my effort. If I'm ignorant or a jerk, that's different - but if I am trying my best, I want to be challenged lovingly and privately (whenever possible) when someone disagrees. (and I really do want to know when others disagree) 

Ultimately, if I am leading an organization, I want my final decision to be accepted generally by those who aren't in a position to know of and understand all the details that affected my decision - especially if they didn't let me know of their concerns at the time of my decision. If hindsight proves I was wrong, so be it. I just hope others will understand I did the best with what I knew.

Today I Lost My Faith in Humanity

As I considered my New Year's Resolution this week (framing it in my mind this week as "to understand more fully that I am no better in the eyes of God than anyone else"), I thought of the parable of the Good Samaritan - and I suddenly remembered something I had written on Times & Seasons almost exactly four years ago.  It was a re-posting of something one of my "sons" had written - about a situation that made him angry and frustrated with humanity.  He admitted in one of his follow-up comments that the title (the one I used as the title of this post) was a bit hyperbolic, but I loved the post when he wrote it and want to re-re-post it here on my own blog tonight. 

I encourage you to read the comments on Times & Seasons, as well - even though it will take some time to do so.  Some of them strayed from the point I was making by re-posting it, so go ahead and skip the comments that don't focus on the parable of the Good Samaritan.  That parable, more than perhaps any other story in our scriptural canon, captures the spirit of what I have been thinking this week - and it is weighing quite heavily on my heart and mind, in more ways than one. 

With that introduction, here is the link:

Today I Lost My Faith in Humanity - Brett John Light, re-posted by Curtis Ray DeGraw (Times & Seasons)

Learning from Others Who See Things in Very Different Ways

As I have contemplated my New Year's Resolution to understand more fully that I am not better in God's eyes than any of his other children, I remembered a quote I read a few years ago.  It encapsulates a lot of how I view humility and faith, so I want to share it this month as part of my resolution: 

“You do find, every once in a while, someone who has actually thought about the same problem in a very different way”—and that can be the most important sort of catalyst: the kind that leads to new discoveries.” (Harvard Magazine)  

There is MUCH we can learn from each other, even from those with whom we disagree strongly about many things, if we simply open ourselves up to opportunities to listen to and learn from those who have thought about and see some things differently than we do.  There is an element of a belief in on-going revelation that I believe is manifested in our openness to learn from others around us - not just from God.  I believe that He can and does reveal "many great and important things" through others, and I believe we miss so much growth and progression when we insist on learning and receiving "further light and knowledge only from God - or in "religious" situations. 

To Persecute Others Less

My New Year's Resolution for this month is to persecute others less - taken from Alma 5:54, which says:

Yea, will ye persist in the persecution of your brethren, who humble themselves and do walk after the holy order of God, wherewith they have been brought into this church . . .

My overall resolution goes beyond the parameters of this verse a bit, since this verse focuses on those who persecute faithful members of a religion or denomination, but for this first post I want to focus more narrowly on the actual message in the verse - and examine if I do, in fact, "persecute" the humble who walk righteously before God.  It's a sobering subject, and it's one that I initially brushed aside without much thought - but as I was thinking of how to begin my contemplation and efforts this month I was struck by the thought that, perhaps, the actual question in the verse itself might apply in some way to me, as well. 

I certainly don't intend to persecute anyone, much less those who are humble and share my general beliefs - who have "been brought into this church".  I generally am quite tolerant and accepting, so it has taken some serious introspection to realize areas where I do, in deed, "persecute" fellow church members. 

In my case, it isn't so much an active, stereotypical persecution that concerns me about myself.  There are two primary definitions of the word "persecute" - and I have little or no inclination to inflict the first one, which is:

to pursue with harassing or oppressive treatment, especially because of religion, race, or beliefs; harass persistently.

That simply is not in my nature, but as I read the second definition, I was struck by a thought I'm not sure I had considered in quite that way before beginning to think about this month's resolution.  That second definition is: 

to annoy or trouble persistently.  

As those who regularly read my blog (or my comments around the Bloggernacle) know, I am heterodox in some of my beliefs.  I believe deeply and passionately in the Restored Gospel taught in the LDS Church, but there are many areas and topics about which my personal views are quite different than many other members.  I am a "thinker tinkerer" by nature, so I spend perhaps an inordinate amount of time considering multiple possible interpretations of almost everything I believe.  I also am not exactly shy about sharing those views with others - although I do try to be aware of others' sensibilities and not push any particular interpretation on those inside the Church who see things differently than I do.  

What struck me this week as I thought of the idea of persecuting fellow believers is that sometimes I am prone to phrase things (verbal statements and written comments) in somewhat forceful ways - and I know that sometimes this general tone leads others to feel criticized in some way and, perhaps, even attacked occasionally.  I rarely mean to come across this way, but it struck me that if I am aware of this tendency and fail to be even more careful than I am inclined naturally to be, I am, in a sense, allowing myself to "persecute" those with whom I disagree.  At worst, I am "annoying and troubling persistently" other LDS members (especially when I continue to read and comment at sites where I know my views will be annoying to the author); at best, I still am allowing others to feel persecuted - and, in practical terms, sometimes perception truly is reality.  

So, my first focus this month will be to take even more care in how I write here and how I comment in other arenas - both online and in person - to try even harder to ensure that I do not "annoy or trouble persistently" those within the LDS Church whose views are different than mine.  I can't stop sharing what I believe, but I can strive to word what I share as charitably and non-annoyingly as possible.

There is Nothing Noble in False Modesty or Self-Deprecation

In thinking about my New Year's Resolution for this month (to "recognize more fully that I am not better than others"), I batted around multiple ideas for this weekend's post.  In the end, I found a post I wrote almost exactly a year-and-a-half ago.  I am re-posting it, with some parenthetical modifications to fit what I have been thinking about for the past week - but I am copying a comment by Molly on that post, since I think it is profound.

In Screwtape Letters, Screwtape says true humility is not a pretty woman trying to believe she is ugly or a clever man smart (some sexism here, but I give him a pass for when it was written and that he was a bachelor for so long). True humility is building the best cathedral in the world and knowing it is the best, and rejoicing in that fact the same as if someone else had built it.

With that introduction:
----------------------------
The fundamental point of my resolutions posts this month has been that charity is measured largely by how one views one's own abilities and knowledge - but, more precisely, that "vaunting" one's self and being "puffed up" are manifestations of one's view of one's self relative to others. In summary, the lack of charity in the manifestation of vaunting one's self and being puffed up is measured by how one raises himself above others - how one views her own abilities and/or knowledge in relation to others - and, again, more precisely, how one must devalue another's abilities and/or knowledge in order to value one's own more than is "correct".

(This applies exactly to the idea of recognizing that, at the most basic level, in the eyes of God, I am not any better than others.) 

The following, I believe, is self-evident, but I still believe it needs to be said:

It is very easy when thinking of this juxtaposition to conclude that self-confidence stands in opposition to charity - that if one is aware of and admits to a difference in the abilities and knowledge among people, and if part of that awareness and admission is that one's ability and/or understanding is greater than another's, then one is not being charitable. However, this stands in direct opposition to both common sense and one of the central themes of scripture and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Again, the key is not a recognition of differences in ability and understanding, but rather it is not allowing that recognition to lead to condescension and condemnation.

(This also applies to members of the LDS Church directly, as it is very easy and "natural" to equate understanding of "The Restored Gospel" and membership in "the only true and living church" with being "better than others".) 

In case anyone is tempted to dispute the title of this post, simply stop and realize that the parable of the talents explicitly ends in the Lord rewarding those who recognized their abilities to multiply what they were given - and in the Lord taking what he had given from the one who feared his Lord and did not magnify what he had been given. It rarely is phrased this way, but the two who were rewarded had the ability, understanding and self-confidence necessary to do what they knew the Lord desired of them; he who was not rewarded lacked the ability and understanding to do so - perhaps due directly to a lack of self-confidence, manifested in fear.

(I listened to someone speak in Sacrament Meeting recently and cringed inwardly when she said feelings of self-confidence were not of God - that "self-esteem" was a damnable philosophy of men that breeds pride and arrogance and distances us from our Father in Heaven.  First, I don't believe that, at all - and, second, it is guaranteed to be misunderstood and hurtful to many who hear it.) 

There is nothing wrong with me admitting and openly stating that I have been blessed with a natural ability to understand mathematical concepts - or to see how various pieces of a puzzle fit together (both physical puzzles and conceptual puzzles) - or to find joy in simple things - or to see the good in others. Those are personal strengths, and it would be dishonest or disingenuous to state otherwise - and, at the very least, I would be naive and misguided to think that all share those strengths equally. It is not the recognition of my own strengths that constitutes being puffed up and vaunting of myself; it is the over-valuing and/or over-estimation of my own strengths and the under-valuing and/or under-estimation of others' strengths on which Paul focuses in I Corinthians 13.

Part of the message of the Sermon on the Mount, on which I focused for two years, is the challenge to put conscious effort into understanding those characteristics that comprise completion, wholeness and full development - and to pursue acquiring them in order to glorify God. That entire process requires a level of confidence - and confidence is another way to phrase faith and hope. Of course, ultimate confidence in this process is pointed toward God, but one of the uniquely empowering aspects of Mormonism is the addition of an element of confidence in our own status as children of God - confidence that humans really are "worthy" of "the grace that so fully he proffers us" (based simply on our shared heritage of sons and daughters of divinity, not based on "individual worth" as distinguished from others' worth).

There is nothing noble, in my opinion, in false modesty or self-deprecation. Those things are not the same as meekness and humility. The former are facades; the latter are internal characteristics. The former are deceptive; the latter simply are descriptive. In that light, I believe it is much better to offer a simple, sincere "Thank you" when complimented than to deflect honest expressions with canned phrases that reject the sincerity of others' words - thus devaluing their praise. False modesty, as a way to avoid openly vaunting one's self, only masks the puffiness that exists hidden inside and is, therefore, hypocrisy.

Postscript: I have felt the need to add one "disclaimer" - and it is an important one, I believe:

There is a fine line between proper and realistic self-confidence and reckless self-confidence. The latter (recklessness) often appears in the religious as a belief that the Lord will not let anything bad happen to you - that you can do anything without concern for the potential consequences - that you deserve to have good things happen to you and that nothing is an un-necessary risk.

(The proliferation of multi-level marketing and bankruptcy in Utah points to this too common tendency to equate "perceived righteousness" with "being favored of God in ALL things" - and it is a reflection of twisted pride, imo.) 

There is realistically being aware of one's strengths AND weaknesses, and there is being aware of one's strengths and blind to one's weaknesses - and there is being aware of one's strengths and blind to others' weaknesses (which is a weakness, in and of itself). I am not advocating blind and/or all-encompassing confidence in this post. Even Ammon gloried "in the Lord" - and humans have a tendency to think the Lord will help them get whatever THEY want, rather than what HE wants to accomplish through them.

I Am Not Better than Others: The Difference between Talents and Worth

My New Year's Resolution for his month is to, "Recognize more fully that I am not better than others."  It is taken from Alma 5:54, which reads:

Yea, will ye persist in supposing that ye are better one than another?

My first thought was that this is a truly appropriate resolution for me this month, given the events of last month I described somewhat in my resolutions post throughout the month.  It's interesting that these two resolutions would be back-to-back, since a good old-fashioned beating with regard to not setting one's heart upon the things of the world leads quite naturally into a recognition that I am not better than others in my ability to avoid such beat-downs.  Life throws sucker punches at all of us, in one way or another, on a regular basis - so, in that regard, God does let the rain fall on all equally.

However, I need to look for deeper meaning in this month's resolution than just what I learned last month - especially since I really, really don't want to have to repeat the lessons of last month.  LOL

What struck me as I prepared to embark on this journey is that there is a HUGE difference between being better than others when it comes to certain talents and strengths and being better than someone in what really matters - eternal worth and potential in the eyes of God.

In the interest of full disclosure, I have had to make this distinction in my own mind largely because I do have certain strengths that make me better AT some things than many other people are in those things.  There is nothing wrong, imo, with recognizing one's strengths - and even recognizing that one is better AT something than someone else is at that same thing.  The key, I believe, is not a denial of comparative strength, but rather a balanced emphasis on the comparison where one is better than another and on the comparison where one is not as good as another.  It's understanding that all of us have strengths and weaknesses and that, ultimately, we all are equal in the eyes of God.

To be specific in practical ways:

I sing better than many people - and not as well as others.  I understand math intuitively better than many people - and not as well as others.  I see nuance and implication and potential outcomes better than many people - and not as well as others.  I am able to keep a prayer in my heart more easily than many people - but I struggle with formal prayer more than many others.  I am a very good public speaker - but I am not as good a private listener.  I could go on and on, but the point is that I need to be able to recognize my strengths and weaknesses, even in comparison to others, without allowing that recognition to cause classic pride that makes me feel like I am better than another intrinsically - that I am of more worth eternally than someone else.

I am planning on addressing more practical aspects of this in future posts this month, but I wanted to start with the foundational idea that I am a child of God - and so is everyone else in this world.  I am special and unique - just like everyone else in this world.  I can praise God for the talents he has given me (which is completely different than the Parable of the Talents, btw - just saying - *grin*), but I cannot develop an attitude of arrogance that is manifested in "praising Him" for making me "better than those poor people" who lack the specific talents for which I am grateful. 

To Set My Heart Less Upon the Vain Things of the World: Looking Back on My Life and Former Expectations

This month, my New Year's Resolution is "to set my heart less upon the vain things of the world" - taken from Alma 5:53, which says:

And now my beloved brethren, I say unto you, can ye withstand these sayings; yea, can ye lay aside these things, and trample the Holy One under your feet; yea, can ye be puffed up in the pride of your hearts; yea, will ye still persist in the wearing of costly apparel and setting your hearts upon the vain things of the world, upon your riches?  

This will be a bit more reflective post than most, in the sense that I am going to be writing quite openly about my past and personal inclinations.  I hope and pray I will be able to do so in a way that will help someone who reads this post.  

I have to admit up front that this resolution is one area where I have been both naturally humble but also been forced to be humble.  I was raised poor, due to my father's amazing dedication to my mother and willingness to forsake honor and relative wealth to care for her in her need.  (See this post for an explanation of that sacrifice.)  However, that poverty never was presented to us as a burden in any way.  I wished I could have more fairly often (especially when I was dating Mama - *grin*), but I never was covetous to any significant degree.  My struggle with the concept was much more a result of my ambitions upon leaving for college - and my subsequent desires to "live up to my potential" when it came to earning a living.

I never struggled in school.  In fact, academic learning came easily to me from the time of my earliest memories.  Understanding math, especially, was a natural gift.  This led me ultimately to Harvard (my admission being influenced greatly, I know, by the fact that I was from a tiny Utah town of which none of the Admissions Officers had heard), where I became enthralled for a few years by the opportunities that lay ahead of me.  I dreamed for a while about international diplomatic work - probably in Japan, where I served my mission, or China, which always has fascinated me.  Eventually, however, I realized I really did want to be a high school teacher, so I walked away from those secondary dreams and entered my subsequent life of relative poverty.

After I left the classroom, I ended up in Educational Publishing Sales and Marketing - and I made a very good living in that arena for nearly a decade.  I had one year, in particular, that was extraordinary - but, in the end, due to an unwise investment, I lost what I had earned, changed careers and now, once again, am doing work I love immensely that does not pay very well.  The "difficulty" for me now is that I have been more than comfortable previously, and it is hard to let go of the desire to be there again.

In general, I am incredibly happy with my life, regardless of my financial circumstances - especially since I believe deeply that I am and have been exactly where I am supposed to have been and be now.  I can look back on my life thus far and see that it was FAR more important for my family to be where we have been than for me to have made a lot of money.  In other words, our location has been more important than my actual job and career path.  I have gotten jobs that took us to where we needed to be - and, in having that happen, I am learning to let go more fully of the dreams I fostered those first four years in college.  It helps tremendously that I now do work that I enjoy greatly. 

This year has deepened my understanding of the trajectory I just described - and I have come to accept more fully the idea expressed in the LDS hymn, "I'll Go Where You Want Me to Go":

It may not be on the mountain height or over the stormy sea.  It may not be at the battle's front the Lord will have need of me.  But if, by a still, small voice he calls to paths that I do not know, I'll answer, dear Lord, with my hand in thine: I'll go where you want me to go.  

I was talking with Mama this week about exactly this understanding - that I have no idea where life will lead me from this moment forward, but that I am willing to accept wherever that ends up being.

I will deal more specifically with the meaning of the focus of my resolution in the posts that follow each week, but I wanted to start with this post - and an encouragement for everyone to strive to be able to accept whatever life the Lord desires of us - even if it is a life we did not expect and would not have chosen on our own.

We Need Leaders Who Are Acutely Aware of Their Shortcomings

Outgoing, confident people can find a supportive social network with people like themselves anywhere. Introverted and/or insecure people need a structure that functions around them and allows them to integrate slowly and passively fit in somewhere at first.

The irony of the church's totally non-professional local ministry structure is that the outgoing, confident people sometimes overwhelm the introverted and the insecure. It's a bit counter-intuitive, but the wards and branches that work the best generally are the ones that have leaders who are acutely aware of their shortcomings - the ones who often feel like they are on the verge of sinking every time they jump in the pool. We had a Relief Society President, for example, who was extraordinary - but one of the reasons she was so wonderful was that she knew she was nothing of herself. Her calling scared her nearly to death, but she accepted it, anyway.

Personally, I think that's the main reason why callings are shuffled regularly - to avoid the natural arrogance that arises when people finally feel like they "get it" and can perform their calling in their sleep. Not only does that provide opportunities for "unnatural" growth to the truly meek and humble who normally wouldn't be chosen as leaders, but it shortens the harmful period that inevitably occurs for some members when there is a personality conflict with a leader whose personality is opposite of their own.

I appreciate the words of newly called apostles, since they invariably speak sincerely of being overwhelmed by their new calling.

To Walk the Path that Opens Before Me

As I come to the end of this month's New Year's Resolution to be more humble and less proud, I want to wrap it up with a short commentary that will be a bit more vague than normal - but as personal as pretty much anything I write.  It deals with my life right now and something I have understood through experiences previously but am relearning now.

There have been times in my life when cirucumstances have combined to make me prouder of myself than I should have been - not in the proper way that Pres. Uchtdorf highlighted recently, but in the uncharitable way that is the focus of so many scriptural verses.  Generally speaking, my own life has followed the classic scriptural cycle associated with pride: Periods of pride, followed by forced humility.  There are elements of my life currently that represent that cycle - and it has come into stark relief as I have focused on how to conclude my resolution this month. 

Therefore, as a result of this introspection, I have only one commitment that has come at the close of this month:

No matter what the Lord has in store for me in the future - whether it is what I naturally want or not, I will accept it and do the best I can to make the most I can of it.  I will do my best to forge the path I desire, but I will accept and walk any path that I feel is being directed by God. 

Seeing God in the Mirror: Part 2

Somehow, the post I wrote last night got deleted and there was a weird combination of posts and titles when I logged in this morning.  The following is something I wrote nearly three years ago, and it felt right to re-post it this morning in place of what I lost from last night.  I hope it helps someone, somehow:

-------------------------------------
I was struck by something the other day that I have been considering ever since. It is not profound, but the combination of a very common scripture (and then one more) and the effort to understand and become more pure in heart has put something into a little different perspective for me.

The Book of Mormon includes the following statement from Alma, the High Priest, to Korihor, the professed atheist :

"The scriptures are laid before thee, yea, and all things denote there is a God; yea, even the earth, and all things that are upon the face of it, yea, and its motion, yea, and also all the planets which move in their regular form do witness that there is a Supreme Creator." (Alma 30:44)

Alma lays out both a scientific and mathematical argument in this verse - speaking of the complexity of the creation and its intricate, "regular" operation as proof that God exists. In essence, he says:

"This could not be without a God to make it be."

This seems simple to many people - that the creation itself, seen as encompassing all of which we are aware, testifies of a Supreme Creator. They think:

"How is it not self-apparent to all? Why can some people look around - or even study the intricacies of molecular biology and string theory and quantum physics and other astounding modern discoveries - and not see that it simply can't be the result of random mutation from an origin that still is unfathomable to scientists? Why can these people not understand this, even when many of them are very good, moral people? We haven't even scratched the surface of it all, and yet some can't recognize it as a sign of a creator. WHY?"
 

"For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father."

What struck me is that there is an element of "they shall see God" in one's ability to recognize the hand of God in His creations, but that ability is contingent on "yielding to the enticings of the Holy Spirit" - to having a heart purified by that Holy Spirit. What just hit me this instant, and is changing how this post evolves as I type, is that it is relatively easy - with even a small and comparatively weak connection to the Spirit - to see the grandeur of the universal creation and be humbled into a recognition of God in that creation.

It is more difficult to rise above the natural man and see God in His most inspiring creation - His children.

From both a religious and evolutionary perspective, we are the height of creation - but we also carry within us its depth. We are both god and devil in very practical terms, and, while it is easy for nearly everyone to see the fallen man (the chasm that separates us from God), it is very hard for many to recognize the embryonic god-child within that fallen man (the tie that will be bound in heaven). It is easy to see the caterpillar, but it is very difficult to see the butterfly within that caterpillar when it still is a caterpillar.

One of the most amazing things that happens when our hearts are purified by the power of the Holy Ghost is that, to some degree or another, we glimpse the inner butterflies around us while they still are limited by their caterpillar exteriors - and, in glimpsing those butterflies, we suddenly, in a very real and powerful way, begin to see God.