My Own Bucket List

I loved the movie, "The Bucket List." I had seen it one time previously, but it was better the second time, since I knew what was going to happen and could focus on the smaller details I missed the first time I watched it. It also allowed me to consider thoughts and conceptual things that struck me for the first time, and those insights were powerful for me.

The first epiphany was something quite simple. The very concept of a bucket list is a product of relative privilege and luxury. People who can consider a true "bucket list" (things they have reason to believe they might be able to do, as opposed to things they simply wish they could do in an ideal world) are able to do so due to some kind of privilege or luxury from their current and previous lives. Financial considerations are the best example of this disparity, since more concrete, objective goals often have an accompanying price tag, while poorer people usually are forced to focus on things that are more conceptual or subjective. In fact, many people don't have the luxury of even considering the concept of a bucket list, since all their energy must be focused on nothing more than survival. 

For example, in the movie, Edward’s list was about seeing the world, which was possible only because he was abnormally rich. It included, “Go on a safari,” “Visit Stonehenge,” “Sit on the Great Egyptian pyramids,” and “Drive a motorcycle on the Great Wall of China.” Conversely, Carter’s list was full of things like, “Kiss the most beautiful girl in the world,” “Witness something truly majestic,” “Laugh until you cry,” and “Find the joy in your life.” The differences in their buckets lists could be explained as nothing more than their individual personalities and perspectives, but it is not adequate to ignore the impact of financial success and security on those personalities and perspectives. Edward was able to record practical goals that were expensive to accomplish specifically and exclusively because he had the money to make them happen, while Carter was constrained by his limited resources to goals that were not attached in any way to financial cost and which were far more subjective.

The second thought was much more personal and enlightening. My own father would fit Carter’s character almost completely. Except for the element of race, which was a legitimate, major contributing factor for Carter, my father’s life mirrored Carter’s in nearly every way. My father gave up his professional dreams to marry my mother, then he did it again, 14 years later, to give her the support she needed to deal productively with her schizophrenia. He had eight children, specifically because my mother wanted as many kids as possible, even though he knew it would increase his responsibilities exponentially. He intentionally moved from financial security to serious poverty for his wife’s sake, and, as a result, he changed irrevocably the content of what he would have included on a bucket list.

In fact, even more fundamentally, he gave up the notion of creating a bucket list and made his own life his bucket list. He lived specifically and intentionally for his wife and children, giving up nearly all aspects of pure, undiluted individuality in the process. Watching this movie reminded me that I have come to read one particular Biblical verse differently as a result of coming to understand my father's sacrifice: “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.”

This verse doesn’t say that he "die" for this friends; rather, it says that he "lay down his life" for his friends.” There is an important difference between those two phrases. Just as Jesus, of Nazareth, set aside whatever life he had created prior to the age of 30 to begin his ministry to the people of his area, my father set aside the life he envisioned, twice, to begin his own personal ministry to his wife.

I see that same example in Carter. He lived his life for his wife and family, and he lost himself in a real and practical way. Edward offered him a chance to focus on himself again, and, initially, Carter accepted that offer. Eventually, however, he realized that the life he had established was more important than a practical, tangible, measurable list of dreams – as much as he enjoyed living those dreams. Edward didn’t improve Carter’s life in any way, ultimately, except in helping him regain the joy of his former life of self-sacrifice and service.

Meanwhile, Carter literally changed Edward’s life. The things on Edward’s bucket list that matter the most in the end were the things Carter had added, especially, “Find the joy in your life.” That joy wasn’t in the grandiose, fancy, and expensive; it was in the personal, intimate, and costless gift of his daughter and granddaughter.

That is my takeaway from this movie. Bucket lists are enticing, and, for those who can afford to fulfill them, they can be enjoyable and fulfilling to a degree. However, the most meaningful bucket lists are what people live as a direct result of their normal, daily, steady lives. I have chosen a life path that probably will not afford me the temptation to create a bucket list like Edwards, even if only in theory and not actual cost, but that chosen path has given me a multitude of experiences like Carter’s bucket list. Perhaps more than anything in my life, I am grateful for that particular way in which I am my father’s son.  

Yes, We Are Our Brothers' and Sisters' Keepers

Remember: It was Cain (a murderer) who replied to God, when asked where Abel was, "Am I my brother's keeper?"  
There are hundreds of verses and passages throughout the Bible (and other religious texts) that say, quite explicitly, that we are our brothers' and sisters' keepers in some way and to some extent. 
It is the determination of the way and the extent where there can be reasonable discussion and disagreement. (For Mormons, however, King Benjamin's sermon sets an incredibly high bar for refusal.) For Christians to deny their responsibility to help "keep" God's children (any of them), at all or minimally, however, is a direct denial of the ministry and teachings of Jesus, of Nazareth. 
Quoting Cain in doing so is the height of irony.

We Can Be "Atoners" in This Life

We talk of an infinite Atonement, but I have seen an example of how powerful a mortal, finite Atonement can be. 

My father's sacrifice for my mother, about which I won't write again here, allowed her to have a peaceful, joyful life despite "limitations" that could have made her life hellish. In a very real way, he laid down (set aside) his potential life and picked up a new life solely for her. In more ways than one, he suffered so she wouldn't have to suffer. We (their children) were blessed in many ways as a result, but he did it because of his deep, unquenchable love for her. 

I honor the concept of divine Atonement, but I think we focus so much on a universal, transcendent Atonement that we overlook the impact we can have when we choose to be "at-one-ers" throughout our lives. 

It is easy to be a divider. Any unprincipled person can be that. It is much harder to be a dedicated uniter and accepter and valuer and uplifter and atoner. 

I try to live my life that way, and the current political situation has made that excruciatingly difficult. I hope I can return to whom I want to be - and, in my interactions with others, be more like my dad was with my mom than any other example I have had in my life.

Avoiding the "Too Syndrome"

“Sometimes we have what I call the Too Syndrome. We feel that there are some people we can’t really extend full acceptance to because they are too something--too old, too young, too liberal, too conservative, too rich, too poor, too educated, too uneducated, too rigid in religious observances, too lax. In the parable of the Good Samaritan, if the traveler who fell among thieves was like other Jews of his time, he felt that Samaritans were too ethnically impure to worship in the temple; I don’t think he felt that the wine and the oil poured on his wounds were too Samaritan, do you?”

- Chieko Okazaki, "Aloha," p. 98-99

Jesus Showed All Lives Matter by Focusing His Ministry on Specific Lives

This post is not a defense of Black Lives Matter. Seriously, it isn't, so please don't make it about that. It is a broad statement about the stupid meme that is going around Facebook saying Jesus made the definitive statement about all lives mattering when he died on the cross for everyone. 
Yes, he died for everyone. That is a fundamental tenet of Chrisitanity, and, ironically, Mormon theology affirms it even kore than most Protestant theologies. However, he did that by explicitly focusing his mortal ministry on the marginalized and rejected in his society. In other words, he showed that all lives matter specifically by highlighting and working to change the inequities of his culture that made some lives NOT matter - or, at least, not matter nearly as much. He made all lives matter eternally when they didn't matter equally within their politic and socio-economic system - but he also worked tirelessly to convince the religious and political authorities (and the citizenship, by extension) to change the views and practices that disproportionately disadvantaged and harmed specific people. He beleived it so strongly that he died for it.
That is indisputable in the Gospels, and it boggles my mind how some people don't understand it. BLM being a good or bad organization doesn't change Jesus' ministry at all. He showed all lives matter by valuing publicans' lives - and lepers' lives - and sinners' lives - and adulterers' lives - and, importantly, Samaritans' lives. 
Truly beleiving all lives matter, as a Chrisitan, means doing everything possible to make all lives as equally valuable and sacred and protected and honored and loved and served in every way as possible.

My Sacrament Meeting Talk on the Meaning of Christmas

I spoke yesterday on the meaning of Christmas. 

I started by sharing my daughter's quote after attending the temple for the first time: 

We spend so much time building the kingdom of God that we forget to establish Zion.

I then said that the meaning of Christmas depends greatly on how we view the Kingdom of God. I asked everyone to close their eyes and picture a kingdom. Then I asked them how they would describe what they saw in their mind's eye. I asked them if there were large castles, clean and bright streets, smiling and happy and well-fed people, etc. Nearly all of them smiled and nodded in agreement. Then I said: 

So, when we think of the Kingdom of God, we usually picture a Disney movie - but that is radically different than what we see in the New Testament about Jesus, of Nazareth, his own life and the followers he gathered around him during his ministry.

I told them I believe we miss the real meaning of Christmas if we don't focus on and understand Jesus' early life, his ministry and whom he focused on teaching. The following is a simple outline of how I addressed that misunderstanding: 

1) "The whole need not a physician, but the sick." 

2) Mary was unmarried when she became pregnant. Without Joseph's acceptance and support, her baby probably would have been raised in abject poverty - and it is likely he either would have been discarded as trash, literally, to die or sold into slavery, as was the custom in that time and culture for babies born without available support. 

3) When he was a young child (probably 1-2 years old), his parents took him and fled a terrorist attack in his homeland, seeking refuge in the strongest opposition to the Roman Empire - Egypt. We have no idea in the Bible how many others in that area learned what Herod had decreed and was doing and fled with Joseph and Mary - but it is reasonable to believe there were many. 

4) When he started his ministry, he taught in the synagogues, but his followers were mostly the poor, the sick, the sinners, the publicans, the outcast, the rejected - "the least of these". In a very real way, he served those like himself in his earliest years. 

I told them that I see the meaning of Christmas as the message that every person on this earth, including those whom others can't love and accept and serve, is of equal worth in the eyes of God, with equal potential - and that we will not honor the true meaning of Christmas if our congregations and dreams resemble a Disney movie more than the people whom Jesus served in his ministry. I asked them to think of persons and people whom they naturally tend to judge and avoid - and to reach out, somehow, in their busy lives, to those specific people. After all, he said: 

Inasmuch as you have done it unto the least of these, you have done it unto me.

The following are two posts that were the foundation of my talk: 

"Thoughts on the Meaning of the Birth of Jesus" (Brad - By Common Consent) 

"It Is Finished: Death on Easter Sunday" 

In the End, What Really Matters?

When all is said and done, I believe what matters most is no more than that we search for and find peace and happiness, that we love and serve others and that we try to be the best people we can be on our life's journey.

We really can't know objectively about things outside our mortal vision (which varies from person to person), so, at the most fundamental level, all we are required to do is live according to the dictates of our own consciences, let us worship how, where or what we may.

The interesting thing is that, when you get to the heart of current Mormon theology (especially when you consider temple theology and vicarious work for the dead), the summary above is a pretty good one to describe the path to "perfection" (completeness, wholeness, full development) we call the Celestial Kingdom - and it's the heart of the Atonement within our theology. Our effort, limited though it is, is enough, through the grace of God and its limitless reach. 

My Talk on the Atonement: Jesus' Life As the Most Important Element

When we talk about the Atonement, we often use analogies or explanations that make sense to us. For example, we hear about the parable of the bicycle - or the weak student who is going to get whipped for his actions but a stronger student steps in to take his punishment - or someone who is in overwhelming debt who has his debt paid by a rich benefactor - or any number of other examples. We want to understand the Atonement more deeply, so we create these explanations - and we pick whichever one resonates most deeply with our own personalities and experiences.

While I also like to try to understand the mechanics of the Atonement (how it works in practical terms), I think obsessing over exactly which explanation is "true" is an example of something Elder Maxwell said in General Conference in 1988 - that the dimensions of the cross are not as important as what happened on it. Therefore, I am not going to talk about my understanding of the practical details of the Atonement; rather, I am going to talk about what the Atonement means to me - how it resonates most deeply with my own soul.

I start by comparing how the Atonement is addresses within mainstream Christian thought and within Mormon theology.

The traditional belief in Christianity about our ultimate end can be summed up as the wicked or unsaved suffering forever in Hell, while the righteous or saved live forever in the presence of God (generally focused on Jesus). In essence, this belief says that some will be punished with eternal torment, while others will end up in the condition we teach existed in the pre-existence. Framed differently, in Mormon terms and not focusing on the differences in physical condition to the resurrection, mainstream Christianity teaches that all people will end up in either Outer Darkness or the Terrestrial Kingdom. It's not that we reject their concept of Heaven and Hell; it's that we see more eternal conditions than that - and, importantly, we teach that most people will end up being more blessed than what is believed in most other denominations. For example, the generically wicked will be rewarded and blessed with a degree of glory, and those who strive to live the best they understand will be blessed with a much greater reward than the Terrestrial Kingdom, no matter their religious affiliation in this life.

That concept of an "extra reward" is the heart of the difference between how we view the Atonement - and I have to chuckle a little whenever I hear someone say that Mormons believe they are the only ones who will make it to Heaven. They simply don't understand our theology - but I also think it's important to point out that this misunderstanding sometimes occurs because of how we talk about "the world" and "others".

That is part of the intellectual aspect of the Atonement that means a lot to me, but the intellectual is not the most powerful to me. I believe strongly that, in the Church, we so the Atonement a disservice (that we actually devalue it) when we focus exclusively on the Garden of Gethsemane and Golgotha. Those are incredibly important aspects of the Atonement, but the ultimate goal of our existence is NOT to be saved from sin and death and return to a terrestrial existence (equal to the pre-existence, except with a resurrected body). We are told that the purpose and measure of our creation is to become like God - and it is Jesus' LIFE that provides the blueprint for how that can occur. His suffering and death are said to free us to pursue exaltation, but it is his life that teaches us how to "become like God"; thus, his life is an integral part of his Atonement.

To state it differently, someone can lack an intellectual understanding of Jesus and the Atonement (and not even have heard of either in this life) and still become like God, while others can study Jesus and understand intellectually the Atonement and not become anything like God. Understanding Jesus and the Atonement to the best of my ability is important, but actually striving to live like he lived and become like him is FAR more important in the end.

How can we do that?

We can read his words and emulate him. We can read the Sermon on the Mount and strive to acquire the characteristics of blessedness it lists and describes. We can see whom he served and look for ways to serve those same people (the publicans and sinners in our own society). We can stop focusing on serving those whom it is easy to serve (like each other here in this chapel) and reach out to those we naturally would avoid, despise and reject. We can try to love as he loved, knowing all the other commandments hang on love.

Brothers and sister, we need to acknowledge Jesus' suffering and death (and we generally are pretty good at that), but I believe we need to be much more intentional and dedicated to changing the world around us than we generally are. My only New Year's Resolution this year is to find a way to help the publicans and sinners around me - those people who I naturally see as "unclean" - not just to check off something on a to-do list, but to develop more fully the type of character and loving nature that Jesus said in Matthew 5:48 is the full measure of perfection.

I hope we all can do so, together and individually.

Church Programs: Necessary Crutches, Not Divine Ideals

A friend whom I respect greatly was talking with me about Home and Visiting Teaching recently, and she said something that I want to share here.  It's not new or uniquely profound, but it is powerful, nonetheless. 

My thinking is that if we lived as we ought, we wouldn't need a program to look after one another.

I usually tell a story to illustrate the point. My sister-in-law had three little girls when her fourth was born with down's syndrome. There was no forewarning of the abnormality and she found out when the nurse laid the baby in her arms. It was a shock that began a period of constant adversity. Unlike her other children, this newborn would not sleep. She had trouble feeding. She cried almost round the clock for the entire first year. One morning, as my sister-in-law sat in her pajamas crying because she had reached her wit's end, the phone rang. A sweet voice on the other end said, your name came to me when I prayed today. How can I help you? And help she did. She swooped in and gave my sister-in-law a much needed reprieve. No formal calling necessary.

And one from my own life. Our family was going through a soul-crushing period of adversity. I was home with our children. My husband was away. I was at my breaking point. It was Monday evening and I was skyping my sister. Feeling utterly alone and abandoned by God, my feelings spilled out as I tearfully wrote, "I give up. I don't think God even knows my address anymore." I signed off to go downstairs and make dinner for the children. As I exited Skype the doorbell rang. It was my bishop. "I had a feeling as I was leaving work that I needed to stop by tonight. Is that okay? My family is out of town. Can I have Family Home Evening with you? I brought ice cream." He held out the carton and I smiled wryly at God's impeccable sense of timing. He didn't just know my address, He knew my broken heart. This good brother had a calling but that's not how he ended up at my door. This was the most humble, genuinely charitable, and concerned bishop I've ever known.

I wish I were half as inspired. I need a program, like a crutch, to keep me upright and moving forward. But I hope I never make the mistake of confusing the hobbling I do aided by a poor prosthetic with running full speed with two good legs to be the Lord's hand and feet in this world.

Our programs are so much less than our potential.

My Sacrament Meeting Talk: What is Fasting? (not what we generally think)

I spoke yesterday on the topic "What is fasting?"

Between two talks that lasted longer than anticipated and an intermediate hymn that took a while to start, I had five minutes left. Afterward, I realized that was a good thing, since it allowed me to focus on the heart of the message I wanted to give.

I started by mentioning how important it is to understand what something means in order to live it properly. I used reverence as an example by saying that I could be sitting silently in church and be totally irreverent. Reverence means "deep respect, worship, adoration, etc." - and I could be thinking about sports or my job or any other topic that did not make me reverent. I also pointed out that some of our hymns are supposed to be sung "confidently", "with vigor", "enthusiastically" - and many of them are sung best when sung loudly. Those songs, when done appropriately, are sung reverently - since they convey deep respect, adoration, worship, etc.

(If I'd had more time, I would have used modesty as another example. We largely have taken an important concept, when viewed in its entirety as "moderation", and narrowed it so restrictively to the way we [and, mostly, women] dress that it has lost much of its transformative power - and, in many cases, we have begun to term conservative immodesty [over-dressing for an occasion or activity] incorrectly as modesty.)

I told everyone that I had planned on reading Isaiah 58, which I highly recommend and see as the best explanation of what fasting is and is not, but that, given the time constraints, I would summarize the central message, instead. I first said that I don't think God cares one bit about us not eating when we can choose to eat, in and of itself, and that fasting is not supposed to equal not eating - just like reverence does not equal being quiet or silent.

With that, I focused on Isaiah 58. The first few verses explain why Israel was condemned for the way it fasted. They abstained from food but simultaneously continued to oppress the poor - and performed their normal labors - etc. Fasting changed nothing about their practices and their lives. They also fasted for their own benefit, including making it an obvious sign of their righteousness. In fact, by wearing sackcloth and using ashes, they put on disguises that made them appear to be poor - a rank form of hypocrisy.

The rest of the verses focus on the pure intent of fasting: helping the poor, the afflicted, the imprisoned, etc. In other words, fasting is supposed to help people who generally don't understand poverty and hunger in a powerful way forge a link with people who don't have the luxury of choosing to fast - who go without food regularly and without end in sight - who would never dream of making a show of their poverty - etc. In a way, it is similar to temple work, which is supposed to connect our hearts with our ancestors in a unique and eternally-binding way and help us respect, understand and love them differently than we could without that concept.

I emphasized that if we are not feeling connected to the most poor and needy - the truly destitute among us and throughout the world, in some way and to some degree, we are not fasting as it is meant to be. If we are not becoming more Christ-like in how we interact with those who are hungry and marginalized and outcast and demeaned and ridiculed and "stand in need of comfort" in some way, we are missing entirely the foundational reason why we are supposed to fast. If we are not receiving the suffering of the poor, we are not fulfilling a pure fast.

I said there are legitimate reasons why we should fast at times for certain blessings in our own lives, but that if we make ourselves the center of most of our fasts we are, in a real way, no different than the Israelites in Isaiah 58.

On Not Being of the World: Our Rhetoric Can Discourage Living More Christ-Like Lives

I think we work so hard not to be of the world that we forget to be fully in the world - which is where the Gospel is found, in the purest sense.

Jesus certainly lived fully in the world, and our rhetoric too often discourages that sort of involvement.

Is Having a Church Calling a Divine Commandment?

I don't see having and magnifying a church calling as a divine commandment, in and of itself, but I do believe it is a commandment to be involved in helping others - and helping staff and run the Church can be a way to do that for lots and lots of people. Therefore, I believe serving in the Church can be a way to fulfill a divine command. 

I don't think anyone who doesn't serve in some way in a church organization is "breaking the commandments" - but I do think anyone who doesn't get involved in some organization dedicated to helping others (or doesn't do that personally, outside an organization) is ignoring the two great commandments in a real way.

Why Do Committees in the Church Often Fail to Make a Difference?

God so loved the world that He did not send a committee. 

I was asked once to lead the Melchizedek Priesthood Missionary Committee in my ward, and I accepted only after telling the leaders that they would have to accept my unorthodox view on the committees and my unorthodox approach.

In the first meeting (the last 15 minutes of the third hour meeting), I started by saying to everyone:

Why are these committees generally such a failure?

After getting the initial stunned looks and a few comments, I told them that I thought it was because we didn't spend enough time on them (because we didn't have enough time in the first place), we tried to tackle too many things (given how busy everyone was with other responsibilities), we came up with grandiose plans (or, in the case of the Missionary Committee, we simply acted as a wing of the Ward Mission and ended up doing administrative things for the Ward Mission Leader) and we didn't establish any unique things to do that were simple enough to accomplish. Therefore, my focus would be on nothing but community service, not for the sake of conversion, but simply for the sake of service. I told them the Ward Mission Leader could focus on "missionary work"; we would be focusing on sharing the Gospel - that he could build the kingdom of God and we could work to establish Zion. Service was something we could do without any angst, without a huge time commitment and without feeling like failures.

Volunteers generally want to do something fairly simple that makes them happy without creating more burdens and responsibilities in their already busy lives. Conversely, many leaders want to change the world or, at least, have a major, visible impact - and it isn't always ego-driven or a bad thing in any way. They just have a bigger vision, if you will, and more confidence in their ability to enact a bigger vision, than the other people do. They also tend to forget that worker bees still need to fly all over the place for most of their available time to gather the honey they need to survive.

My advice when it comes to a leader working within a volunteer organization is not complex:

Simplify. Simplify. Simplify.

Take longer to do what you envision doing.

Respect volunteers as volunteers.  

Find tasks can be done and, through being done well, provide feelings and experiences of success.

A Conversation We Have Far Too Infrequently in the LDS Church

"As I have loved you, love one another."

Jesus actively spent his time serving (loving) the people in his society whom everyone else rejected and judged. ("the least of these" - the leper, the sinner, the publican, etc.)

Identify the people in our own society who are the outcasts and those rejected and judged by people - and especially by us as Mormons. (the poor, the immigrant, the gay, the unwed mother, etc.) 



Now, ask yourself, based on the account we have in the Gospels:

What would Jesus do?

That can open a conversation that we have far too infrequently in the Church.

People Will Flow to Zion: Service Should Be Unconditional, Not a Means to Conversion

I believe the greatest "missionary work" we can do is to devote more time and effort to service, but I believe we can't do so with the idea or goal of increasing church membership.  I believe we need to "share the Gospel" of Jesus Christ more by modeling Jesus' actions than by preaching what he taught - as important as it is to share what he taught.  I think if the overall membership stopped trying to “do missionary work” and started serving others more actively (not just each other, like so many “service projects” are focused on doing) – with no conversion focus but simply for the love of other people – we would end up with a situation where the full-time missionaries would be teaching much more than they currently can. I believe if we truly worked to establish Zion, people would “flow unto it” – and “missionary work” would be available for the full-time missionaries without their having to seek it nearly as much. 

I am talking about service by regular members like me, given in the communities in which we live. Those opportunities are abundant and nearly overwhelming in many communities, and everywhere I’ve seen it approached humbly and meekly (“How can we help, no strings attached?”) the local government and community leaders have been grateful. In areas like where I was raised, where over 90% of the citizens are members, it would be a bit different, but if we stopped serving with an agenda and simply looked for those who need help (and provided whatever they need, not what we want to give), things would be radically different even in areas like where I was raised.

Serving in soup kitchens and shelters of all kinds – conducting parenting courses for young parents – mentoring and tutoring students (of all ages) – sitting with hospital patients and nursing home residents who have no family who visit – volunteering in schools – delivering Meals on Wheels – providing temporary shelter for abused women and their children – teaching budgeting and nutrition skills – cleaning senior citizens enters – helping Habitat for Humanity – volunteering at the local Boys and Girls Club and YMCA – cleaning and beautifying cemeteries – clearing land that poses a fire hazard – providing childcare for welfare recipients attending classes – helping with military veteran rehabilitation – organizing or participating in drives to gather food, clothing, school supplies, etc. for needy children and families.

The list is endless – and I believe that it would take a paradigm shift to allow members to spend less time at the church building and more time in the community. With the advent of modern technology, there is so much we could do administratively without having to have traditional meetings – and we could substitute service of this type once a month for some of our secondary meetings (even the second and/or third hour of our Sunday meetings). It’s just a matter of decoupling culture and tradition from Gospel, in many cases – and I use “just” knowing it’s not easy.

The issue is sustained effort and commitment, even if no baptisms result immediately. It really does have to be for nothing more than love of others. If nothing else, it would turn us into better Christians and not just better Mormons – but I really do believe a lot of the misconceptions and stereotypes (many of them deserved, unfortunately) would break down and interested people would find us as a result of more exposure and our own internal change.

As I’ve said previously, we tend to focus so much on not being of the world that we forget to be fully in the world – and that, I believe, is our biggest challenge to both building the kingdom of God on earth and to establishing Zion. So, while I believe that how missionaries serve is an important issue (and that it can’t be the same way they served previously as itinerant preachers), I believe the solution in our own time lies in how we (the membership) serve, first and foremost.

If You Want to Be a Force for Good at Church: First, Don't Blame Those Who Struggle

There was a discussion in a leadership meeting I attended once that centered on the question of why members left the Church and what we could do about it. I knew how it probably would go naturally, so I piped up right at the beginning and said that most of the people who have left with whom I have talked personally mention being bored and feeling unfed at church - and that the best thing we can do, in my opinion, is to make our services and classes and meetings at all levels and of all kinds more spiritual and more spiritually filling.

Of course, there was an initial, immediate reflection of that onto the people who don't come prepared to feel the Spirit (as if it's their own fault for not feeling fed and feeling bored), but the conversation eventually ended up focusing on the "standard" idea that everyone needs a friend, something to do and nourishment with the good word of God. I agreed and simply pointed out that it is up to the leadership of each ward and branch to set the example of nourishing with the good word of God and insist that the membership do that, as well, to the best of their ability.

This is one issue where I agree completely with the "standard Sunday School answer". Everyone needs a friend (someone with whom s/he can talk honestly and openly without being judged or condemned), something to do (to not feel like a nobody and to serve others) and spiritual nourishment. One is social; the next is active personal; the last is spiritual.

If all three of these things were provided to every member, there still would be issues - but they would be much fewer, far between and less serious. So, my advice to everyone:

If you want to be a force for good at church, be a real friend to someone at church, find something to do at church that is important and meaningful to you (whether that is an official calling or not) and provide nourishment of the good word of God to those who need it (including yourself, if you aren't getting it directly at church as much and as often as you'd like).

How to Enjoy Church and Grow Personally When You Don't Learn Much while There

I have been asked by more than one person what they can do to enjoy church and feel like they are progressing spiritually at church when they don't feel like they are learning anything new by attending.  

My general advice is:

When you go to church, lay down your life for that short time period and step into Jesus' ministry. Start going primarily to find ways to serve people, not to be instructed. You can get the instruction you need outside of church, so whatever you get in church will be an unexpected bonus. I promise, there are lots of people who need to be served at any given time - at least as many, I'm certain, as need to be taught.

Focus on being the servant first (a savior to others) and be the student whenever that happens naturally.

It really can change the life you lay down when you leave your house each Sunday.

Service for the Sake of Service: We Serve Conditionally Too Often

I believe that being born again is all about being a child of God and Christ in a very personal way - and I think that happens fully when we maintain communal allegiance, support and service but find our own faith, understanding and vision within that community. We then turn around and help others find their own faith, understanding and vision and accomplish their own desires - even when they differ slightly or significantly from ours, both within and without our central religious community. It's serving simply for the sake of helping in whatever way is possible, not with an ultimate agenda in mind - other than that person's joy and peace. At the most fundamental level, it's not about baptism, church attendance or any other conditional motivation; it's being born into Jesus' ministry in some real way and helping simply to help. 

I know how unorthodox that is in the minds of some members, but it absolutely is in line with a lot of things that are taught in General Conference, for example. Elder Wirthlin, Pres. Uchtdorf, Pres.Monson and others often talked and continue to talk about service just for service's sake. Yes, we have responsibilities to our religious community and "tribe" - but we also have this over-arching theology that teaches us we are part of a global, eternal, universal religious community and family. With that foundation, our ultimate responsibility is to everyone, not the small subset who are or might become members of our Church.

A Beautiful Christmas Post: The Power of a Baby, not a King

Holy Innocents II - Kristine (By Common Consent)

My Sunday School Lesson Recaps: Serving Effectively in the Church; or, Focusing on Building Zion

The topic this month is "Building the Kingdom of God on Earth", and we focused last week on "Serving Effectively in the Church". We did so by talking about five things:

1) We talked about the meaning of "effectively".

Effective can mean efficient - meaning doing something with as little wasted energy as possible, but it also can mean "causing an effect" - meaning achieving a desired result. Both are important in the context of serving effectively in the Church, but I pointed out that all actions have effects. One of the critical aspects of leadership is to identify the desired effect and act in such a way that the desired effect occurs. I simply said that the ultimate effect from service in the Church should be a closer relationship with God and each other - or, in other words, the establishment of Zion. Anything that takes people away from that effect is not in harmony with the stated goal of service in the Church.

2) We talked about the importance of callings in the operation of the Church.

I asked the students to rank church callings in order of importance. After a brief discussion about the "natural (wo)man" view of callings, we talked about how the most important calling is the one that they are doing at the time. We talked about living in the present and valuing the contributions and efforts of all members - and I mentioned how much I like the fact that a Bishop can get released and serve next in the Nursery, for example.

3) We talked about the difference between being a leader and being a worker - not relative to importance but merely to emphasize the necessity of each type of calling.

Concerning leaders, we talked openly, with the Bishop in the room, about how some callings are through inspiration, some are through perspiration and some are through desperation. We talked about how callings are important no matter which category applies in each case - and how, as a leader, it is important not to present a calling as being in one category when it really belongs in another one. I told them they should never tell someone a calling was inspired, for example, if there wasn't clear, undeniable inspiration in the selection process.

Concerning workers, we talked openly about how their honest input is important - and how it's okay to say no to callings and/or give qualified acceptance, meaning doing the best they can even if it isn't ideal. One of the students mentioned living in a small ward where his mother had three callings (two of which were leadership callings) while being pregnant. When she was asked to do one more thing, she had to say no for her own health and the well-being of her family. I mentioned a couple of instances where I had said I would accept a calling, but I shared some things about my situation at the time that would not allow me to perform the calling the way they probably wanted.

4) We talked about councils and their centrality to the serving effectively.

We talked about the importance of input from council members - and I stressed that the best councils are those where the participants have differing perspectives and views, since that allows the leader to hear ideas and suggestions (and concerns and objections) that s/he wouldn't consider naturally.

5) We finished by talking about the need to respect others who are doing their best, even if that best isn't what the leader would like.

I told them bluntly that people are more important than numbers and that if they ever lost sight of that and started focusing on numbers over people they would lose effectiveness and, more important, hurt people and lose their support and respect.