I am a skeptic, who loves questions and questioning (I
created a list as a missionary of doctrinal questions numbering around 300,
which I occasionally build on. Currently it’s over 400 questions). This can
make watching General Conference an uplifting, yet frustrating experience. I am
prone to dissect every word and phrase that’s spoken and try and build counter
arguments while I’m listening, a practice formed while I participated in debate
during high school. I can’t just take the words of the prophets and apostles as
one hundred percent the will of the Lord. I know the scripture, “whether by my
own voice or by the voice of my servants it is the same,” but I cannot accept
the fact that every word or phrase that crosses the lips of the men I sustain
as prophets, seers and revelators is scripture.
In fact, I tend to follow counsel spoken by J. Reuben Clark,
who gave a fantastic
talk on the subject of revelation and knowing when prophets speak as
prophets. His basic premise is that if what is being said is true then the
Spirit will testify to you of that truth. If you receive no witness, then it’s
not spoken under the influence of the Holy Ghost and therefore not inspired or
binding. I enjoy this approach, but it’s not without its own problems. What if
you can’t feel the Spirit? How do you know what is a witness? What if two
people watch Conference and claim to have opposing Spiritual witnesses about
the same talk? What about the different levels of spirituality, specifically
relating to the ability to recognize and follow promptings?
Having a sufficiently complicated understanding of
revelation and scripture muddies the idea of sustaining the leaders of the
Church. I wonder if there’s a threshold for the amount of material from General
Conference that needs to be accepted as truth and acted on to truly sustain my
leaders. Some would claim that if you truly think they’re prophets, seers and
revelators, then you would believe 100% of what they say. I’m not one of those
people and think that if most knew the vast amount of statements made that we would
now consider ludicrous to accept, they wouldn’t suggest such a proposal either.
Pres. Uchtdorf’s talk from the Saturday morning session, acknowledges that
Church leaders have made mistakes in the past, an admission that implies that
not all statements made by Church leaders are inspired. Uchtdorf’s talk was
incredibly welcoming and compassionate, soothing my questioning, skeptical
soul. His statement that “the acorn of honest inquiry has often sprouted and
matured into a great oak of understanding,” was particularly comforting and
stated what I have long felt and believed to be true.
I sometimes long for the ability to believe everything
without questioning, thinking that life would be easier if I was blind to the
complications that I see everywhere and in everything. However, the spiritual
experiences I’ve had due to questioning and pushing deeper, seeking
understanding, are of immeasurable value to me. I don’t know what I would do
without trying to constantly resolve tensions and work out conflicts. There is
beauty in that conflict, in the ambiguity and unknown. The conflict can be
wearisome and seem fruitless, especially when others doubt the sincerity of my
faith and belief, simply because I question or see things differently. At times
like these, I’ll remember the words of Pres. Uchtdorf, the Silver Fox, knowing
that my acorn of honest inquiry can grow to be a great oak of understanding. My
method of inquiry may differ from others, or perhaps they were given the gift
of a great oak, or feel as though the existence of other’s great oaks is
enough. The moments when the acorn starts to grow, when life is seen overshadow
the pain and inner turmoil. The sensation of Spirit surrounding me as I
discover truths and gain understanding, as I tease out and break through the
conflicts is Enlightenment. An experience that I constantly strive for and
wouldn’t trade for all the certainty in the world.
No comments:
Post a Comment