Did Kate Kelly Ever Encounter The Real Joseph Smith And The Real Mormonism?

Did Kate Kelly Ever Encounter The Real Joseph Smith And The Real Mormonism?© 

The world of Mormonism has been thrown into a turmoil by the minor squall fomented by Kate Kelly and her “Ordain Women” organization which resulted in her excommunication from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on Sunday 22 June 2014 in Virginia. Despite her protests of belief and faithfulness (to be discussed in more detail below), she has two outstanding problems–she does not know, understand and believe some basic church doctrines about how the Church is governed, nor the history of the Church relative to these same issues. She has never encountered the real Joseph Smith and the principles he taught about apostasy.  She missed Apostasy 101.

On 21 June 2014, Mrs. Kelly reproduced on the “Ordain Women” website a letter she wrote to her Virginia bishopric which she labeled, “My defense against the charge of ‘apostasy’.” This defense begins with a request: 

I beg of you not to impose any form of discipline during the trial you will hold on Sunday. I also request that you do the right thing and revoke the “informal probation” that was placed upon me and remove the “move restriction” placed on my records so that I can participate in the ward where I currently reside. Please reconsider this punitive process and allow me to continue to worship in peace.(1)

Though she did not attend the disciplinary council or agree to do so through modern technology or arrange for another date, she asks not to be disciplined and for the brethren to “do the right thing” and revoke previous restrictions placed on her, as though she were the sole arbiter of what “the right things” are, and implying that her leaders are misdirected. The “peace” of her worship is at issue; apparently the peaceful worship of the church, especially the women among whom she is agitating, (not to mention the men of the general priesthood meeting she sought access to) be damned.

Her long letter asserts that her leaders do not really know her or her heart and that they failed to follow-up on her “repeated invitation to engage in an open dialogue in person.” She refers to but does not cite four emails. This is puzzling and seems contradictory to the letter from her bishop informing her of her excommunication in which he refers to four separate meetings she had with him and/or the stake president.(2)

She went on to say that she has always had a believing but questioning heart, and that she cannot stop asking hard questions. She complained that when she was baptized the only thing to wear was a white jumpsuit for an adult man.  

I was very upset that no one [apparently including her own parents] had thought that a little girl might be getting baptized and prepared something for her to wear. As I look back I realize that is just a small reflection in my memory of the way in which adult men are treated as the standard mold in the church and everyone else is an ‘other.’

This super-sensitivity is typical of critics who get something in their craw and then everything is seen in this light. She does not hold her parents responsible for her dress, it is the male dominated Church that is trying to force her into a male mold. She does not consider how big the ward was at the time and how much baptismal clothing they had available, or any issue of modesty. She had her own idea of what she expected to happen and when it didn’t she somehow became a victim demeaned by the organization. It is all about her, as it is for many critics.

Again, as is typical with apostates, she feels her personal morality, her perception of truth and integrity are greater than the Church’s commitment to righteousness, truth, and integrity.  Her personal morality trumps that of God’s Church. From her recital of lessons she loved about brave pioneers putting faith into action and walking in difficult paths to support the truth, the Young Women values of good works and integrity that to her require one to “act on the thoughts and feelings you have in order to live with true integrity,” (the same argument gay and lesbian Mormons use in violating the law of chastity), we learn that she somehow sees her “Ordain Women” quest as an act of pioneer heroism, integrity and authenticity. When she launched the website she exclaimed, “that was the most joyful worship I had felt since my mission. My whole authentic(3) self was out there for all to see, and I was unashamed.”

Thus the following paragraph from her letter is equally telling and suggests why the outcome was what it was:

I want to communicate with perfect candor, as I have always done. As I made clear to President Wheatley when we met on May 5th, I will continue to lead Ordain Women, the group I founded. I will not take down the website ordainwomen.org. I will not stop speaking out publicly on the issue of gender inequality in the church. These things President Wheatley instructed me to do, I cannot do in good conscience. I cannot repent of telling the truth, speaking what is in my heart and asking questions that burn in my soul.

She received a legitimate call to repent from God’s authorized servants and by her own admission she rejected it. All apparently because of self-righteousness and pride and being "authentic".  Her defense, as I read it, is: "Look, I grew up loving the gospel, active in it, even owning and wearing BYU paraphernalia, serving a mission and marrying in the temple. That should show you [her judges] that my sincerely asking hard questions, starting a website campaigning for changes in Church practices, using six proselyting discussions in recruiting others, are not reasons to question my faith, loyalty, and commitment to the gospel." 

Encountering the real Joseph Smith and the real Mormonism

Mrs. Kelly’s problems are many, but two stand out. She does not understand some fundamental doctrines and she has not learned how they have been implemented and played out in the history of the Church.  As good of a woman as she may be, she is ignorant of some very fundamental things and that ignorance has led her into grave consequences.

First, she does not understand the “first step” into apostasy. Joseph Smith taught it as an eternal and undeviating principle “firm as the pillars of heaven.” In other words, this is not some possibility, or some likelihood, or some issue for others to worry about; in actuality it is a key to one of the mysteries of the Kingdom.  In 1839 he said:

I will give you one of the Keys of the mysteries of the Kingdom. It is an eternal principle, that has existed with God from all eternity: That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives. The principle is as correct as the one that Jesus put forth in saying that he who seeketh a sign is an adulterous person; and that principle is eternal, undeviating, and firm as the pillars of heaven; for whenever you see a man seeking after a sign, you may set it down that he is an adulterous man.(4)

Perhaps Mrs. Kelly in her attorney-like way may want to parse this and say, “Well, he is talking about men here, not women.” I do not think she is that shallow, but just in case, I would remind her that it was she who said “adult men are treated as the standard mold in the church and everyone else is an ‘other.’” So, it should not escape her that the same principle applies to women. She is exhibit A of its truthfulness for the present generation.

The Lord gave the following warning to the Saints in the first section of the Doctrine and Covenants, when he spoke about conditions and beliefs in our day. Verse 16 reads:

16) They seek not the Lord to establish his righteousness, but every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol, which waxeth old and shall perish in Babylon, even Babylon the great, which shall fall.(5) 

A correlation to these principles comes from President George Q. Cannon, apparently another teaching unknown to Mrs. Kelly.This statement was made in reference to The Godbeite apostasy in 1868-69.

A friend . . . wished to know whether we had said that we considered an honest difference of opinion between a member of the church and the authorities of the church was apostasy, as he said, we had been credited with having made a statement to this effect. We replied that we had not stated that an honest difference of opinion between a member of the church and the authorities constituted apostasy; for we could conceive of a man honestly differing in opinion from the authorities of the church and yet not be an apostate; but we could not conceive of a man publishing those differences of opinion, and seeking by arguments, sophistry and special pleading to enforce them upon the people to produce division and strife, and to place the acts and counsels of the authorities of the church, if possible, in a wrong light, and not be an apostate; for such conduct was apostasy as we understood the term. We further said that while a man might honestly differ in opinion from the authorities through a want of understanding, he had to be exceedingly careful how he acted in relation to such differences, or the adversary would take advantage of him and he would soon become imbued with the spirit of apostasy, and be found fighting against God and the authority which He had placed here to govern his church.(6) 

Second, Mrs. Kelly appears to be unaware of other very important teachings of Joseph Smith.  In an op-ed piece in the Salt Lake Tribune of 13 June 2014, Ashley I. Woolley, an LDS graduate of Harvard Divinity School, took issue with Kelly on three grounds, though as she said because of her background, “I might be expected to align with those who believe the LDS Church should ordain women.” Her third point was that neither she (Woolley) nor Kelly had the calling, nor the authority, nor the perspective “to resolve complicated doctrinal issues for the church. Intellectual discussion and questioning of doctrine is the privilege of all members. But to claim that my own interpretation is right for the whole church is beyond the scope of my authority. That is, I believe, what prophets are for.”(7) According to Joseph Smith she was absolutely correct.  He said:

I will inform you that it is contrary to the economy of God for any member of the Church, or any one, to receive instruction for those in authority, higher than themselves; therefore you will see the impropriety of giving heed to them; but if any person have a vision or a visitation from a heavenly messenger, it must be for his own benefit and instruction; for the fundamental principles, government, and doctrine of the Church are vested in the keys of the kingdom. Respecting an apostate, or one who has been cut off from the Church, and who wishes to come in again, the law of our Church expressly says that such shall repent, and be baptized, and be admitted as at the first.(8)

I am not aware that Kate Kelly has explicitly claimed revelation or guidance for the Church. However, her practical actions of starting an organization and a website, with discussions for recruiting, campaigning for her position, and leading a group of women in that campaign are de facto evidence that she believes she knows better than the leaders of the Church on this issue. She is not, in fact, seeking a dialogue with Church leaders about her questions.  She believes the Church practice is in error and she seeks a change in church government in harmony with her personal belief.  Her campaign is not for dialogue, but for change.  She deceives herself and anyone else who does not see through this rhetoric.

Mrs. Kelly, who either did not know these doctrines and principles or ignored them, adds the further problem of not knowing or ignoring the history of the Church.  Many have tried to steady the ark; some but not all have been disciplined.  But one can force the issue too far.  Mrs. Kelly is either naive or ignorant, or both if she thought she could persist in her ever escalating campaign without some response from her church leaders. To say now that she is surprised by her treatment is disingenuous given the fact that she knew as early as March of 2013 that there was an issue which concerned her for the rest of that year and which was brought to a head in four meetings with her Stake President in the winter and spring of 2013-14, following her actions at the Fall General Conference. If Kate Kelly would have studied Joseph Smith and church history, she would not have been surprised by the judgment brought upon her. She would have seen it coming and even predicted the outcome.  Unfortunately in her case, as Jesus frequently pointed out, those who will not see and hear, do not understand.

An important question is what will the future hold for Mrs. Kelly? It will be interesting to see if the teachings of George Q. Cannon and Joseph Smith hold true for her. Cannon warned that one who differed with the brethren“had to be exceedingly careful how he acted in relation to such differences, or the adversary would take advantage of him and he would soon become imbued with the spirit of apostasy, and be found fighting against God and the authority which He had placed here to govern his church.” Joseph Smith once had a discussion with Isaac Behunnin about apostates. Behunnin observed that if he left the Church he would “go to some remote place where Mormonism had never been heard of, and no one would ever learn that I knew anything about it." Joseph Smith taught his friend the same principle Cannon urged upon the Saints generally–caution about becoming an apostate. He told Behunnin that he [Behunnin] didn’t really know what he would do if he left Mormonism. When he joined the church he “left neutral ground” forever–he couldn’t get back on it. Therefore, if he were to leave the Church it was at the instigation of Satan “and you will follow his dictation and be his servant.”(9)

I do not desire to wish a plague upon Mrs. Kelly’s house, but I know enough about these principles and how they have been demonstrated ad infinitum in church history to be concerned about what lies ahead for her.  I won’t be surprised if her campaign turns ever more virulent.  It is common among apostates to leave the Church but not leave it alone. I can only pray that the “spirit of repentance” will come upon her and replace the spirit of self-justification and self-righteousness which is with her now.

I am sad that Kate Kelly apparently never encountered the real Prophet Joseph Smith and his teachings. She has nobody to blame for that but herself, but had she done so the outcome for her could have been different.

Lets think together again, soon.

Notes:

1. Kate Kelly to Mark Harrison, et al., 21 June 2014.  Available online at:

http://ordainwomen.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Kate-Kelly-Letter-of-Defense.pdf

Accessed 27 June 2014.  All other quotations from Mrs. Kelly in this article are from the same source.

2. Available online at:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/231051936/Kate-Kelly-Excommunication-Decision

3. Doing something with authenticity or being one’s “authentic self” is a popular buzz word or phrase these days. I believe Mrs. Kelly confuses it with true integrity which is more robust, more direct, and less abstract than “authenticity.”  Integrity implies thinking, belief and conduct based on genuine and true high moral and upright principles; whereas authenticity is more malleable, more in line with individualism, pushing the envelop, and rebellion–all based on one’s personal standards and beliefs regardless of how incorrect or low they may be.  “If I am true to my personal beliefs and standards, I am authentic.”  What more could one want?

4. Joseph Fielding Smith, ed., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1967), pp. 156-157, emphasis added.  Hereafter cited as TPJS.

5. Emphasis added.  Verse 14 is also relevant.  It says, “...the day cometh that they who will not hear the voice of the Lord, neither the voice of his servants, neither give heed to the words of the prophets and apostles, shall be cut off from among the people.” 

Establishing the Lord’s righteousness is also at issue in Isa. 54:13-14; Jas. 1:20; and Rom. 1:16-17.  Doing religious things one’s own way was an issue in Old Testament times.  See for example, Jer. 7:24, 9:14, 10:23, 11:8, 13:10, and Ezek. 36:17-19, 32.  Of course idolatry takes many forms beyond idol worship.  One of the most subtle in our day is willfulness in religious matters.  See Spencer W. Kimball, “The False Gods We Worship,” Ensign, 6 (June 1976): 3-6, where he also cites D&C 1:16.

6. George Q. Cannon, Editorial, Deseret News, 3 November 1869, p. 457, cited in B. H. Roberts, Comprehensive History of the Church, 6 vols, (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 1965), 5: 265-66, n. 23, and in Walter E. Bowen, Teachings of the Living Prophets, (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, n. d.), p. 205, emphasis added.  Many like statements may be found in the latter publication on pp. 196-208.

7. Ashley Isaacson Woolley, “Op-ed: Changing the church: How Ordain Women gets it wrong,” Salt Lake Tribune, 13 June 2014, available online at:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/58064931-82/church-leaders-members-ordain.html.csp

Accessed 27 June 2014.

8. TPJS, p. 21.

9. Daniel Tyler, “Recollections of the Prophet Joseph Smith,” Juvenile Instructor, 27 (15 August 1892): 491-92.

Gospel Laws Pertaining to Marriage and Family

Introduction:

We are not born knowing the gospel laws pertaining to marriage and family. Depending upon the strength of our own family we may learn some of them more or less. In general, we as a church do not discuss this specific topic (laws of marriage and family) very often.(1) I believe as Latter-day Saints the subject should be of great interest to us. Where will you find the laws pertaining to marriage and family? There are two basic sources: 1) the holy scriptures, and 2) from the teachings of the modern Apostles, Prophets and other General Authorities and Officers of the Church. Learning the laws of marriage through scripture study takes considerable searching and skill to ferret them out.  Some are obvious, others are not.  The teachings of modern General Authorities are surfeited with instructions about marriage and family, but they too must be located, obtained, and studied. Consider the following: There have been over 360 General conferences (2 per year for over a 180 years). I don’t know what the average may be, but in my lifetime it seems as if there have been one or two, sometimes more, talks devoted to these subjects in each conference. As a result, our leaders have discussed our responsibilities in marriage as a spouse and parent so frequently, it is likely that they have discussed most of the major and important subjects, including divine laws relative to this topic.We just have to be interested enough to seek this information out and study it.

There is a third source.  Many of the more important, though not all, of the major laws pertaining to marriage and family have been condensed into a one-page document known as “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” which was first read to the church on 23 September 1995, at a meeting of the Relief Society sisters. Knowing the importance of these laws and having read the document a number of times, I am nevertheless, ashamed to admit that though it has been around for almost twenty years, it was not until last week that I finally sat down and outlined it with the purpose of learning what it had to say about my responsibility as a husband and father.  Below I have reproduced my findings for the readers of this blog.  

I wish I would have been wise enough to do this twenty years ago.  I know that with frequent reviews of its teachings, I would have kept my covenants better and would have been a better husband and father.  In that spirit, I encourage all to download this outline, revised it to your own liking, but most importantly use it as a guide to your conduct as a spouse and parent. It seems only logical to me now after thinking about this subject for the past six or seven years, that doing so is crucial to our doing a better job of keeping our covenants with God, our spouse, and our children.

Blogspot does not have, so far as I can tell, true outline capabilities, so please forgive the present format. You will notice that where a sequence of items is listed, separated by commas, I have isolated each one with the relevant comment which preceded or followed it. This is to highlight and give appropriate weight to each item, separate from its list. Also, as you will see some subjects are mentioned more than once, in different terms. I have grouped all the relevant statements under the general heading which seemed appropriate to me. I was struck that the largest section deals with the spiritual duties of spouses and parents.  All quotations are from the proclamation with emphasis added by me.

BASIC LAWS OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY

AS FOUND IN

THE FAMILY: A PROCLAMATION TO THE WORLD

Prepared by

Danel W. Bachman 

1. Fathers are to “preside over their families...”  
1. “... in love and righteousness...”
2. Equal partners
1. “In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners.”  
2. “We warn that individuals who ...abuse spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day stand accountable before God.”  
3. Maintain Family Integrity
1. “Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.” 
4. Procreation
1. “The first commandment that God gave to Adam and Eve pertained to their potential for parenthood as husband and wife.  We declare that God’s commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force.”  
5. Chastity
1. “We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.” 
1. No homosexuality or bestiality.
1. “...only between man and woman”
2. Only inside of marriage.
1. “...man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife”
2. “We declare the means by which mortal life is created to be divinely appointed.” 
3. “Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity.” 
4. “We warn that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, ... will one day stand accountable before God.” 
6. Husband and wife to love each other and their children
1. “Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children.” 
2. “‘Children are an heritage of the Lord’ (Psalm 127:3).  Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness.... 
3. “By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love....”  
4. “Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of ... love...”
7. Husband and wife to care for each other and their children
1. “Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children.” 
2. “Husbands and wives–mothers and fathers–will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.” 
8. Children to be reared in righteousness
1. “‘Children are an heritage of the Lord’ (Psalm 127:3).  Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness.... 
2. “Parents are to provide for the ... spiritual needs of their children.”  
3. “By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in ... righteousness....” 
4. “Husbands and wives–mothers and fathers–will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.”  
5. “Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ.”  
1. “Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of faith....”
2. “Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of ... prayer...”
3. “Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of ... repentance...
4. “Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of ... forgiveness...”
5. “Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of ... respect...”
6. “Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of ... love...”
7. “Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of ... compassion...”
8. “Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of ... work...”
9. “Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of ... wholesome recreational activities.”
9. Parents are to provide for the physical ... needs of their children
1. “Parents have a sacred duty ... to provide for their physical and spiritual needs....” 
2. “Husbands and wives–mothers and fathers–will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.”  
3. “By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families ... and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families.”  
4. “Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children.”  
10. Parents are to teach children to love and serve one another 
1. A. “Parents have a sacred duty ... to teach them to love and serve one another.” 
2. “Husbands and wives–mothers and fathers–will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.”  
11. Parents are to teach children to observe the commandments of God
1. “Parents have a sacred duty ... to teach them to ... observe the commandments of God.” 
2. “Husbands and wives–mothers and fathers–will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.”  
12. Parents to teach children to be law-abiding citizens wherever they live
1. “Parents have a sacred duty ... to teach them to ... be law-abiding citizens wherever they live.”  
2. “Husbands and wives–mothers and fathers–will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.”   

Lets think together again,  soon.

Notes:

1.  One clear example of which I am aware is, Parley P. Pratt,  “Laws of Marriage and Procreation.”  In Key to the Science of Theology, 159-73.  Liverpool: F. D. Richards, 1855. This can be viewed in the Internet Archive at: 
https://archive.org/stream/keytosciencethe03pratgoog#page/n180/mode/2up

One Businessman’s View About The Education Of Today’s Workforce

Introduction: I am not in favor of looking at education solely from the point of view of getting a good job, nevertheless, that is a very important aspect of the subject. Because the world is changing so rapidly, it is important for educators and students to keep abreast of how the changes influence the need.  Here are some excerpts from one business executive who also sits on the board of the Council of Independent Colleges.  This is worthwhile reading for educators, students, parents,  and business leaders.

GENERAL NEEDS

...let’s discuss what a business like mine [UPS] needs from institutions like yours [Coalition for International Education].

Of course ... we want to see people with the basics of smarts and the ability to commit to something bigger than themselves.

We need students who excel at critical thinking ... problem solvers ... independent thinkers who also understand teamwork.

We need global thinkers with an abiding curiosity about people and places unseen.

These are people who want to know how the world works. They understand that a world hungry for the best ideas values diversity over uniformity.

They want to find the connections.  They want to understand how something happening half a world away can impact something happening to a customer down the street.

They need to understand the benefits of global exploration ... how to source and sift solutions and ideas from all parts of the world.

They need the intellectual humility to accept that good things are “not always invented here.”

COMMUNICATORS

Here’s one more thing you can help us with: We need communicators.

If there is one complaint you hear consistently about the bright young talent coming into our organizations, it’s that they can write an algorithm, but they can’t write a letter.

We need people who are not only technologically literate in how to communicate ... but also expressively literate in what they communicate.

That’s important because ... in an age of collaboration ... communication is the force that brings the parts together.

Communication focuses them on a shared feature, and gets them moving in the same direction.

FOREIGN LANGUAGE

A big plus is the ability to speak a foreign language ....

You can debate what learning a language adds to your lifetime earnings.   [DWB: But there is no debate about what knowing a second language adds to one's personal life beyond money.]

But when I see a U.S. job candidate who speaks more than one language, I see someone who had the foresight and determination to put in the extra hours.

I also see someone who sees the importance of making those global connections I spoke of.

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE AND LEADERSHIP

We need a new generation of leaders who understand the cost of political expediency.

We need leaders who can rise high above the protectionist debates to see the realities–the inevitabilities –of an interconnected world.

We need people who pursue the benefits of globalization without forgetting that 2.7 billion people around the world struggle to live on less than $2 a day ... and that in many countries, the gap between rich and poor is growing.

Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan once said that “arguing against globalization is like arguing against the laws of gravity.”

That’s true.  The best and the worst of its impacts are simply facts of life.

The only question: How do we manage them?

The only answer I see is leadership that understands that global possibility and risk are very personal issues.

We must all adjust to the fact that wherever we are, whatever we do, our day is shaped by events a world away.

Source: Kurt Kuehn, CFO, UPS, "Internationalization of U.S. Education in the 21st Century," available online at:

http://www.ups.com/pressroom/us/speeches/speech/About+UPS/UPS+Leadership/Speeches/Speeches+for+Syndication/ci.Internationalization+of+U.S.+Education+in+the+21st+Century..syndication

Accessed 6 June 2014.

Lets think together again, soon.

John Stuart Mill, Michael Bloomberg, and Joseph Smith

Michael Bloomberg:

A week ago the former mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg, spoke at Harvard’s commencement ceremonies. His address briefly stirred up the liberal media. Headlines such as: “Michael Bloomberg bashes liberal bias at Harvard commencement address” (The Washington Post), “...Bloomberg slams intolerance by liberals on college campuses...” (The New York Daily News), give a little flavor of the furor. Despite the hoopla his address merits a close read. My version of the headline would have been: “Bloomberg Reminds Harvard Graduates of Fundamental American Ideas and Ideals.” The speech is not long but embodies important principles and examples about the purpose of universities and the American values of freedom and tolerance.

Bloomberg acknowledged “...this has not been a traditional commencement speech, and it may keep me from passing a dissertation defense in the humanities department, but there is no easy time to say hard things.” He began by asserting that Harvard is

America’s most prestigious university. And, like other great universities, it lies at the heart of the American experiment in democracy. 

Their purpose is not only to advance knowledge, but to advance the ideals of our nation. Great universities are places where people of all backgrounds, holding all beliefs, pursuing all questions, can come to study and debate their ideas – freely and openly. 

Today, I’d like to talk with you about how important it is for that freedom to exist for everyone, no matter how strongly we may disagree with another’s viewpoint. 

Tolerance for other people’s ideas, and the freedom to express your own, are inseparable values at great universities. Joined together, they form a sacred trust that holds the basis of our democratic society.(1)

From there he discussed evidence that freedom and tolerance are vulnerable and at risk in America’s cities and on America’s college campuses due to “ the tyrannical tendencies of monarchs, mobs, and majorities.” His first example of the danger to freedom and tolerance came from his own NYC following the attacks on the World Trade Center in 01. Almost immediately afterwards there was a furor because some Muslims wanted to build a mosque a few blocks from the site. Bloomberg said that movement was resisted because: “The idea that government would single out a particular religion, and block its believers – and only its believers – from building a house of worship in a particular area is diametrically opposed to the moral principles that gave rise to our great nation and the constitutional protections that have sustained it.”  It was precisely the values of freedom and tolerance that those who attacked New York feared. To them we were a godless country. “But in fact,” Bloomberg observed, “there is no country that protects the core of every faith and philosophy known to human kind – free will – more than the United States of America. That protection, however, rests upon our constant vigilance.” He went on, “If you want the freedom to worship as you wish, to speak as you wish, and to marry whom you wish, you must tolerate my freedom to do so – or not do so – as well.” [Emphasis added.] A bit later he stated, “We cannot deny others the rights and privileges that we demand for ourselves. And that is true in cities – and it is no less true at universities....”

He went on to talk about the problems of political intolerance on American university campuses and some ideals which should be in place.  Here is a summary of a few things he pointed out:

• There is an idea that scholars should be funded only if their work conforms to a particular view of justice. There’s a word for that idea: censorship. And it is just a modern-day form of McCarthyism.

• In the 2012 presidential race, according to Federal Election Commission data, 96 percent of all campaign contributions from Ivy League faculty and employees went to Barack Obama. ... [By the way, Bloomberg supported Obama, which wasn’t often mentioned in the liberal reviews of this talk!] When 96 percent of Ivy League donors prefer one candidate to another, you have to wonder whether students are being exposed to the diversity of views that a great university should offer.

• When tenure was created, it mostly protected liberals whose ideas ran up against conservative norms.  Today, if tenure is going to continue to exist, it must also protect conservatives whose ideas run up against liberal norms. 

• The role of universities is not to promote an ideology. It is to provide scholars and students with a neutral forum for researching and debating issues – without tipping the scales in one direction, or repressing unpopular views.

• This spring liberals “silenced a voice–and denied an honorary degree” to people deemed politically objectionable who were invited to give commencement addresses at Brandeis, Haverford, Rutgers, and at Swarthmore and Johns Hopkins last year.

• A university’s obligation is not to teach students what to think but to teach students how to think. And that requires listening to the other side, weighing arguments without prejudging them, and determining whether the other side might actually make some fair points.

• If university administrations do not defend freedom and tolerance for all students, they will graduate with ears and minds closed and the university will have failed both the student and society.

John Stuart Mill:

These are ideas and ideals liberals constantly claim in their own defense.  However, many liberal political activists and ideologues in the guise of university professors and administrators have forgotten a fundamental principle of free expression.  Bloomberg turned the attention of the Harvard graduates to the writings of John Stuart Mill:

I’m sure all of today’s graduates have read John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty.But allow me to read a short passage from it: ‘The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it.’ 

He continued: ‘If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.’ 

Mill would have been horrified to learn of university students silencing the opinions of others. He would have been even more horrified that faculty members were often part of the commencement censorship campaigns. [Bold emphasis mine.]

Bloomberg concluded these observations with this comment which sensationalists and scandal-mongering reviewers touted: “For tenured faculty members to silence speakers whose views they disagree with is the height of hypocrisy, especially when these protests happen in the northeast–a bastion of self-professed liberal tolerance.”

Joseph Smith: 

Rather than an excoriation of liberals, I find much that is fair and truly liberal here and view this address as a much needed restatement of fundamental principles which should apply to all political parties. The remarks of Bloomberg and Mill reminded me of two very important statements of Joseph Smith. Regarding the threats to religious freedom he said:

I am bold to declare the rights of a Presbyterian, a Baptist, or a good man of any other denomination; for the same principle which would trample upon the rights of the Latter-day Saints would trample upon the rights of the Roman Catholics, or of any other denomination who may be unpopular and too weak to defend themselves.(2) 

And he added the following as a revelation from God, binding upon his people:

No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; By kindness, and pure knowledge....(3)

Joseph Smith was so committed to the principles of free agency, tolerance, and the constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion, that Mormonism was never set on the path of either restricting what people could hear or forcing its religious message upon them. The gospel was to be presented and people were free to accept it or reject it. Joseph Smith believed the principles of the fullness of the Gospel could hold their own in the marketplace of ideas. This approach of dispensing the gospel not only honors the agency of mankind, it also accepts the justice and fairness of God. This is a position that both major branches of Christianity, Islam, and other religions have not always understood or honored.

In the same sermon Joseph Smith also laid down what was to become a fundamental principle of Mormonism regarding the search for truth. He said, “One of the grand fundamental principles of ‘Mormonism’ is to receive truth, let it come from whence it may.”(4) This perspective suggests that Latter-day Saints should be open, tolerant, interested, and engaged in the search for truth–the “fairest gem that the riches of worlds can produce.”(5) 

Sometimes we Mormons are tempted to restrict the expression of the ideas of others and are not as open and valiant in our search for truth as our ideals teach us to be, but I am grateful for those ideals and the man who promulgated them as well as for other like-minded men such as Michael Bloomberg and John Stuart Mill. I am confident those ideals, when properly upheld and pursued, are our best personal and collective approach to political and religious freedom–and progress–in this great land.

Let’s think together again, soon.

Notes:  

1. See, Michael Bloomberg, commencement address, Harvard University, 29 May 2014.

Available online at:

http://www.mikebloomberg.com/index.cfm?objectid=4D9E60A5-5056-9A3E-D07D6B773CAD46E4  Accessed 4 June 2014.

2. Joseph Smith, TPJS, p. 313, 29 July 1843.

3.  D&C 121:41-42, 20 March 1839.

4. TPJS, p. 313, emphasis mine.

5. Parley P. Pratt’s poem, “Truth,” in LDS Hymns, p. 272. John Taylor's view of Mormonism and truth is captured in this 1867 statement:  "Our religion is more comprehensive than that of the world; it does not prompt its votaries with the desire to 'sit and sing themselves away to everlasting bliss,' but it embraces all the interests of humanity in every conceivable phase, and every truth in the world comes within its scope."  John Taylor, JD 11:354, 6 April 1867. 

Thanks Teddy For Saving My Patch Of River ©

May is the most beautiful month of the year!  Spring is in its glory, the days are almost perfect. The cool but warming temperature entices one into the sun hanging in the robin-egg blue heaven with puffs of clouds floating by.  It recalls memories of boyhood and the glory of 70 Springs. Spring is so glorious that in my dotage it seems like not only a sin, but a major waste not to use at least part of May to explore the wonders and beauties of the world. I am particularly blessed to live in the western United States where there is an abundance of natural beauty to visit.

We decided to use the last week of May to renew our spirits, one of the most appropriate of springtime rituals, but my wife found that there were no rooms available in the inns of several new places we wanted to visit. After days of searching, I suggested we go back to two old favorites–Yellowstone and the Grand Tetons. Uncharacteristically, we lucked out and found a timeshare available for two nights in West Yellowstone, Montana and two more in a facility owned by the same company in Jackson, Wyoming, so we were set.

Monday we ambled from Logan, Utah to West Yellowstone. Normally the trip takes the better part of four hours, but we were on vacation.  For me that means photography.  We stopped in two very small rural southeastern Idaho communities–Swan Lake and Downey. As is typical with so many American small towns, these places seemed to be about as lively and agile as the retired seventy-year-old writing this blog. Photographing pieces of vanishing Americana is a favorite with me.  Tall shining silver grain elevators look from a distance to be the center of agricultural communities such as these. On closer inspection broken windows, missing pieces of sheet metal, and absence of life told us these were hollow shells of a passed era.

Plate 1:  Grain elevator in Swan Lake, Idaho, May 2014.

Grain elevators, old barns and out buildings kept us preoccupied and we arrived at our destination about mid-afternoon.  A bit of lunch and an early check-in and we were on our way to “The Park” between 3:30 and 4:00 p.m. The National Parks are some our favorite getaway destinations. A decade or more ago I was permitted to purchase for $10 a “Golden Age Pass which allows senior citizens to visit the National Parks free of charge. We absolutely love this tax-payer’s perk!  We have used it often.

This afternoon’s destination was a point of pilgrimage for me and has been in our last three or four visits to Yellowstone. For me, Yellowstone encompasses some of the most beautiful rivers in America, if not the world. The Yellowstone, Madison, Lamar, Gibbon and Firehole flow through what must have been God’s playground on Creation day. The Gibbon and Firehole converge in the Park to form the Madison. My favorites are the Madison and Firehole. 

One travels along the early stages of the Madison from West Yellowstone to Madison Junction. A good chunk near West Yellowstone passes through high mountain plains covered with sagebrush that has its own western flavor. It isn’t long however, before the sage gives way to pines and to a small and ever widening valley –well more like a meadow than a valley. The grass is green and no willows line the banks as with many other western waterways. Along here it isn’t uncommon in the mornings to see doe elk and their calves slowly working their way along the bolder studded banks on the far side nestled against the foot of the mountains.  Occasionally a moose or two stand in the river grazing on the grasses on the bottoms. These spectaculars of nature always create traffic jams. The likelihood of such encounters is less in the afternoon, so we drove on. One almost gets the sense of entering a paradise while paralleling the Madison toward the interior of the park.  

Plate 2:  Elk along the Madison River, Yellowstone National Park, 2012.

Yellowstone’s rivers this late in May are running high and murky if not muddy.  Where the valleys widen the low flatlands in many places are inundated. The late afternoon sun danced and shimmered from a thousand streamlets, pools and marshlands. 

Plate 3:  Madison River in Yellowstone National Park at flood stage, May 2014.

Where the ground is higher and accessible, small groups of bison lounge on the fresh green grass.  Many were laying down and we accounted it due to the lateness of the day. However, we  also observed there were no calves among them. In June, two years ago scores of calves attended larger herds. They romped and cavorted and played in the spring of their own lives.  Was this why many were laying around now? We thought their size and lethargy suggested calving season was close, but later learned from a Ranger the calving season is in early May. So much for our “rational” explanation.

At Madison Junction you turn right to go to Old Faithful. Along this route you can turn off the main road and travel a one-way-in-need-of-repair macadam road up the Firehole Canyon. Cascades, small falls and narrow passages are the hallmark of this short but hidden gem of Yellowstone. Once, later in the season, my oldest son and I encountered two doe elk and a fawn feasting on the lush grass of a small island along this route, unaware of the human observers high above them. 

Plate 4:  Mother and fawn on small island in the Firehole River Canyon, Yellowstone National Park, June 2012.

When you emerge from the canyon the Firehole river broadens out into large pools just before it plunges into the canyon.  Upstream from here it runs in a fairly straight stretch down a very small valley between some mountains. Here is my place of pilgrimage!  Not too far from the canyon as one travels upstream with the Firehole on your right there is a picnic turnout among the trees along the river which also gives easy access to its grassy banks.  Here is where I long to stop.  This afternoon we are in luck.  The first Monday after Memorial Day traffic in the park is moderately lite. We are alone.  At the far end, just before returning to the main road, awaits my temple.

As we climbed out of the car and walked the twenty-five feet to the bank, I immediately experienced a sense of uplift and renewal.  Reflecting back, that sense was building as we drove along the Madison and through the Canyon.  Now it came unabated.  This is to me, an amazing patch of river.  It is so simple, that when you see it you may wonder why it is so special to me.

I have had deeply moving spiritual and emotional experiences in nature on at least four very memorable occasions. One on a road at 10,000 feet among the “Thirteens and Fourteens” of Rocky Mountain National Park in Colorado.  We stood at a vista point, high mountain tundra and tundra vegetation surrounded us. Ubiquitous signs warned of the fragility of the tundra–the tree line was below us.  It seemed as if  we could see forever!   Another, during an early mourning drive past several box canyons while entering the southern part of Canyonlands National Park.  The sun’s rays streamed into these east-west oriented canyons and their tall black-faced walls seemed like the temple of the God’s. Breathless, the beauty so overwhelming, I could not go on without stopping, pondering, praying, worshiping, and weeping. 

Plate 5:  Box canyons at the entrance of the southern portion of Canyonlands National Park, Utah.  The experience described above happened much earlier in the morning than the time of this photo, but this is the place.

The third was an afternoon in June with one of my best friends as we walked into the Muir Woods National Monument north of San Francisco. The sun was dropping into the west; the shadows were long and dark. We came to a small, small meadow with a giant Redwood in the middle shooting skyward, the ground surrounding it covered with the most amazing chartreuse green clover called Redwood sorrel. Here and there the sunlight broke through the canopy. Into this scene wandered a small spotted fawn seemingly unaware of our presence.  Photography was impossible. But here I was with one of the premiere landscape impressionist artists of our day who has traveled many places in the world in search of subject matter for his paintings and he said to me in a hushed tone, “Dan, this is one of the most beautiful things I have ever seen!” Through glistening eyes and an inhibiting lump in my throat I struggled to agree.

Why does this patch of river on the Firehole do the same thing to me? I don’t really know. For a half to three-quarters of a mile at this place the Firehole runs fairly straight. The evergreen covered mountains on the far side approach the river but here and there an open space lets grass grow to the edge of the bank. At the right time of the season the occasional wildflower blooms. The river is wide and shallow and calm here. Fishermen and women use the picnic ground as a place to park, picnic and fish.  At the high season one isn’t alone here. On this side of the river as you look upstream the tree line is back from the edge of the river twenty or thirty feet and grass lines the bank dotted by an occasional stump or fallen tree.

Plate 6:  Firehole River, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming.  This section of the river is above the Firehole River Canyon and is accessed via a picnic turnout. View is looking upstream.

Three or four trips ago, when we first visited here, we were nearly alone.  Upstream I could see a raptor of some sort cruising up and down the river looking for a meal. On the opposite bank a great heron surveyed the shallow water. Other birds called to each other, the sun reflected off the calm water. Serenity and beauty opened my heart instantly. Breathless once again in nature’s natural beauty. Such a pleasant and welcome surprise. As with the other occasions, a prayerful and worshipful spirit came along with a deep sense of reverence. These are the things that bring me back to this spot.

Today they were here again!  Thank God. As we sat on a log looking upstream on this gorgeous afternoon I once again felt thankful. I am seventy years old and do not know how many more times I may visit this sacred and hallowed spot. So I was thankful that I was permitted to come one more time to find peace to the soul, nourishment and renewal. It is difficult for Pat to walk on uneven ground so I walked alone 100 yards upstream in the newly reborn grass. As I turned around to return, the spirit of prayer stopped me. I paused for a couple of minutes and thanked the Lord for one more time here, for its beauty, and for how it feeds and renews me like few other places do.  On the way back I asked myself why this place seems so beautiful to me?  Words came to my mind–simplicity and peace. Ah yes, simplicity. To me the most beautiful photographs and paintings and much in life in general share this one beautifying quality.

We sat on the log for a few more minutes–mostly silent. My wife knew something was happening inside.  I reflected on my gratitude. It turned toward God, and then to Teddy Roosevelt. He was the one who had the “great American idea” and the foresight to turn Yellowstone into a National Park and preserve its wonders and beauty for Americans for all time.  I said to Pat “I would like someday to say to Teddy Roosevelt...” I could not speak for at least two minutes. She waited patiently. Finally I had enough control to finish, “...Thanks for saving my patch of river!”

Let’s think together again, soon.

Why I Believe: Evidence Sixteen-2: Joseph Smith, Christ’s Baptism and the Fulness of the Holy Ghost

101 Reasons Why I Believe Joseph Smith Was a Prophet

Evidence Sixteen-2: 

Joseph Smith, Christ’s Baptism and the Fulness of the Holy Ghost© 

Continued from Part 1 (23 May 2014)

Introduction:  This is the second of two parts of an essay exploring Joseph Smith’s contributions to our understanding of some details about the baptism of Jesus Christ found in the Gospel of John which ultimately lead us to profound teachings about our own destiny and the role of the Holy Ghost and the temple ordinances in achieving that destiny. Your comments are welcome and encouraged.

JOSEPH SMITH, CHRIST’S BAPTISM

AND 

THE FULNESS OF THE HOLY GHOST

Part 2© 

Well, so what?  Why are these matters important? First and perhaps least, but not an insignificant fact, is that the revelations and teachings of Joseph Smith at once recognize the implication of these details, whereas they are otherwise neglected in the Synoptics and the New Testament generally. Moreover, his revelations and teachings are also consistent with the teachings of Isaiah, John the Baptist, and John the apostle, but as is always the case, they take us a few steps deeper into their meaning and importance.  

Second, these historical facts in the story of the baptism of Jesus constitute important elements in the testimony of John the Baptist. They were  God’s sign to him that he had found “the Son of God” and could thereby fulfill the mission for which he was granted the gift of the Spirit while still in his mother’s womb (Lk. 1:15; D&C 84:27), that of testifying that Jesus is God’s Son, he is the Messiah, the Savior and Redeemer of the world. As such Jesus possessed the fullness of the Spirit and of the glory of the Father. He was God on earth possessing all power on earth and in heaven. The revelations to Joseph Smith enhance the testimony of John the Baptist and it becomes in many ways a greater, more powerful testimony of Jesus Christ than is generally found in the Gospels.  

On that note, the third and to me most important, “so what” concerns Section 93's answer to this question. The earlier part of D&C 93 records the Baptist’s testimony about how Christ did not receive the “fulness” at first, but grew from grace to grace and received grace for grace (vss.12-14) until at the baptism John saw he “received a fulness.”  The revelation continues:

19) I give unto you these sayings that you may understand and know how to worship, and to know what you worship, that you may come unto the Father in my name, and in due time receive of his fulness. 20) For if you keep my commandments you shall receive of his fulness, and be glorified in me as I am in the Father....   (Emphasis added)

In other words, the explanation about Jesus receiving the fulness of the Spirit was not only a detail, the “seeing” of  which allowed John the Baptist to give a powerful testimony of the Savior. It also has vital relevance to the disciples of Jesus because it is possible for them through him to also receive a fulness of the Spirit and of the glory of the Father. This is achieved by “worshiping” him properly, and the clear inference here is, that involves emulating him–that is doing what he did–by growing from grace to grace and receiving grace for grace.

How then do we grow in grace and receive a fulness of the Holy Ghost? Here is where Joseph Smith shines as always, in answering not only the “why” questions, but most importantly the “how” questions.  D&C 109:15 begins our exploration of his teachings on this subject. This is the revealed dedicatory prayer of the Kirtland Temple offered on 17 March 1836. Verse 15 is especially important because it is the only known verse in the Standard Works of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints which says this. Joseph is praying for the influence of the temple to bless all those who “enter upon the threshold” of the Lord’s house, and he adds, “And that they may grow up in thee, and receive a fulness of the Holy Ghost....”(6) Joseph Smith, Jerome, the author of The Gospel According to the Hebrews, and John,  are of one mind–that the recipients of the gift of the Holy Ghost do not receive it in fulness at the time of confirmation. That happens as the Saints mature spiritually–by “growing up” in the Lord. And because this statement is in the dedicatory prayer of the Kirtland Temple it is not unreasonable to assume that temple worship has something to do with this growth and attaining the fulness of the Holy Ghost.

Another of Joseph’s related teachings is that “Being born again, comes by the Spirit of God through ordinances.”(7) Note that the word “ordinances” is plural, suggesting that the process of rebirth and spiritual growth, the subject of our present investigation, comes to fruition through more than the ordinances of baptism and confirmation. Full development of this theme must await another post, but let it suffice to suggest that the six required ordinances for men and five for women (baptism, confirmation, reception of the Melchizedek priesthood, endowment, sealing, and sacrament) are mechanisms which assist in bringing about a rebirth or total transformation of the “natural man” or woman to become Christlike and eventually to possess a fulness of the glory of the Father. In this process, each of the ordinances make possible a greater endowment of the Spirit.(8)   

Christ is our archetype. Isaiah 11:2-4 tells us that when the Spirit rested upon him he received seven gifts relating to the mind and intellect. They were: wisdom, understanding, counsel, might, knowledge, fear of the Lord, and righteous judgment. The number seven is significant because it suggests completeness, totality, or fulness.(9) This implies total illumination of the mind, complete knowledge, and in the following quotation Methodist scholar Margaret Barker made a remarkable statement about this passage, at the end of which she suggests that "wisdom" is a scriptural word that encompasses all seven:

Isaiah’s vision of the peaceful creation [Isa. 11:2-4], as we might now expect, began with a description of the transformation of the human mind.  Someone was anointed with the Spirit of the Lord, the spirit of wisdom, understanding, counsel, might, knowledge and fear of the Lord. These gifts of the Spirit transform the human mind–‘change the mind’ is the literal meaning of the Greek word for repentance, metanoia. We have heard a great deal in recent years about the gifts of the Spirit as Paul described them in Corinth–but very little about the effect of the Spirit in transforming the human mind. The Spirit-transformed mind sees with anointed eyes and hears with anointed ears, and so judges with righteousness and decides with equity for the meek of the earth. This is the gift of Wisdom which joins all things together.(10)

This concept is undoubtedly connected with the seven-branched candlestick which may have been in the Holy of Holies in Solomon’s Temple and was in the holy place of Herod’s Temple and which many scholars equate with the Spirit. It is interesting that these intellectual gifts which Christ receives are not mentioned in the traditional scriptural lists of the gifts of the Spirit, (11) nor are they, save one, mentioned in any of the lists of the “fruit” of the Spirit.(12)  

How did Christ receive the Spirit?  Our assumption may be that he received it through an ordinance of confirmation, of which we have no record. With the loss of the Melchizedek Priesthood at the time of the “Provocation” when Israel provoked God by worshiping the Golden Calf in the Sinai Wilderness,(13) neither John the Baptist nor any other mortal person in Israel at that time so far as we know, held the Melchizedek Priesthood necessary to perform that ordinance. Therefore, it must have been bestowed by a divine source. The scriptures speak of another way he received it.  Isaiah 61:1 says:

1) The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me because the Lord hath anointed me....

Luke 4 relates the story of Jesus visiting a synagogue in Nazareth on the Sabbath day. As was the permissible custom, the Master stood to read the day’s lectionary, part of which was Isaiah 61:1. He quoted it somewhat differently than is found in our version of Isaiah, but the essential “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach...” is there. When he finished he sat down and said, “This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.”(14) He applied the passage to himself.  Peter did too. After the crucifixion, Acts 10 tells the story of the conversion of Cornelius, the Roman gentile, at Caesarea. As part of his testimony to Cornelius, Peter spoke of,

38) How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power....”

John, in his first epistle (1 Jn. 2), also relates the concept of anointing with knowing all things because the Spirit abides in us:

20) But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. ... 27) But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him. 

I am not saying that in the case of Christ anointing replaced confirmation. I do not know the answer to that question. My suspicion is that it does not–that Jesus needed to be confirmed as the rest of us do.(15) But these passages suggests that the anointing was necessary for him to secure a fulness of the Spirit, symbolized by the number seven, including gifts which Isaiah mentioned earlier in chapter 11 which involve the intellect and which do not appear in scriptural accounts of gifts and fruits of the Spirit. According to Peter he also received “power” through the anointing, and this is consistent with D&C 93:16-17 cited above.  This all implies that there is an additional endowment of the Spirit available which results from spiritual growth and maturity and which is directly connected with the ordinances of the Temple.(16) This is harmonious with both the view of Joseph Smith that other ordinances are involved in the process of being born again and with the blessings we receive at the time of our own anointing.

Thank God for Joseph Smith.

Lets think together again, soon.

Notes:

6.  As noted in the text above, the JST version of Jn. 3:34 mentions the concept without using the exact phrase “fulness of the Holy Ghost.”  I have not taken the time to examine it, but it would be interesting to know if JST Jn 3 and D&C 93 were given to Joseph Smith near the same time, in the Spring of 1833.  If it came earlier, then the sequence would be something like this: JST Jn. 3:34, then D&C 93:19-20, and finally D&C 109:15.

7.  TPJS, p. 162.

8.  I am indebted to Truman Madsen for first exposing me to the temple-related implication of this statement by Joseph Smith.  Madsen said:

“The next letter is B, and I suggest the words born or born again.  Today the religious world often speak of the “twice-born person,” or of being a “born-again Christian,” not fully comprehending how complete is His promise to those who come to Him.  It is one thing to have faith and another to have repentance, but in the house of the Lord, His house, He requires of His children a covenant making from the heart. And then He makes promises even more inclusive than those that come with the first principles and ordinances. When the Prophet Joseph Smith sent the first Twelve abroad to Britain, one of the instructions he gave is summed up in one sentence.  He said, “Being born again, comes by the Spirit of God through ordinances.” And all ordinances, therefore, are channels of His Spirit. But the crowning ordinances are those of the holy temple.” Truman G. Madsen, The Temple Where Heaven Meets Earth, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 2008), p. 16, see also p. 124.

9.  The writings of Margaret Barker have been particularly insightful regarding Isaiah 11:1-4 and 61:1. See: Margaret Barker, “Isaiah,” in Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible, edited by James D. G. Dunn and John W. Rogerson, (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2003), pp. 509, 538; Temple Theology, An Introduction, (London: SPCK, 2004), p. 49; The Hidden Tradition of the Kingdom of God, (London: SPCK, 2007), p. 41, 48, 85, 89-90; The Mother of the Lord. Volume 1: The Lady in the Temple, (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2012), pp. 104-6, 317; and King of the Jews: Temple Theology in John’s Gospel, (London: SPCK, 2014), pp. 174-76, where she speaks of the “sevenfold Spirit” which brings “complete illumination” and which she equates with the idea of “fullness.”

10.  Margaret Barker, Temple Theology, An Introduction, (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 2004), p. 49. Combined with Truman Madsen’s observations as noted in footnote 8, this statement set me upon the quest to more completely understand the relationships of the saving and exalting ordinances of the Gospel and enjoying a fullness of the Holy Ghost--principles explicated in this essay.

In regard to the “transformed mind”, the following statement by Elder Sterling W. Sill also evoked considerable thought about the relationship of our temple ordinances and enjoying the fulness of the Holy Ghost:

“One of the most prominent of the teachings of Jesus had to do with the difficulty that most of us have in keeping the right kind of ideas operating in our lives. Jesus pointed out that there are some who have eyes but who cannot see and ears that cannot hear. The natural consequence of course is that our hearts do not understand. Our eyes and ears are two of the most important entrances by which understanding can get into our minds. When either of these fail in any degree, or when they function improperly, our welfare may be adversely affected.”  Sterling W. Sill, The Glory of the Sun, (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft Inc., 1961), p. 200.

11.  See 1 Cor. 12, Moroni 10, D&C 46.

12.  See for example, Gal. 5:22-23; 2 Pet.1:6-7. There is a fundamental difference between those things designated as “gifts” and those referred to as “fruits” of the Spirit. The gifts are tools given to someone to bless the lives of others, whereas the “fruits” are character traits of the person themselves.  Knowledge is mentioned in 2 Peter 1:6. The “word” of wisdom and of knowledge are mentioned in D&C 46:17-18, but it seems evident from Moroni 10:9-10 that these are teaching gifts. I should, however, add a caveat to the observation in the text above that many of the things mentioned in Isaiah 11:2-4 are frequently mentioned in other contexts in the scriptures and I suspect one could find some places where it could be argued that the context is in reference to “gifts” or “fruit” of the Spirit. The point here is that Isaiah’s list seems to be unique and it is probably related to temple ordinances.

13.  See D&C 84:19-27; JST Ex. 34:1-2; Jac. 1:7; Ps. 95:8;  Heb. 3:8,15 and Al. 12:36.

14.  Luke 4:16-21.

15.  My supposition that Christ needed to be confirmed is based on the same logic as expressed by Joseph Smith in the following: “If a man gets a fulness of the priesthood of God he has to get it in the same way that Jesus Christ obtained it, and that was by keeping all the commandments and obeying all the ordinances of the house of the Lord.” (TPJS, p. 308.) It is possible I suppose, that because of the absolute sinless nature of Christ–his perfect holiness–his spiritual maturity, and the capacity of his godly intellect, that confirmation and anointing may have taken place at the same time. We are simply told that God declared “Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.” (Ps. 2:7; see also Acts. 13:33; Heb. 1:5, 5:5.) Since this implies his rebirth, it seems not unreasonable to think this took place on the day of his baptism. It is not mentioned explicitly in the Gospel accounts; they simply report that the voice spoke from heaven saying, “This is my beloved Son.”  D&C 93:15-17, gives more detail  of what John experienced and lends weight to the analysis here.

16. The relationship of the temple to the Holy Ghost is also suggested by D&C 88:137 which says: “And ye are called to do this by prayer and thanksgiving, as the Spirit shall give utterance in all your doings in the house of the Lord, in the school of the prophets, that it may become a sanctuary, a tabernacle of the Holy Spirit to your edification.”

Why I Believe: Evidence Sixteen-1: Joseph Smith, Christ’s Baptism and the Fulness of the Holy Ghost

101 Reasons Why I Believe Joseph Smith Was A Prophet

Evidence Sixteen-1: 

Joseph Smith, Christ’s Baptism and the Fulness of the Holy Ghost

Introduction:  This is the first of two parts of an essay exploring Joseph Smith's contributions to our understanding of some details about the baptism of Jesus Christ found in the Gospel of John which ultimately lead us to profound teachings about our own destiny and the role of the Holy Ghost and the temple ordinances in achieving that destiny. Your comments are welcome and encouraged.

 JOSEPH SMITH, CHRIST’S BAPTISM

AND 

THE FULNESS OF THE HOLY GHOST

Part 1© 

The Gospel of John contains several interesting details about the baptism of Jesus which are not found in the Synoptic Gospels,(1) but which receive some additional emphasis and elaboration in the revelations and teachings of Joseph Smith.  When pursued they ultimately lead us to profound teachings about our own destiny and the role of the Holy Ghost and the temple ordinances in achieving that destiny.  John 1:33 reads:

33) And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.

As I understand this passage, John, whose mission in part was to identify for Israel the Messiah, was told that he would know he had found his man when he saw the Spirit descend upon him and remain. This was commentary on the previous verse in which the Baptist testified that he “saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.”  (Jn.1:32, emphasis added.)

Why this detail is not mentioned in the Synoptics is a puzzle.  It’s inclusion here suggests that perhaps John had access to some information not then available to the other Evangelists.  Whatever the case, some in the early Church knew of writings today called the Gospel According to the Hebrews, which has a passage that alludes to the same idea. Jerome in his commentaries on the scriptures quotes from this lost text. His commentary in this case is relative to a phrase in Isaiah 11:2 which he has placed in parentheses:

(The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him) not partially as in the case of other holy men: but, according to the Gospel written in the Hebrew speech, which the Nazarenes read, ‘There shall descend upon him the whole fount of the Holy Spirit’ ....  In the Gospel I mentioned above, I find this written: And it came to pass when the Lord was come up out of the water, the whole fount of the Holy Spirit descended and rested upon him, and said unto him....(2)

Obviously Jerome thought this was a significant point, because in commenting on Isaiah 11:2 which speaks of the Spirit of the Lord which shall “rest” upon Christ, he (Jerome) opines that this means that Jesus did not receive just a portion of the Spirit such as is the case with other men. Rather, he received the “whole fount” and this is indicated by the fact that the Spirit rested or remained with Christ. Jerome here links the “rest” in Isaiah 11:2 with the same concept in John 1:32-33 in the terms “abode” and “remaining”. John the Baptist testified that he saw the “Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.” (Jn. 1:32)  It took up its residence in Christ.

As mentioned above, the revelations and teachings of Joseph Smith give additional emphasis to this part of the story of John.  To begin with, in the Book of Mormon, about 600 BC., Nephi records that he saw a vision of the Redeemer and “the prophet who should prepare the way before him”–John the Baptist. He saw John baptize the “Lamb of God” and “the Holy Ghost come down out of heaven and abide upon him in the form of a dove.” (1 Ne. 11:27, emphasis added.) Here John’s story is not only confirmed in both its critical aspects–the abiding and the dove–but the latter is more explicit, whereas John’s language leaves it somewhat open as to whether he saw an actual dove or just the Spirit descending like a dove. Nephi said the Spirit descended “in the form of a dove.”  Joseph Smith will have more to say about this below.

A second important revelation on this subject is in Section 93 of the Doctrine and Covenants. This revelation also reports the testimony of John the Baptist at the time of the baptism of Christ.  It reads:

15) And I, John, bear record, and lo, the heavens were opened, and the Holy Ghost descended upon him in the form of a dove, and sat upon him, and there came a voice out of heaven saying: This is my beloved Son.

This revelation also confirms the “remain” idea with the word “sat” and the presence of the dove, in the same language as Nephi.  

In a Sunday meeting on the floor of the unfinished Nauvoo Temple in January 1843 Joseph Smith clarified the meaning of the descent of the Spirit “in the form” of a dove.  Luke 7:28 records Jesus as saying, “Among those ... born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist...” Joseph Smith gives three reasons in answer to the question as to why John was the greatest of prophets.  The second was that John was the only one who had the privilege of baptizing the Son of God.  He said:

Whoever led the Son of God into the waters of baptism, and had the privilege of beholding the Holy Ghost descend in the form of a dove, or rather in the sign of the dove, in witness of that administration? The sign of the dove was instituted before the creation of the world, a witness for the Holy Ghost, and the devil cannot come in the sign of a dove. The Holy Ghost is a personage, and is in the form of a personage. It does not confine itself to the form of a dove, but in sign of the dove. The Holy Ghost cannot be transformed into a dove; but the sign of a dove was given to John to signify the truth of the deed, as the dove is an emblem or token of truth and innocence.”(3)

Note that this clarification is only indirectly related to the language “like a dove” of John 1:32.  It actually clarifies the language “in the form of a dove” in Joseph Smith’s writings–1 Nephi 11:27 and D&C 93:15! Parenthetically I would add, if anyone was authorized to clarify the teachings of Joseph Smith it was the man himself.  His clarifying insight was that John the Baptist actually saw a dove descend and sit or abide upon Christ, but the dove was not the Holy Ghost. It was a sign not only that Jesus Christ was the Son of God; it was a token that the deed–the baptism–was correct or true and Jesus was innocent.

Another very interesting matter is Jerome’s comment that Christ received the Spirit, “not partially as in the case of other holy men....” Apparently Jerome thought that receiving the Holy Spirit through the laying of hands brought the recipient only a portion of the Spirit initially, but Christ received the “whole fount”. A passage in John 3:34-35 says as much:

34) For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him. 35) The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand. 

The clear implication of this verse is that Jesus is different. Other men receive a measure of the Spirit, but he received it without measure. A revelation to Joseph Smith confirms that, unlike Christ, the Spirit may not always abide with a man.

22) ... the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit.  Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us. 23) A man may receive the Holy Ghost, and it may descend upon him and not tarry with him. (4)

Five years earlier Joseph taught:

The Gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands, cannot be received through the medium of any other principle than the principle of righteousness, for if the proposals are not complied with, it is of no use, but withdraws. (5)

Jerome’s idea has at least two additional parallels in the revelations of Joseph Smith.  The first is the JST version of John 3:34.  It reads:

34) ...  For God giveth him not the Spirit by measure, for he dwelleth in him, even the fulness. [Emphasis added.]

The antecedent of “he” in this verse is “the Spirit.” The fulness of the Spirit dwelt in, (like an abode), Christ. A similar passage is also found in D&C 93:16-17:

16) And I, John, bear record that he received a fulness of the glory of the Father; 17) And he received all power, both in heaven and on earth, and the glory of the Father was with him, for he dwelt in him.

So, here we have Isaiah, John the Bapitst, John the Apostle, Nephi, Joseph Smith, and (ahem) Jerome, whose teachings all lean in the same direction about the importance of the descent of the Spirit upon Christ at the time of his baptism, from which we extract three precepts:

1. The Spirit descended upon Christ.  John saw it come like a dove. Nephi described it as in the form of a dove. Joseph explained there was a dove, but it was a sign or token.
2. The Spirit rested or “sat” upon Christ, it abode upon (in?) him, it remained upon him.
3. At this time Jesus received the “whole fount” of the Spirit; he received the Spirit “without measure.”  The fulness of the Spirit and the glory of the Father dwelt in him.

To be continued.

Notes:  

1.   Matthew comes the closest when he says the John the Baptist saw the Spirit descend like a dove and “lighting” upon him.  Mt. 3:16.

2.  Cited in M. R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975, p. 5, bold emphasis added.  I am indebted to Margaret Barker for this reference.

3.    Joseph Fielding Smith, comp., Teaching of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1967, pp. 275-276, emphasis in the original. A good friend reminded me that this discourse, as are all of Joseph’s discourses, is an amalgamation derived largely from the journals and memories of those who heard them.  See, Andrew F. Ehat and Lyndon W. Cook, The Words of Joseph Smith, (Provo, Utah: Religious Studies Center, BYU, 1980), pp. 160-62, and notes on 264-65.   The amalgamation and enlargement can be seen by comparing the first published version of this statement in, “Mormonism,” Times and Seasons 4 (15 May 1843): 200, with this version.  I hasten to add that the amalgamation of the content of several journal accounts of these teachings does not appear to materially alter the ideas or meaning found in the individual journals and Times and Seasons.  The question naturally arises, under what circumstances did Joseph come by this knowledge. Two possibilities occur to me, though there may be others.  He may have learned something during his work on the JST when the Gospels were being studied and revised, or later during the translation of the Book of Abraham.  See Facsimile 2, Fig. 7, where he says this sign was given to Abraham.

4.  D&C 130:22-23, given 2 April 1843.

5.  TPJS, p. 148.  This statement comes from a record by Willard Richards and is unlikely a verbatim transcription of Joseph’s words.  This may be indicated by the unusual phrase “for if the proposals are not complied with...”  It seems to imply that something was said earlier in the sermon, of which this is a summary.  What proposals?  The commandments?  Or, those things which the Spirit proposes?  Should the phrase have read “for if its proposals are not complied with....”?  It is not clear and perhaps if we had the full sermon Joseph may have given some context or examples.  Nevertheless, the idea is clear that righteousness depends upon obedience to those “proposals” and in its absence the Spirit withdraws.  Jesus complied and did not experience such a withdrawal until perhaps when he was on the cross, but that is a separate, if related issue.