window to the soul

"window to the soul"

oceans of clear blue water,

opening up wide realms,

comfort, peace, desire,

intensity

blinking mirrors,

reflecting and refracting,

opening visions,

searching and revealing

beauty

without and within

encircled in sapphire

while encompassing

me

The (False?) Faith/Doubt Divide

Are faith and doubt truly and fundamentally incompatible? Because the concept of faith forms so fundamental a part our belief system, its contours merit careful attention. Likewise, the negative space surrounding it merits attention, which is the purpose of this post. 

Faith sometimes carries an ephemeral sense about it, leading to the often assumed conclusion that faith may only exist intangibly. Despite many efforts to redefine faith as involving more than mere belief, such efforts rarely annhilate barriers that many have constructed from an upbringing focusing on faith as belief or as assent to certain ideas or concepts. A few of the more effective attempts of this manner to which I have been exposed redefine faith as belief + action or as "faithfulness." 

Thinking upon these redefinitions has led me to evaluate what effect they might have on the "negative space" surrounding the idea of faith/faithfulness. I have heard many times that faith and doubt are polar opposites, which concept (at least on its face) received support in the Lectures on Faith (6:12). Notwithstanding the advantages of such a belief, its tendency to stigmatize any harboring of doubts as a betrayal of one's faith can itself create a crippling, chilling effect on both faith and doubt. For individuals whose inquisitive minds instinctively question and examine, even when maintaining faithful observance of covenants, the thought that questioning or reevaluating their beliefs might actually constitute a rejection of those beliefs can lead down a dark path paved by the great deceiver.

Rather than reinforce this false divide, making use of the concept of faith as faithfulness seems to restructure the "negative space" of doubt. Instead of seeing doubt or questioning as something to either avoid or embrace wholesale, the faith as faithfulness idea seems to suggest that in the gospel and in scripture, doubt should be understood as "doubtfulness" or acting on doubt--similarly to faith being understood as "faithfulness" or acting on faith. In this light, doubt loses its independent positive or negative connotation and may return to its rightful place alongside belief as means to an end (whether the end is good or bad depends on the direction that the belief and doubt lead us). Questions and inquiry and examination can allow a righteous individual to pursue righteousness and faithfulness as did Joseph Smith, without worrying whether his questioning of the various tenets of faith which surrounded him would eternally condemn him as a "doubter" or infidel. 

Although faith as faithfulness and doubt as doubtfulness may not provide every answer or resolve all lines of inquiry, leaving these interpretations open can allow the believer to hold fast to their belief while evading the forces that would require an unquestioning belief in the face of doubt. Doubt can then act to strengthen belief in truth by allowing for questions and inquiry to uncover reinforcing truth, enabling intelligent belief and a spiritual way of learning truth by study and also by faith. Similarly, doubt and questioning and inquiry can provide means for discrediting the untrue by providing believers the freedom to hold fast only to true beliefs and not feel obligated to embrace every whim that might entice them down roads of human musings and sophistries.

The true believer may then proceed to "prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." (Romans 12:2). Faithfulness can include faithful doubting and questioning and inquiry so long as such faithfulness directs itself at bringing the faithful individual closer to God and to truth. In this manner, the possibility that faith and doubt may coexist in the same individual simulataneously without either threatening the security of the other seems real, provided that the individual retains the motivation to follow truth. Such a motivation seems to be the root of faithfulness. What doubt may remain can serve as a catalyst to further learning--an enabling power to the seeker for truth. 

Only when doubt gives rise to doubtfulness--to unfaithfulness--should it be absolutely shunned. Otherwise, the beginning and ending point of faith is a perfect knowledge. As recounted in Ether, the brother of Jared "knew, nothing doubting." (Ether 3:19). Such a description should not be the touchstone of faith, but rather of knowledge. None of us should expect to begin our journey at the culminating point.

Faith strengthens into knowledge through experiences of faith--which by definition require belief in things as yet unknown, or in things where some question may remain. Thus, the absence of certainty becomes a hallmark of faith, allowing for faithful doubt, questioning and inquiry. These gifts--the gifts of faithful doubt, faithful questions, and faithful inquiry--may form the stumbling block of this age. To reject them is to reject the progress that they offer--even if that rejection is pronounced in the name of seeking certainty or knowledge. Thus, seeking to know, "nothing doubting" mistakes an end for the means to achieve it. To attempt to reach knowledge without first passing through faith--and tests of faith--only serves to limit our agency and our ability to progress, a form of self-damnation.

Knowledge and certainty do not come from discarding faithful questions, but rather from embracing them and the learning that they open unto us. We cannot be acted upon and not act, cannot shelve faithful inquiries instead of pursuing them, and expect to receive the blessings of the faithful--even the growth from faith to knowledge. Instead, the Gospel requires that we remain faithful despite the (initial, and possibly long-lasting) absence of knowledge. It requires that our faith persist in the face of doubt. Only then are we truly exercising faith and relying on it as our "evidence of things not seen" or known (Hebrews 11:1).

As faithful adherents to the Gospel, we must maintain our faith in the face of doubt. We must, as Paul described it, "against hope, believe[] in hope" (Romans 4:18). And through such faithful experiences--when faced with true tests of faith, requiring careful thought and questioning and study, even as we pass through the valley of the shadow of doubt--we grow in faith unto the perfect day when our faithfulness allows for the Spirit of God to answer all faithful doubt, questions, and inquiries. 

eden

cloak removed,

covering hidden,

absent longing returns

 

justification fled

when will, revealed

and covered by

Will,

opened the path

leading away

toward the reentry

 

fruit half-eaten

tangy and sweet,

the bloodstain 

lingers on lip

as longing eyes

engrave

 

ungraven image

eye of faith encompasses

yet fading forms

shadow

 

rippled reflections 

reveal failings,

sustain new stature

 

a new creature emerges and

returns,

On Being Missionaries

My time during the interval between my last post and this one has been largely filled with thoughts geared toward my current calling as Ward Mission Leader. I brought upon myself a flurry of activity in that regard by suggesting that we challenge our Ward to engage ourselves as member missionaries more actively during the month of September, and most specifically during the week between today and next Sunday. As a part of this, the Bishopric gave me opportunities to teach the August 31 fifth Sunday lesson to our priesthood and Relief Society on this topic, and followed that by asking my wife and me to speak in Sacrament meeting today. I also presented a musical number on clarinet, engaging me in the meeting from several angles as I prepared the music and arranged "Hark All Ye Nations" and "Rejoice, the Lord is King" into a unified medley.

That said (and with apologies for my delay in writing), I have had several thoughts that might be of use to any who might read this post, and from which I may benefit for having written. Foremost is the focus on being missionaries rather than on doing missionary work. Elder Bednar's talk about preparing for missionary service by being missionaries now rather than any "one true and living missionary preparation regiment" informed this train of thought greatly. I find myself responding with more enthusiasm to a challenge to be a missionary than a challenge to do missionary work. In viewing the command to be missionaries this way, I have focused on 2 Corinthians 3:1-3 wherein Paul sets the Saints up to be the epistles (or letters of introduction) of Christ to those around them. They are epistles written not with ink, but with the Spirit of God; written not on tables of stone, but on the fleshy tables of the heart. In this way, we become witnesses, missionaries in the true sense of having been sent on a mission. As we integrate the gospel and teachings of Jesus Christ into our lives, our instinctive response, forming a part of the pattern of the plan of happiness, becomes a missionary response. Thus, our interactions with others naturally gravitate toward our experiences with the Lord from time to time, creating opportunities to share our witness without any awkwardness, stiffness, or discomfort. 

The notion of being a missionary and of sharing our testimony or sharing our witness turns the mind to what being a witness truly entails. The notion of testimony and witness becomes particularly significant to one trained in the law, and conditioned to view experiences and events in terms of evidence. In the legal profession, effective witnesses must give competent testimony, must limit their testimony to relevant topics, and must convey credibility to their testimony such that a skilled advocate may use their testimony together with that of other witnesses to craft an entire case.

Similarly, the Lord, acting as our Advocate with the Father, creates a case. Our testimony must first be competent. This means that it bases itself on actual events and experiences with which we have firsthand knowledge. We give testimony about what we have experienced. Thus, our personal experiences with the Lord form the foundation of our testimony. It is important to note that we need not be every kind of witness. Not every witness in a legal trial gives expert medical evidence, expert forensic analysis, eyewitness accounts and character evidence. Nor need we feel obligated to check every box in giving our witness of each facet of the gospel each time an opportunity arises to bear testimony. We merely need to impart our experiences with the Lord.

Related to this concept, witnesses are to limit their testimony to relevant evidence. Statements about a witness' family might be accurate and true; however such statements would have no relevance to what that witness observed about her workplace in the days leading up to an incident. In the same manner, we need not testify to every gospel principle during every opportunity to bear testimony of which we avail ourselves. In conversations relating to our family, we can limit our testimony effectively by sharing how the gospel has given our family a foundation on which we find stability despite the tumultuous times surrounding us, perhaps including an anecdote about family prayer or family home evening and inviting those hearing the testimony to join us the next time. Or we can talk about how blessed we feel to have a living prophet who can issue warnings, as did President Hinckley in October 2001 when he made reference to Joseph's dream almost exactly seven years prior to our current economic turmoil. Relevant testimony need not be formulaic--in fact it loses power when reduced to trite, contrived or repetitive statements rather than a sincere and simple statement of our experience.

We find our testimony through our own experience with the Lord. Zechariah recounts a vision with which each of us can identify in Zech. 3. In this vision the accuser, Satan, points to our filthy garments; whereupon the Lord replaces those filthy garments with clean white clothing and a royal crown upon our heads. He invites us to walk in His ways and keep his charge. If we so do, he promises us that we will judge his house and keep his courts and that he will give us places to walk among those that stand by. In effect, our Advocate with the Father opposes Lucifer, the prosecutor seeking the spiritual death penalty for our sins. Jesus pleads our cause (Isaiah 51:22), entering a plea of not guilty by reason of atonement. At this point, we become witnesses of Jesus Christ--his epistles and missionaries.

When we have genuine experience upon which to draw and we give relevant evidence, our witness may be joined with others to form a compelling case, sufficient to meet any standard of proof, whether it be more than a scintilla of evidence, or beyond a reasonable doubt, or anywhere in between. 

Peter admonished us to "sanctify the Lord God in [our] hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh [us] a reason of the hope that is in [us] with meekness and fear" (1 Pet. 3:15). As we become missionaries and understand the mission we have been given (Jacob 1:17), we can act on the calling that we have each received as a result of our desires to serve God (D&C 4) and share our witness of God at all times and in all things and in all places that we may be in (Mosiah 18). Then we take upon us the image of Christ, even to the point of having that image engraven upon our countenances (Alma 5) as the Lord engraved us upon his palms and his feet. 

Ceasing our Worship of the God of the Lost Keys

This post has been brewing in my mind for some time, but before I get too far into it, I do want to make clear that in no way am I suggesting that God does not care about us personally or that He is unable (or unwilling sometimes) to intervene. The thrust of my post intends to force us all to rethink the way or ways in which we approach the true and living God. So without further ado...

We all know the pattern of the story, a desperate moment of searching for the lost keys followed by an intent prayer that leads to the rediscovery of the missing keys. Although not involving keys, I have had similar experiences myself, both in the literal sense, and in the spiritual/symbolic sense. So I do not say that the stories do not stem from faithful individuals approaching the God of the universe and receiving from His tender mercies. Usually, these stories come from spiritually sensitive individuals who love God and seek to find His hand in their lives.

That said, I wonder if we (more accurately if I) have become complacent or idolatrous in our (my) approaching God as a result of such experiences? I find, sometimes, that my experiences in prayer have been shaped negatively when I reflect on such "lost keys" moments, and extend that reflection to my worship as a whole. In other words, I find that my overall outlook may have been distorted through the lens of the "god of the lost keys." This phrase merely serves as shorthand for the larger phenomenon. Sometimes our experience with God seems more pragmatic than spiritual. We approach Him more as the latest, best technology--as the truly universal remote control which can function in ways that science could only dream. We ask (and expect!) blessings that short-circuit the growth process, then complain when we perceive any so-called failure of the "technology."

Religion, at least in my view, should entail more than perfunctory statements of thanks, followed by a wish list that could as easily be directed by a child toward Santa Claus. The "false gods we worship," as so aptly taught by President Spencer W. Kimball, do not only include the temporal. Perhaps more commonly, we transform the true and living God into our own personal god, complete with our own personality (granted, with improvements to achieve our perception of what perfection should be), with our desires (sometimes adding what we wish we desire, too), and with our perspective.

When we fall prey to President Kimball's "false gods," we disobey God and give preference to the things of the world. Perhaps more insidiously, though, when we fall prey to the "god of the lost keys" worldview, we obey--but our obedience is to a degenerate form of the true God which we have created through our interpolations. Rather than making idols out of the things of the world, we create a false god by reshaping God to more completely match up with our preconceived notions of what "God should be like" regardless of scripture or revelation. We pave our own shortcut to "god" by molding notions of the divine to conform to ourselves instead of transforming ourselves as a response to the divine presence in our lives. We cling to our self-created characterization of god (idol worship, if ever an idol has been worshipped) instead of opening our minds to accept that perhaps His thoughts really are not our own, nor His ways ours--instead of acknowledging that our understanding of God must continue to grow or our line-upon-line learning must come to an end and we will lose that which we have been given.

To elaborate further with an example, we may decide based on our opinion or "learning" that God desires for us to take a certain course of action which we have found desirable--perhaps something significant like marrying a certain partner, pursuing a particular career, or having children. When we decide that this is God's will for us and make it a matter of prayer and worship, we effectively limit God's role, setting up a "god of the next decision." This god wants us to act a certain way, and if this god fails to bless us in ways that we perceive would open the way before us to arrive at our desired destination, the god may fail us. If we do receive the desired blessing(s), we instincitvely attribute the result to the desire of this god.

Behind all of this, however, lies our discernment in ascertaining whether our own desire may have departed from the will of the true God, or whether God really has left the decision up to our own exercise of agency. If such is the case, attributing the success or failure of the venture to the "god of the next venture" or to our version of god merely reinforces our own conception of god as technology. We think that God should function as the power which enables us to achieve that which science is still too limited to do for us. In effect, we rely on ourselves and on the arm of flesh to a point, then when our own power finds its limit point, we turn to the "god of the lost keys" to do what we want, when we want it.

Recognizing that we too frequently transform the workings and will of God into our own degenerate form of divinity, we may reflect back on our experiences to discern when we are projecting our "god of the lost keys" onto our lives and when God truly has a hand in directing us. We may find that what we thought several years ago must have been God's influence was instead our own frailty convincing us that God intended one course when it was merely our own god usurping the throne and enticing us toward that which we had wanted more than we wanted to accept God.

The perspective that I find opening a way for "tender mercies" while maintaining a more proper worship of the true and living God recognizes my limitations and God's power. With this altered orientation toward God and the world, I still find myself in the same desperate times when I need my keys (literally and figuratively) more often than I would like. However, at those moments of need, I find myself striving to approach God without an expectation that God will act as a key-finder, and instead with the perspective that I worship a good, just God, who will listen to me and permit me to struggle. I may ask for help, but leave it at that, or ask for help to overcome my forgetfulness and to remember, rather than help to find. A very subtle difference, yet reflective of a different relationship with God. One which strives to worship Him as a son of God, and one which acknowledges His hand in my life, even when I may not always recognize it or may mistake my own hand for His. Yet one which is shaped by His undying love despite my amateur attempts at discerning and at worshipping.

Replacing our worship of the "god of the lost keys" requires a willingness to continue learning, and to abandon the dross and filler that we have permitted to enter into our conception of God. We must realize our limitations and act in faith by acknowledging the existence of God and becoming better acquainted with him through His hand as it truly acts. Such faithfulness embraces much of the gospel, but goes deeper, grounding itself in a relationship between God and man, Creator and creation, Father and son, which only remains a true relationship for as long as it has no endpoint, no moment (at least during mortality) when we feel that we truly "know" what we need to know. For the moment that we think that we have figured it out or that we know enough, our knowledge evaporates.

Thus, the quest is to authentically experience the divine in our lives and to respond appropriately. When we depart from this to suggest any arrival, we have surely arrived, but at a destination we thought we were avoiding. Therefore, let us cast down any idols, whether of wood or stone or plastic or merely individual conceptions of God, and bow before Him who is mighty to save, for this is our only authentic response to His voice.