Grace in Sacrament Meeting

[Zakuska]

Precisely.

From the LDS Bible Dictionary: 'It is likewise through the grace of the Lord that individuals, through faith in the atonement of Jesus Christ and repentance of their sins, receive strength and assistance to do good works that they otherwise would not be able to maintain if left to their own means.'

And from John 14:5 (also referenced in the BD): 'I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.'

I agree completely, But how far does that go?

I've heard Evangelicals (Just yesterday in fact) say absolutley ZERO good can be done by an unregenerated spiritual walking dead man. They even went so far as to say that sinners can do NOTHING but sin.

Luke 6:33

And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.

[Hamba Tuhan]

My only comment would be (having grown up in "mormon country" in the 50's) that this definition would have bafffled most if not all of the old-time Mormons that I associated with. The culture and teachings of that time were extremely prejudiced against any doctrine that smacked of being "saved by grace".

Interesting. It sounds like you're about 20-30 years older than I am, but I was raised by 'old-time Mormons,' and I learnt to trust in the grace of Christ from them. Do you think the LDS you grew up around actually read the Book of Mormon?

[Jeff K.]

I converted to the church in the 70's, in the South. We knew about grace and its place in the church. A topic of discussion with most churches in the area.

[Jeff K.]

humba, you are up way too early (on my way to a work out)

[mercyngrace]

I agree withdaz2, libs, and your assesment here. My only comment would be (having grown up in "mormon country" in the 50's) that this definition would have bafffled most if not all of the old-time Mormons that I associated with. The culture and teachings of that time were extremely prejudiced against any doctrine that smacked of being "saved by grace". I guess it's the experience and context of having lived through that time that makes me inclined to see the church turning (ever so slowly) closer to some of the sensibilities of mainstream Christianity.

I grew up in the South in a fledgling corner of Mormondom. When I was born we were part of a huge "district" and by the time I was 6 we had our first stake. Branches were meeting in rented town hall buildings or movie theater balconies. It was always an adventure to go on speaking assignements with my dad! Now we have two stakes in my hometown - an amazing feat given the population - and branches that once had only a dozen members have grown into two or three wards!

Anything that remotely resembled a "saved by grace" doctrine was shunned in favor of working out our salvation in fear and trembling. I think our merry band of converts naturally shed much of the good that we associated with our protestant and pentacostal backgrounds when we joined the church. There was a painful collective adolescence through which we matured together and learned to find a balance between what we thought was Mormonism and what really is the gospel.

Now when I encounter LDS who don't understand or can't accept the doctrine of grace in all it's effulgent glory, I put my faith in the compassion of a loving Father who will teach us truths as we are prepared to receive them. I have as much confidence in the plan He designed as I do in Him. Just like our merry band of southern converts, eventually, we all come 'round.

Relating this back to the parable of the prodigal, there is a natural stage where we believe we have to "Earn" our Father's love. The prodigal was willing to be a hired hand in order to, in some way, re-enter his father's household. Once we realize our own sinfulness and desire a return to our Father's kingdom, it is a natural response to try and work our way back in through our own efforts. As we become better acquainted with our Father, we awaken to the fact that our self-flagellation is ultimately insulting to Him. After all, how would you feel if your beloved child came to you and said "You won't love me unless I do x,y, and z." But that's the natural response of prodigals - to see their fathers through their own imperfect eyes. What our Father says is "I love you so much that I've guaranteed you a starting place (redemption). In order for me to help you progress, you must do x,y, and z. Now let me help you..."

[Hamba Tuhan]

humba, you are up way too early (on my way to a work out)

Actually, I'm up a bit too late. Just finished a late dinner of cheese on toast and now need to do some Book of Mormon reading before bed.

[CV75]

I believe Spencer Kimball, as much as I admire the man, was famous for having said we have to "lift ourselves by our bootstraps" in order to be saved.

The closest reference I could find about this famous saying is from "Be Ye Therefore Perfect,

[WalkerW]

I haven't read through the thread, but I'm not sure that I see why speaking and singing about grace in sacrament meeting would seem so earth-shattering or in any way likely to incur the wrath of the leaders of the Church.

I think it's fair to say that Latter-day Saints have, historically, tended to downplay the word grace (almost certainly because of what we've regarded as an abuse and distortion of it by certain Protestant groups). But we've surely taught it. That's, after all, the whole point of the concepts of atonement and Redeemer/Savior, which have certainly been taught all of my life.

As for the hymn "Amazing Grace," it is a favorite of mine -- I even once wrote a Meridian magazine column about it and its author -- and was a late favorite of my father's. I used it in my talk at his funeral in 2003, and it was printed on the program of the service. His stake president (and home teacher) presided at the funeral, and I can't really remember so much as a raised eyebrow, let alone anything truly cataclysmic.

When talking to evangelicals, I have often replaced the word "atonement" with "grace" when quoting the 3rd Article of Faith in order to help them understand our terminology.

[Palerider]

Interesting. It sounds like you're about 20-30 years older than I am, but I was raised by 'old-time Mormons,' and I learnt to trust in the grace of Christ from them. Do you think the LDS you grew up around actually read the Book of Mormon?

I'm sure they read it but it was also interpreted for them by leadership. The emphasis was placed on the scripture that says "after all we can do" meaning the possibility for celestial glory only kicked in after you had given your last ounce of effort to do self-purification, serve the church (the equivalent of serving Heavenly Father) and your fellow man. Grace was relegated to only affecting a universal resurrection and nothing more.

Which if I'm not mistaken is why Consig started this thread to begin with. If the church today were called upon to make the sacrifices of service that were made by the early members, I feel confident it would lose a significant portion of it's members.

When I was growing up the emphasis was always on the old stories of sacrifice and heroism. As when Brigham young commented on the three young men who aided the Willy-Martin handcart co. at the Sweetwater river crossing:

When President Brigham Young heard of this heroic act, he wept like a child, and later declared publicly,

[WalkerW]

I find that description unrecognizable, and completely foreign to my experience.

But then, as Darth J has already helpfully well-poisoned, I'm an apologist, and, accordingly, disingenuous (when I'm not simply lying outright).

I mentioned this before, but I had an Interfaith Dialogue at the Institute Building on UNT campus in December with the director of the upcoming Religion & Redemption: A Documentary of Mormonism. A written version of my presentation can be found here. I might co-author a review of the documentary once it is released and submit it for publication through Mormon Studies Review.

[ElfLord]

I'm sure they read it but it was also interpreted for them by leadership. The emphasis was placed on the scripture that says "after all we can do" meaning the possibility for celestial glory only kicked in after you had given your last ounce of effort to do self-purification, serve the church (the equivalent of serving Heavenly Father) and your fellow man. Grace was relegated to only affecting a universal resurrection and nothing more.

I know what you mean by "old-time" doctrine!

1 John 3

1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

3 And every man that hath this hope in him

purifieth himself, even as he is pure

.

Which if I'm not mistaken is why Consig started this thread to begin with. If the church today were called upon to make the sacrifices of service that were made by the early members, I feel confident it would lose a significant portion of it's members.

When I was growing up the emphasis was always on the old stories of sacrifice and heroism. As when Brigham young commented on the three young men who aided the Willy-Martin handcart co. at the Sweetwater river crossing:

When President Brigham Young heard of this heroic act, he wept like a child, and later declared publicly,

[Palerider]

The number of times I've had the virtual **** kicked out of me by some other religion for the false belief that I could some how "work" my way into heaven, and have been told, even by Evangelicals on this board, that all you have to do is accept Jesus into your heart and your saved... It doesn't seem like a cowardly oversimplification to me.

I suppose those of you who have never left the state of Utah wouldn't understand.

Their misunderstanding of Mormon doctrine doesn't make our misunderstandings of theirs any better. I've lived outside of Utah for most of my life for whatever that has to do with anything.......

[WalkerW]

It seems that LDS members feeling burdened, and the LDS (mis)understanding of Grace, are completely unrelated issues.

Furthermore, I don't think adopting a more Evangelical understanding of Grace by itself would mitigate the problem.

Of course a massive theological shift away from works and towards grace might indeed take the focus off obedience, but that is entirely unrealistic.

The simple solution is to just ask less of members, and make them feel like its okay to say "Sorry I don't have time."

No doctrinal modification is needed, merely an adjustment to the institutional culture of the church.

I think there are two problems that come along with the LDS use of "grace":

1. Doctrinally and scripturally, the LDS concept of "grace" fits the ancient mold quite well (as I show here). However, I believe our use of the word in talks and in writing is often influenced by the Protestant definition. We need to stop using Protestant rhetoric. This is how we get hair-splitting between things like "salvation" and "exaltation," which to me is incoherent.

2. We can get caught up on how many pairs of earrings we are wearing or how many ward activities we attend/plan instead of things that actually matter.

The institutional culture definitely needs a shift. (This is true in some wards and not in others, though. Depends.)

[Palerider]

I know what you mean by "old-time" doctrine!

1 John 3

1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

3 And every man that hath this hope in him

purifieth himself, even as he is pure

.

Hmmm sounds straight out of the diaries of St. Peter...

2 Peter1

5 And beside this,

giving all diligence

,

add to your faith

virtue; and to virtue knowledge;

6 And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;

7 And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.

8 For if these things be in you,

and abound

, they make you that ye shall

neither be barren nor unfruitful

in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.

10 Wherefore the rather, brethren,

give diligence

to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:

11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

I agree and isn't it nice we have grace to aid us in this effort, because without it those efforts would be meaningless.

[ELF1024]

Their misunderstanding of Mormon doctrine doesn't make our misunderstandings of theirs any better. I've lived outside of Utah for most of my life for whatever that has to do with anything.......

It would seem they are misunderstanding their own doctrine based on what you are saying.

[consiglieri]

"Man can transform himself and he must. Man has in himself the seeds of godhood, which can germinate and grow and develop. As the acorn becomes the oak, the mortal man becomes a god. It is within his power to lift himself by his very bootstraps from the plane on which he finds himself to the plane on which he should be. It may be a long, hard lift with many obstacles, but it is a real possibility."

Wow, CV75! Thanks for finding that quote.

Now that I see it in its entirety, it seems to make even less sense to me.

So mortal man is supposed to lift himself by his own bootstraps to become a god, the same way the acorn lifts itself by its own bootstraps to become an oak?

I am thinking something doesn't quite fit here . . .

But it is an excellent reflection of common Church teaching in the 1970's.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Palerider]

It would seem they are misunderstanding their own doctrine based on what you are saying.

I agree. I think there are just as many fallacies in many Evangelical approaches to grace as there are in Mormonism's......

[ElfLord]

Wow, CV75! Thanks for finding that quote.

Now that I see it in its entirety, it seems to make even less sense to me.

So mortal man is supposed to lift himself by his own bootstraps to become a god, the same way the acorn lifts itself by its own bootstraps to become an oak?

I am thinking something doesn't quite fit here . . .

But it is an excellent reflection of common Church teaching in the 1970's.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

God is still the ultimate mover in the process. Who sends the rain, bringing nutrients to the roots? Who shines his rays and causes photosynthesis and cells to grow?

God of course, but it wasn't God doing the growing. The acorn had to do that with God's assitance every step of the way.

For some reason people try to make grace into an all God or nothing type of thing, when in reality its a symbiotic relationship.

Which blade of a pair of scissors is most necessary?

[ELF1024]

I agree. I think there are just as many fallacies in many Evangelical approaches to grace as there are in Mormonism's......

I agree with Libs (first time for everything) on 2nd Nephi 25:23

23 For we labor diligently to write, to ^apersuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by ^bgrace that we are saved, after all we can ^cdo.

The hard part is defining what "all we can do" means. D&C 82:3

3 For of him unto whom ^amuch is ^bgiven much is ^crequired; and he who ^dsins against the greater ^elight shall ^freceive the greater ^gcondemnation.

In my life it always seems I can do more...

[volgadon]

This is true in some wards and not in others, though. Depends.

Never were truer words said.

[WalkerW]

This doctrine of divinity also entails a particular doctrine of grace. Those who are familiar with the "New Perspective" of Paul's doctrine of grace, first stated by E.P. Sanders and more recently by several others, will notice that this view of divinity entails a notion of covenantal nomism. The doctrine of grace in the New Perspective is multi-faceted, but briefly it holds that Paul taught that persons enter into a covenant relationship with God through grace alone, but once in the relationship one must abide the conditions of the covenant to remain in Christ. The conditions of the covenant for Paul included the law of love taught by Jesus. Further, in Pauls works grace is not seen as inconsistent with judgment and reward by works. God offers the divine relationship to us as a sheer grace, an unmerited gift which is offered in unconditional love. We need not, indeed cannot, do anything to earn or merit this love. To attempt to earn the divine love is to demonstrate that we misunderstand what is offered and the unconditional nature of Gods love. Grace is the way that loving persons relate to one another. However, that God offers us love unconditionally does not mean that there are no conditions to abide in this love. We abide in the divine love by keeping the commandments. (John 15:9-10; 1 John 3:24) The commandments are simply two: to love God with all of our heart, might, mind and strength, and to love one another as we love ourselves. (1 John 3:24; John 15:16) The commandments merely outline the way we must act to avoid injuring the relationship of covenant love that God has offered to us. Thus, the relationship is the primary consideration protected by invoking obedience to commandments. There is no sense of earning the relationship by keeping the commandments. We keep the commandments to maintain our fidelity with God.

As I have attempted to show elsewhere, this same view is essentially the view presented throughout Mormon scripture and in the gospel of John. In Mormon scripture, God offers light, or his own presence and glory, without condition as a sheer gift . This light reflects the quality of ones relationship with God, or the degree to which one appropriates Gods power and glory as the source of their lives in the here and now. However, one grows in the light or relationship by keeping the commandments. As D&C 93 states, one grows in the light by keeping the commandments until the perfect day when one is glorified with the divine knowledge, power and presence as "one" "in" the Father and Son, just as they

[Palerider]

I agree with Libs (first time for everything) on 2nd Nephi 25:23

The hard part is defining what "all we can do" means. D&C 82:3

In my life it always seems I can do more...

Yes!!!!! My point exactly! If we all can or could have done something more then aren't we falling short of living the Law perfectly as Justice requires? So then in my mind here is where God's grace makes up the difference for us and says "Because we have been reconciled through your faith, your imperfect effort is acceptable and sufficient". I'll do the rest....My grace will make your effort perfect through the atonement of my Son.

[ELF1024]

Yes!!!!! My point exactly! If we all can or could have done something more then aren't we falling short of living the Law perfectly as Justice requires? So then in my mind here is where God's grace makes up the difference for us and says "Because we have been reconciled through your faith, your imperfect effort is acceptable and sufficient". I'll do the rest....My grace will make your effort perfect through the atonement of my Son.

That's my understanding of grace at least...

What Does the Atonement Mean To You? By Elder Cecil O. Samuelson Jr.

...

Immortality and Eternal Life

Perhaps the most oft-quoted verse in our meetings and writings is this wonderful clarifying and summarizing verse from the book of Moses:

[ElfLord]

That's my understanding of grace at least...

Mine as well... but it doesn't release you from any effort what so ever as the "Faith Alone" crowds try to sell.

[ELF1024]

Mine as well... but it doesn't release you from any effort what so ever as the "Faith Alone" crowds try to sell.

True enough, but I think palerider is attempting to say that the "faith alone" crowds aren't actually supposed to be "faith alone". That those who proclaim "faith alone" are misunderstanding their own doctrine.

Having run into many many many people in my time who espouse the "faith alone" doctrine as whole and complete, I'm not sure I buy into what he is saying. However, it is possible that a large number of people just don't get it; based on the recient Pew Poll data on Religous Knowledge.