Grace in Sacrament Meeting

[bluebell]

And what are those "requirements"?

Faith, repentance, and baptism.

You believe, turn toward God, and enter the covenant. Then He promises to sanctify you a fiery baptism as you live by His word.

You can indeed be saved by grace without ever holding a calling the Mormon church, bringing the goldfish crackers to nursery, or visiting teaching.

Exactly.

[Daniel Peterson]

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.

[Obiwan]

Consig never fails to let me down..... His mormonism is so much to often a perversion of actual mormonism.

Stephen Robinson is correct, Consig is not. "Grace" is taught constantly in the Church, and Consig's and his brothers viewpoints (anti-mormons and ex-mormons) in to many things ideologically speaking is not going to change that FACT, no matter how much they claim this and other issues are the "real" mormonism!

[Zakuska]

Relieved because that burden could be easily lifted if she came to a heartfelt understanding of the doctrineSince in the book IIRC he mentions encountering many others who interpret the doctrine in the same way as his wife and in fact, wrote the book to help correct this widespread misunderstanding, I don't see how one can really interpret this to say that he thought the fault was hers for not hearing something plainly and repeatedly set forth.

Edit: I was right, his preface to the book opens up with a discussion about how his students (BYU, often grown up in the church) are great at the peripherals of the gospel (food storage, tithing, genealogy, dating, WoW) that when it comes to the central doctrines (including grace) that they are 'soft'. The book sleeve also lists example after example of people in the church who didn't 'get' the doctrine....thus the book.

And it isn't described as an emotional breakdown in the book, but rather that she was "burned out" from the excessive burdens she had placed upon herself or had accepted from others couple with the attitude that she could and should "do it all".

He also follows the story of his wife getting everything but the very core message of the Atonement by a discussion about his students where he estimates about 1/3 state that LDS do not believe in "being saved".

Reminds me of the Lords criticism in Matthew...

Matthew 23:23

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

[Darth J]

Grace in the scriptures has always been given with something expected in return. If one doesn't praise God (thereby increasing his reputation), or by doing something for someone else, then one gets no more grace, but incurs wrath.

But the necessity of having rituals performed for you by someone who has priesthood authority and obedience to church leaders in every aspect of your life----including accepting any and every job they give you ("calling") is not a universally accepted interpretation of "the scriptures" (whatever scriptures are accepted by one's denomination).

And I am perfectly willing to acknowledge the Bible as more or less a collection of fables and folk tales, so relying on the Bible as a source of authority for the proposition that God is basically the Celestial Scorekeeper isn't going to do a lot for me in addressing the anxiety being caused by pressure from the requirements of being a believing Latter-day Saint that the OP is discussing.

Note: On my statement that we are to accept whatever call we are given:

http://lds.org/general-conference/1997/10/called-to-serve?lang=eng

[SilverKnight]

When one (both leadership and member) correctly understands the concept of Grace, then "works" which are DEFINED by the church NOT by the member (at least not completely) become the outgrowth of the member's love of God, not the church's standard of qualification for righteousness.

Except as far as I can tell, "grace" is a concept that resists even a workable definition, much less a 'correct understanding'.

You would be right if you say the LDS church places way too many expectations and responsibilities on its members.

But this has nothing to do with not understanding correctly some abstract Christian religious notion.

[Zakuska]

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.

Are you sure that after leaving the chapel that fire didn't come down from heaven and devour the place?

[Darth J]

My point is that they bear out what the OP was stating only if they are interpreted in a very specific way.

The fact that these quotes exist does not prove the OP's point. The specific interpretation of the quotes which you are using must be shown as being taught to prove the OP.

I am well aware that when apologetics kicks in, the plain meaning of what someone said is not a reliable indication of what they meant. So feel free to offer an alternative interpretation.

But whether or not the LDS Church teaches that grace is something that is earned, not freely given, is not a matter of opinion.

E.g., http://lds.org/new-era/2005/03/tough-topics-are-you-saved-by-grace-or-works?lang=eng

[Palerider]

And what are those "requirements"?

Faith, repentance, and baptism.

You believe, turn toward God, and enter the covenant. Then He promises to sanctify you a fiery baptism as you live by His word.

You can indeed be saved by grace without ever holding a calling the Mormon church, bringing the goldfish crackers to nursery, or visiting teaching.

But then where are your works (other than the mental work of faith and sincere repentance and baptism)?

[Calm]

ompletely different from the LDS Church I have been attending for 34-years, the reason his wife heard nothing about the grace and only about the demands is because the grace has (almost) never been taught, but the demands are hammered home on a weekly basis.

Anyway, I talked to one of the organizers of the sacrament meeting afterward, and congratulated them on putting it together, parting with,

[Darth J]

Consig never fails to let me down..... His mormonism is so much to often a perversion of actual mormonism.

Stephen Robinson is correct, Consig is not. "Grace" is taught constantly in the Church, and Consig's and his brothers viewpoints (anti-mormons and ex-mormons) in to many things ideologically speaking is not going to change that FACT, no matter how much they claim this and other issues are the "real" mormonism!

You are correct to put grace in quote marks when you say that it is consistently taught in the LDS Church. Grace is not taught as Jesus offering a life preserver to a drowning man and all the man has to do is reach out and grab it. Grace is taught as a bundle of provisos, conditions, and conditions precedent. It is more like making sure you have paid your insurance premiums and filled out all the paperwork before Jesus will extend that life preserver. Meanwhile, you are still drowning.

That's the kind of anxiety the OP is talking about.

Anyone who wants to continue to point out the flaws in what many Protestants/evangelicals think about grace will get no argument from me, but doing so still fails to address the problem in the OP.

ETA: Regarding the singing of "Amazing Grace" in sacrament meeting or by the Tabernacle Choir, you're all not seriously suggesting that the words of this song mean the same thing to a Latter-day Saint as it does to, say, a Baptist, are you?

[Zakuska]

Why would this be a problem? Robinson's book is probably the all time bestseller for Deseretbook so I suspect the Church leaders are well aware of what the book teaches and that a huge number of LDS are fond of it and may even use it from time to time in their talks.

Plus the Mormon Tab sings Amazing Grace on occasion and the song is referenced from time to time in church conference and other talks by the "Salt Lake" brethren.

Whats more even the Chruch newspaper... You know the one that is supposed to be controled by the Morg

Has stories on it... You would think with all that technology on temple square that they could do a better Job at controlling the masses.

http://www.deseretne...zing-Grace.html

[Daniel Peterson]

Grace is not taught as Jesus offering a life preserver to a drowning man and all the man has to do is reach out and grab it. Grace is taught as a bundle of provisos, conditions, and conditions precedent. It is more like making sure you have paid your insurance premiums and filled out all the paperwork before Jesus will extend that life preserver. Meanwhile, you are still drowning.

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).

[volgadon]

But the necessity of having rituals performed for you by someone who has priesthood authority and obedience to church leaders in every aspect of your life----including accepting any and every job they give you ("calling") is not a universally accepted interpretation of "the scriptures" (whatever scriptures are accepted by one's denomination).

And I am perfectly willing to acknowledge the Bible as more or less a collection of fables and folk tales, so relying on the Bible as a source of authority for the proposition that God is basically the Celestial Scorekeeper isn't going to do a lot for me in addressing the anxiety being caused by pressure from the requirements of being a believing Latter-day Saint that the OP is discussing.

Note: On my statement that we are to accept whatever call we are given:

http://lds.org/general-conference/1997/10/called-to-serve?lang=eng

Dear me, is reading comprehension that difficult? "In the scriptures" refers in this case to where a concept is recorded. It is not equating your bitter litany with the scriptures. Grace, in its cultural contexts, always entailed obligations and duties.

[Calm]

With all due respect to Bro Robinson's wife, I feel no deep exhaustion at these activities (even when I was teaching RS it was only once a month), certainly not enough to send me into depression or even worse a break-down... and I've never felt guilty or doubted whether I "measure up."

If there's a woman out there who is feeling overwhelmed, she needs to talk to her RS/bishop about lightening her load, and then do it!!

I think some liberties have been taken with the story.

Brother Robinson gives the reasons for his wife's burnout and it is much more than just church obligations:

"Janet had a particularly exciting year that year. Besides being Relief Society president, she graduated from college for the second time (in accounting), she passed the CPA exam and took a job with a local firm, and she gave birth to our fourth child." She describes what she is doing as "I can't do it anymore. I can't live it. My load is just too heavy. I can't do all the things I'm supposed to. I can't get up at 5:30, and bake bread, and sew clothes, and help the kids with their homework, and do my own homework, and make their lunches, and do the housework and do my Relief Society stuff, and have scripture study, and do my genealogy and write my congressman, and go to PTA meetings, and get our year's supply organized, and go to my stake meeting, and write the missionaries...."

And her "breakdown" consisted of her withdrawing emotionally and becoming very passive to all things spiritual for a couple of weeks until her husband pushed a button and her complaints came out...which they then talked about and apparently resolved the issue (which was her sense that she had to do it all and do it all perfectly).

[Darth J]

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).

Go ahead and prove me wrong, with citations to LDS curricula and/or talks by general authorities. The LDS Church teaches that life is a one-way ticket and we have to earn our way back to God.

H. Burke Peterson, "Return Trip Ticket Home", New Era, Apr. 1974

http://lds.org/new-e...t-home?lang=eng

One spring before school was out I asked my father if I could go to Salt Lake City to work and then return to Phoenix at the end of the summer to be with my family and begin school again. After thinking it over, my parents decided it would be fine. When school was out in May, Dad took me with him to the Continental Bus depot and, since I had no money of my own as yet, bought me a ticket to Salt Lake City. I was somewhat taken back when I found out that he had purchased for me a one-way ticket instead of a round trip. He said he would take the responsibility to see that I arrived in Salt Lake City but it would be up to me to do what was necessary while I was there to purchase the ticket for a return home to Phoenix at the end of the summer. As you can imagine, I was most anxious to come back home after my work experience as I had burning in my memory the happy experiences we had always enjoyed in our home. I enjoyed the association with and loved my three brothers and was most happy and comfortable being with my parents. When I arrived in Salt Lake City I immediately set about to find work. This I was able to accomplish, and as soon as my first paycheck was given to me, guess what I did. First I paid my tithing, and then I took the rest of the money to the bus depot downtown in Salt Lake City and purchased a return trip ticket to Phoenix. I wanted to be sure that when summer was over there would be nothing to stand in the way of my returning home. I loved my home very much. For the rest of the summer I was particularly mindful of taking good care of myself and doing everything necessary to insure my return home to Phoenix. More than anything else I wanted to enjoy again the experience of being with my family.

We all had an experience similar to this long ago before we came to this earth. We were in a gathering where we were being instructed by our Father in heaven concerning the earth that he had prepared for us. He taught us many things about what would be expected of us if we chose to come here. He let us know that the decision to come here would be ours, and if this was our wish, he would see to it that we arrived into this mortal experience safely. Like the experience I had in Phoenix as a boy, our Father in heaven would provide a one-way ticket for us. Whether or not we returned again to him at the end of our mortal experience on earth would depend upon the things we did while we were here. He told us his hope was that we would do everything necessary to insure our return trip. When we were born on this earth, a veil was drawn that blotted out our memory of our previous existence, and thus we cannot remember what a completely happy experience that family relationship was. We are, therefore, being taught to live by faith. We are being taught to be obedient and develop the faith necessary to keep the commandments and live in a manner that will entitle us to that wonderful experience of an association with our heavenly brothers and sisters and parents again.

In order to help us do the things that are right while we are having this earth-life experience (mortal), our Heavenly Father has organized his church on the earth. His church makes available to us all the teachings and ordinances that are necessary for those who wish to return again to him. If we will listen to our leaders and do the things they ask us to do, we can be assured of having enough purchasing power for a return ticket to our heavenly home when our work experience here is over.

The Church must agree with what Bishop Peterson said. Here is that talk being quoted in an Aaronic Priesthood manual:

http://lds.org/ldsor...0003a94610aRCRD

ETA: From the Aaronic priesthood manual to which I have linked:

Explain that we all had a similar experience before we came to this earth. Our Father in Heaven explained to us about the earth that he had prepared. He taught us what would be expected of us if we chose to come here. He let us know that if we wanted to come to earth, he would ensure our mortal birth. Similar to Bishop Peterson

[Calm]

Reminds me of the Lords criticism in Matthew...

Matthew 23:23

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

But they were hypocrites because they thought doing the peripherals excused them from doing the fundamentals, not because they didn't really understand what the fundamentals were.

[Palerider]

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.

Taught in the Church, yes, but I don't think until recently (and perhaps not even now) taught correctly. In earlier days it seemed much more relegated to universal resurrection, not celestialization.

[Palerider]

But they were hypocrites because they thought doing the peripherals excused them from doing the fundamentals, not because they didn't really understand what the fundamentals were.

But even the fundamentals can be done for the wrong reason, thus they would be dead works.

[Darth J]

Dear me, is reading comprehension that difficult? "In the scriptures" refers in this case to where a concept is recorded. It is not equating your bitter litany with the scriptures. Grace, in its cultural contexts, always entailed obligations and duties.

If you are allowed to characterize my non-belief in the biblical narrative as a "bitter litany," may I refer to your cherished beliefs as a "childish superstition"? Just asking for a clarification of board rules.

The issue is not whether there is some nominal action of manifesting faith for God to have mercy on people, but whether the LDS Church places an inordinate amount of requirements on what is required of believers to be "worthy."

And my reference to "in the scriptures" has nothing to do with reading comprehension. "Grace"---as Silverknight points out, whatever that is----is not unique to Judeo-Christian religions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kripa_%28philosophy%29

[Calm]

But even the fundamentals can be done for the wrong reason, thus they would be dead works.

And if done for the right reason, living works, right?

[jana at jade house]

As a church musician I was always given the impression that "Amazing Grace" is inappropriate for sacred use in LDS chapels. Could be because of some doctrinal error ( as in a poor wretch ), could be because it is used secularly. I know that I had the distinct feeling of uh oh when I read the OP. The Mo Tab will probably never sing it in Conference. Poetry of all kinds is referenced in talks. But there are a list of restrictions for music.

[mercyngrace]

But then where are your works (other than the mental work of faith and sincere repentance and baptism)?

Presuming that by "works" you are referring to ordinances and the laws by which we live, I would say that all these things are part of the baptism by fire and are preparatory to the culmination of that process of sanctification.

The process of receiving the Holy Ghost which begins at baptism culminates in the return to our Father's presence which is foreshadowed within the temple. The laws we keep are preparatory, designed to teach us about God's nature and help us acquire His attributes. The ordinances are a reflection of our deepening commitment and His continuing tutelage.

It's not as demanding as we make it out to be.

[Palerider]

And if done for the right reason, living works, right?

Yes, but when you speak of "living works" you are speaking of "justification through faith":

• Justification by faith excludes boasting or exulting in one's goodness achieved by works according to the law. The way God justified Abraham by faith demonstrates that trust as a way of relating to God preceded seeking to relate to Him by the works of the law, meeting the Jewish objection that God requires works for justification (3:27-4:25).

(From Holman Bible Dictionary.

[Zakuska]

It's not as demanding as we make it out to be.

Tell me about it...

1 John 5:3

For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.