Hope

I currently serve as the first counselor in an LDS ward bishopric. If you’re not familiar with the LDS Church, a bishopric consists of a bishop and two counselors—volunteers who are sustained as the governing authority over a local ward (congregation). The bishopric is assisted by clerks and other administrative team members. One of my duties as a bishop’s counselor is to interview people, using a set of questions provided by the Church to help determine if they’re worthy to be issued a temple “recommend” (a small card) that permits the bearer to enter Mormon temples.

One of the questions I’m required to ask is, “Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?”  Just a few months ago, the Church slightly modified the question to read, “Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?”  Either way, the meaning is about the same. During a recent interview I had with a ward member, after I asked him this question he paused, took a deep breath and then asked, “May I be candid with you?”

“Of course,”  I replied.

He continued, “To be honest, I’ve been avoiding coming in to renew my temple recommend because I’m not sure how to answer that question. I have empathy for the LGBTQ movement and community members. I have a number of friends who are gay and lesbian. I love them. And yes, I support and affiliate with them. Does that make me unworthy to hold a temple recommend?”

I felt a calm assurance about how to answer his question. But before I did I reminded him that I was not his bishop and that I was not acting as his spiritual advisor. In the LDS Church bishops are ordained and specifically set apart to offer counsel to members of their ward flock. Having first said that I offered my personal opinion in answer to his question. I told him about my journey toward better clarity on this subject and about my son’s upcoming marriage. I felt the Lord’s spirit in the room as tears filled his eyes and I could see the weight lifting from his shoulders as he had summoned the courage to talk about it. I told him that, in my opinion he was absolutely worthy to attend the temple and that if he wanted to attend he could petition the Lord’s help in using temple attendance to support his journey toward clarity and receiving personal revelation on this subject. Then I told him that he would need to decide for himself how to answer the question. Finally, I encouraged him not to lose hope.

As I’ve been researching over the last year it’s been interesting to run across people and organizations, both inside and outside the LDS Church that are trying to help those experiencing angst over this issue.

The second graph below shows the big gap between church leaders’ perceptions about the importance of the top four specific issues, and the actual importance of these issues to church members who are experiencing a crisis in their faith:

David’s book utilizes these surveys, research from social science and religious studies and LDS teachings to show leaders how to better support those who have questions and how to create local church environments where all can feel welcome.

During General Conference in October of 2013, Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf addressed this topic:

(transcription of a portion of the video above:)

“There are some who leave the Church they once loved. One might ask, ‘If the gospel is so wonderful, why would anyone leave?’ Sometimes we assume it is because they have been offended or lazy or sinful. Actually, it is not that simple. In fact, there is not just one reason that applies to the variety of situations.”

As a local leader it disappoints me that the Church doesn’t provide any training for helping leaders minister to members with these issues. It’s almost as if the Church thinks that by ignoring all this, it will just go away. I don’t understand that—especially when there are so many great ideas we could embrace and promote like David Ostler’s work. A few months ago I held up David’s book in a ward leadership meeting and suggested that we use it to help all of us better minister to our members. Later that day one of the leaders who had been in that meeting told me that he wouldn’t be comfortable using anything that doesn’t come directly from Church headquarters.

“Hmmm…”  I thought, “But we don’t seem to ever get anything from Church headquarters related to this subject.”

So why did I include this excerpt from Elder Uchtdorf’s talk here? Because when I heard it the thought came to me that the essay I’m writing has something to do with missionary work. Not missionary work in the traditional sense, but perhaps in helping even one  Church member feel like he or she is better understood or that they could navigate all of this in a different way that they had not considered.

Transcription of the video above [ with my additions bracketed, in green ]:

“Fifth, trust the Lord to work His miracles. Understand that it’s not your job to convert people  [ to the idea that we should be more understanding of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters, and to the idea that perhaps one should not just leave the Church over this issue ]. That is the role of the Holy Ghost. Your role is to share what is in your heart and live consistent with your beliefs. So, don’t be discouraged if someone does not accept the gospel message immediately  [ or the notion that we should be more understanding of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters, or the idea that perhaps we can do more to help inside the Church  than we can from the outside ]. It is not a personal failure. That is between the individual and Heavenly Father. Yours is to love God and love your neighbors, His children. Believe, love, do. Follow this path, and God will work miracles through you to bless His precious children [ with greater empathy for our LGBTQ brothers and sisters, or with a change of heart that leads them to participate in solutions ].”

My wife and I also met Blaire Ostler at last year’s Affirmation Conference where she emceed that event. Blaire is a member of the LDS Church who resides in Utah with her husband, Drew, and their three children.

Blaire describes herself in this way: “I’m a born and raised Mormon. I come from nine generations of Mormon pioneers. I often joke that if there is a Mormon gene, I have it. I’m also a gender variant, sexually fluid pansexual, but most the time I refer to myself as queer. If there is a queer gene, I’m pretty sure I have it… The truth is I can’t deny my Mormon identity, motivation, and beliefs any more than I could deny that I’m attracted to multiple genders. Both identities, Mormon and queer, are a part of me and I have no intention of renouncing either.”

Blaire provides hope.

Whether she’s sharing her testimony or challenging us to take ownership of our beliefs, she’s doing it from inside  Mormonism with love, thoughtfulness and respect. “I choose faith—faith in people, faith in God, faith in a better tomorrow, faith in love. I choose faith that love will win. I choose to act on that faith and do everything in my power to make the most beautiful and prophetic visions of my religion a tangible reality,”  she writes.

Although, by her own admission her relationship with the LDS Church is “conflicted”, she says, “I strangely find myself more Mormon than ever. Besides Mormonism remaining as an essential aspect of my identity, I still believe. I still find spiritual fulfillment in my Mormonism. I’m Mormon and queer. I don’t see any reason for me to pretend I’m anything other than what I am—a queer child of God finding her way to become just like Them.”

I recently read a great blog post by Bryce Cook, an active LDS Church member in Arizona. He suggests three things we can do as church members to help make things better for our LGBTQ brothers and sisters:

1. “Be more open to talk about the subject with friends and fellow church members. Those in leadership positions in particular need to set the example and show our fellow members that it’s okay to say positive things about gay people, to defend them and to love them…”.

2. “Talk to ward and stake leaders about being a resource to educate members or help families dealing with the issue…”.

3. “Seek out and form support groups with gay members and their families…”.

You can read Bryce’s entire post >here.  Bryce is providing hope.

Shortly after I published this essay, I was introduced through social media to Evan Smith.

Evan is an active Latter-Day Saint who recently wrote a thorough and thoughtful ebook titled, “Gay Latter-Day Crossroads: My Journey, Your Journey, and a Scripture-based Path Forward.”  I was both surprised and delighted when I found his book because many of his thoughts about this topic align with mine.

In chapter 1 Evan poses the question, “Am I trying to attack the church or ‘steady the ark’?”  I like what he wrote about his motives:

Evan is providing hope.

Six months ago my wife and I learned about Richard Ostler’s podcast. He’s kind and fair, but also speaks boldly and directly. We’ve appreciated that. Shortly after I published this essay Richard invited me to record a podcast with him.

Listen, Learn & Love’s Mission Statement:
“Listen, Learn, and Love was created out of the desire to better understand our LGBTQ+ brothers and sisters. We believe in God’s decree to love one another, and this website is one of the ways we hope to foster that love. We believe in and are fully committed to the success of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We are not proposing or advocating changes in the Church’s policies or doctrines. But we’re committed to facilitating meaningful, loving, productive dialogue with our Heavenly Parents’ LGBTQ+ children. We want to hear and share their stories. While we invite everyone to follow the teachings of our Restored Church, we support individual decisions without judgment. We leave judgment to our Savior and His perfect understanding.”

Richard is providing hope. Thank you, Richard.

A couple of weeks ago when the July issue of the Church’s Ensign magazine came in the mail, I was surprised by the callout on the front cover, “When Loved Ones Choose a Different Path.”

In my opinion, this month’s issue is evidence of the Church’s concern over the growing percentage of faithful Mormons leaving the Church or just becoming inactive. Millennials have been leaving organized religion in unprecedented numbers, but until recently the LDS Church was an exception: nearly three-quarters of people who grew up Mormon stayed into adulthood. In her book entitled The Next Mormons, Jana Riess talks about how much that is changing. Jana explores the religious beliefs and behaviors of young adult Mormons, finding that while their levels of belief remain strong, the tensions between the Church’s conservative ideals and their generation’s commitment to individualism proves too high, causing them to leave the faith. Those who remain attempt to balance the Church’s emphasis on the traditional family with their generation’s more inclusive definition that includes same-sex marriage.

When I saw the magazine’s cover, my hope was that in addition to the standard fare there might be an article or two that authentically addressed some of these issues. But there wasn’t. I opened to the welcome page written by the editor, Adam Olson. In setting the tone for this issue, his opening statement felt to me like an indirect jab at church members who are struggling with their faith, likening them to the Book of Mormon heretic Korihor and to the wicked Zoramites:

“In our study of the Book of Mormon this month, we learn about Korihor, who convinced many Church members that they had been deceived by the prophets but later acknowledged that he himself had been deceived by Satan and had deceived others. We learn about the Zoramites, a whole people who separated themselves from the Church. And we see Alma the Younger, who had once actively fought against the Church, seek to strengthen his own adult children against choices that would lead them away from the Lord and His Church. Some of us have family members or friends who choose to no longer participate in the Lord’s restored Church. This can be painful for those of us who feel our faith so strongly. We want to help, but many of us wonder how.”

To me, there’s just something missing in this effort to effectively help church members. It feels like another missed opportunity to embrace members who have questions or doubts. In October 2018’s general conference, Elder Oaks called these struggling members to repentance saying, “The work of the Lord is going forward despite the organized and constant opposition that confronts us as we strive to practice the teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. For those who falter under that opposition … Remember the principle of repentance … As Elder Neal A. Maxwell urged, don’t be among those ‘who would rather try to change the Church than to change themselves.’”

Hope is a Prerequisite to Professing Charity

Remember the quote from LDS author Rebecca Stradling that I used at the beginning of this essay? She said, “Faith is a necessary foundation for hope, which in turn is prerequisite to the development of charity.”  I appreciate that the Church is saying that we should love our LGBTQ brothers and sisters and be charitable to them. That’s certainly progress. Now, in addition to the words let’s provide more hope. Yes, the Atonement of Jesus Christ provides our ultimate hope, but as a church it feels to me like we can’t just shelter behind that. We can do more.

I wish the Church would provide more hope.

I’ve included links below to most of the articles in this issue in case you’re interested in reading them. If you’re on a mobile device and you have the LDS Tools app installed, you may be asked to log in:

Change in the LDS Church

One of David Ostler’s graphs above lists the lack of “Transparency with Decision Making” as one of the top issues contributing to many members’ faith crises. The gospel of Jesus Christ is simple but its application through religion gets messy because of all the decisions that are made. As with any large organization I’m guessing that decision making in the Church is very complicated.

Does the Possibility of Change Provide Hope?

It feels to me like change in the Church is impacted by many variables. Over the last several months I’ve thought a lot about some of the changes and I’ve tried to identify things that may have influenced those changes. I came up with over 30 things, then I distilled them down to nine.

Historically, it seems to me that change in the Church has been influenced by at least nine variables:

1. God’s will,
2. teachings of dead prophets,
3. teachings of living prophets,
4. scriptures and their interpretation,
5. the Holy Ghost,
6. individual leader’s charisma, background, experiences, perceptions, personality, biases and fallibilities,
7. economics,
8. existing and changing laws, and
9. societal norms, societal changes, scientific evidence, human enlightenment and societal pressure.

Variable #1:  God’s Will

Enough said.

Variable #2:  Teachings of Dead Prophets

Throughout history God has raised prophets to guide His children. Their teachings are among the variables that impact change.

Variable #3:  Teachings of Living Prophets

Living prophets’ perspectives are important. Living prophets bring views into the room that nobody else can bring. And because they’re not dead prophets they can be part of the mix; they can get in there and get their hands dirty.

I don’t doubt the LDS Church leadership’s sincerity. I believe that they believe that they’re always teaching the truth as evidenced by this remark in a recent talk given at Brigham Young University by President Russell M. Nelson:

Yes it’s cute when, with a twinkle in his eye President Nelson grins and says that “Prophets are rarely popular”,  but obviously they don’t always teach the truth. For example, I’m not sure that LDS Apostle and First Presidency member J. Reuben Clark was teaching the truth when he taught the young women of the Church the following concept:

There are many such examples throughout church history but rehashing them to dig at the Church and its leaders has no value.

In my opinion, as the spirit of enlightenment gradually works on religious leaders their hearts soften and they more fully align their own will with God’s will. Their experiences are probably no different than ours. Perhaps that’s what revelation is about—time, experiences, patience and softening. The point is, I believe that we should not expect our leaders to always teach the truth. Sometimes they just don’t know—and that’s fine! We should not expect our leaders to be perfect either. But we should expect them to be straightforward.

In his post entitled, “Can Prophets Make Errors On Important Doctrines?” prominent LDS author Terryl Givens said, “We are told that the church, in the last days, is first temporal, and then spiritual. I take that to mean we have the organization in place, but it takes time to get all the doctrines and principles and practices right. I don’t know if the policy on gays will change or not. But I have confidence that every generation we get closer and closer to God’s ideal for the church’s organization and teachings.”

In a recent blog post entitled, “A Place for Our Fellow Saints” Tom Christofferson (a gay Mormon and brother of LDS Apostle D. Todd Christofferson) wrote, “We might also ask ourselves if it is helpful, when approaching the Lord for further knowledge, to begin with a certainty of what He will not reveal.”

For me, instead of looking to prophets and apostles to “always teach the truth” I’d rather look to them to help me strengthen my faith in the Lord, Jesus Christ. According to Elder Neil L. Andersen in his April 2018 General Conference address a prophet’s greatest responsibility and most precious gift to us is to testify of Jesus Christ:

Variable #4:  Scriptures, and Their Interpretation

Both ancient and modern scriptures, to at least some small degree must be considered in the context in which they were written, acknowledging susceptibility to error and paying close attention to their interpretation.

Discernment and personal revelation must always be part of our scripture study—even our study of the Book of Mormon. Prominent LDS author Terryl Givens wrote in his book The Crucible of Doubt:  “Joseph Smith was speaking in relative terms when he said the Book of Mormon was the ‘most correct book.’ Even in that scriptural record, Nephi reminded readers that if he erred as author, so ‘did they err of old.’ And the other scriptures would presumably be ‘less correct’ if the Book of Mormon were ‘the most correct.’ If the Bible is only the word of God ‘as far as it is translated correctly,’ then clearly it is not the word of God in every aspect of its present form. If many ‘plain and precious things’ were removed, then many plain and precious things are missing… One lesson Latter-day Saints should take from all this is the greater responsibility to model Joseph’s practice of combining spiritual guidance with intellectual effort to discern the Divine voice.”

Variable #5:  The Holy Ghost

Jesus said, “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.”  (John 14:26)

Variable #6:  Leaders’ Experiences, Perceptions, Charisma, Backgrounds, Personalities, Biases and Fallibilities (both individual and collective)

There are many examples of what I perceive as Variable #6’s impact on decision making in the Church. I’m not suggesting that’s a problem. In fact it should be expected and we should treat our well-intentioned leaders with respect and patience. They’re human too. Here are three small examples:

A number of years ago, when the stake presidency in my Orem, Utah stake decided that members of the stake should go home after stake conference and throw away all of their playing cards it was positioned as “the will of the Lord, the mind of the Lord, the word of the Lord, and the voice of the Lord”  and delivered by one of the stake president’s counselors who pounded his fists on the pulpit as he declared it! Hmmm… wow, this just wasn’t from God. I could feel it, and I know that there were many people sitting around me who could feel it too. However, it was  the stake presidency’s perception.

In 2008, during California’s Prop 8 battle I was serving in a Utah Valley University student ward bishopric. When a directive came down from the Church requiring bishoprics to rally ward members each evening to report to a nearby call center I just couldn’t do it. Students were asked to spend their evenings making outbound phone calls to California homes encouraging citizens to vote yes on Prop 8 regardless of whether or not the student even understood what Prop 8 was about. I apologized to the bishop for not helping but I just couldn’t participate. It just didn’t feel right to me, but apparently it was the leadership’s collective perception that this was the right thing to do.

Variable #7:  Economics

As with any large organization or business, economics always play a role.

Variable #8:  Existing and Changing Laws

The LDS Articles of Faith declare that as a church we “obey, honor, and sustain the law.” For example, when U.S. laws were passed making polygamy illegal the Church complied and ended the practice.

Variable #9:  Societal Norms and Changes, Scientific Evidence, Human Enlightenment and Societal Pressure

Variable #9 and Variable #6 are tightly connected. I’ve separated them because of a few subtle differences. However, some of the examples I’ve cited here might well fit under either variable. In my opinion there are many examples of Variable #9’s impact on decision making. Here are four briefly described examples:

A year ago the Church’s leadership rolled back a controversial 2015 policy that labeled Mormons in same-sex marriages “apostates” and barred their minor children from being baptized. The Church considers the original 2015 policy and the new 2019 policy to both be matters of revelation even though one reverses the other. But my feeling is that this decision was partially made after seeing the devastation left in the wake of the 2015 policy. And that’s a good thing! Certainly many church members rejoiced when it was reversed.

The graphic below was published online with the likely intent to disparage the Church’s leadership. But when I saw it, it had a much different effect on me:

For me, the graphic above represents hope. It reminds me that the Church’s leadership is watching, listening, and striving to do the right things. Do they get things wrong once in a while? Of course—and that’s OK. Given the many variables of decision making one would certainly expect that.

In his October 2013 General Conference address, Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf said:

In 1990 the Church deleted some of the language, images and ceremonial actions in the temple endowment ceremony that were violent, sexist and politically incorrect. And just a few of months ago more sexist elements were eliminated. The Church’s press release said, “Prophets have taught that there will be no end to such adjustments as directed by the Lord to his servants.”  Yes, I believe that—and, I believe that decisions like this also have something to do with societal norms and changes. And that’s OK.

In 1978 the Church changed the policy that disqualified black members from holding the priesthood and participating in temple ordinances. Latter-day prophets prior to 1978 would not make that change. For some of us, in hindsight it may seem discouraging that this didn’t happen long before 1978, but it still gives me hope. It both confirms the value of modern revelation as an important change variable and it reminds us to be patient with our leaders’ fallibilities.

When federal laws were passed making polygamy illegal, we complied with the law (and/or God spoke and told us to stop). Regardless of which reason you subscribe to (or both) when pressured by federal law President Wilford Woodruff issued the Manifesto which was accepted by the Church as binding in 1890 and led to the end of the official practice of plural marriage in the Church.

I’m not listing the four examples above to slam the Church. I’m suggesting it would be in the Church leadership’s best interest to simply be more transparent and better acknowledge the dynamics of decision making. Doing so would be a good thing, not a bad thing. And although I realize this is a progressive concept for a conservative church to embrace, in my opinion more honesty and openness will strengthen testimonies not weaken them.

Personal Revelation is Essential to Hope

Critics of the Church use its leaders’ weaknesses and biases as weapons to disparage them. This isn’t right. At the same time we cannot remove their human fallibility and biases from the equation. That’s a good thing, not a bad thing. Nobody expects them to be perfect. But that requires us to be thoughtful, discerning, and to rely more than ever on personal revelation.

Author Blaire Ostler wrote, “The anxiety of true agency is dizzying, horrifying, and messy. Yet, this is also a precious gift God has given us—so precious that God will not impinge on our agency. Some people choose to relinquish agency, push it away, or keep it at bay, but ignorance will not save us. The good news is we are not alone. We have each other.”

We not only have each other, we have the promise of help from the Lord’s Spirit as recently expressed by Church President Russell M. Nelson:

In the clip above, President Nelson quoted a scripture from the fourth chapter of Jacob in The Book of Mormon: “For the Spirit speaketh truth and lieth not … [I]t speaketh of things as they really are, and of things as they really will be.”  There are at least two subtle ways to take that scripture to heart. One way is to say that it means “things change” and the Spirit can help us understand what those changes will be. A second way to look at its meaning is that the Spirit can help us understand what is real  right now and what isn’t real  right now. Perhaps both ways of looking at it are correct. Either way, the scripture speaks to the importance of personal revelation.

God’s Ways and Man’s Ways

There are two nearly canonical maxims that we hear a lot in the Church. The first one comes from the Hebrew Prophet Isaiah who wrote, “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.”  Some church members, regardless of the topic being discussed use this scripture to defend the status quo by 1) equating “God’s way” to whatever the Church’s current position is, and then 2) summarily dismissing any other position out of hand by simply saying, “Well, God’s ways are just not man’s ways.”

In His day, Jesus’ disputes “…with the Scribes and Pharisees stemmed from the fact that they insisted on the meticulous performance of temporal laws such as ritual cleanliness, while the weighty laws of love of God and of neighbor remained largely unobserved,”  writes Dr. Avraham Gileadi, BYU Professor of Ancient Studies. “Jewish religious learning had regressed into the cold dissection and scrutiny of the letter of the law, while the Spirit of God was denied.”

In other words, the Jewish leadership was confused about God’s ways and man’s ways. Jesus tried to set them straight. His ways (God’s ways) often seemed counterintuitive. He said, “Love your enemies.”  He said, “The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.”  He taught that unless we become like little children (not highbrow gospel intellectuals), “ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”  He admonished us to “leave the ninety and nine”  to seek the one who has gone astray.

When it comes to God’s ways and man’s ways, as Latter-Day Saints do we stop to think about and ponder things long enough to really know which is which? Do we accept that the Church’s leaders always know  which is which—or, do we seek personal revelation to know for ourselves which is which and (perhaps as importantly) when which is which? Prior to 1978 the Church taught that “God’s way” was that blacks weren’t worthy of the Priesthood, and “man’s way” was that they deserved equality. After 1978 the Church taught the exact opposite. What was formerly man’s way was now God’s way.

In 2014 I was sitting in a class at church where a lesson was being taught on this subject. It was shortly after the Church released the statement “Race and the Priesthood” which explained that the Church’s previous position was rooted more in racism than in revelation. The class instructor was a black Priesthood holder who expressed, with tears streaming down his face that he always knew throughout his entire life (and certainly prior to 1978) that the Church’s position was never “God’s way.” How did he know that? He said that he knew it through unmistakable personal revelation.

Brigham Young cautioned church members when he said, “I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually… Let all persons be fervent in prayer, until they know the things of God for themselves and become certain that they are walking in the path that leads to everlasting life.”

From a recent post by the Faith Matters Foundation:

The Church is Still Being Restored

Recently, in a number of President Nelson’s remarks he’s been referring to “a process” of restoration or an “ongoing” restoration:

I talked about the first nearly canonical maxim that we hear a lot in the Church: “God’s ways are not man’s ways.”  The second one is that “God will never let the prophet lead the Church astray.”  While I don’t mean to sound disrespectful, as far as I can tell this has actually only been uttered by prophets and apostles, not by God himself. Is it a conflict of interest to only have apostles and prophets claiming prophetic infallibility?

Is the Church’s current position, that same-sex marriage is a sin “God’s way” or “man’s way?” For me, it’s something to consider. One day, could the Church teach the exact opposite the same way it does today with regards to blacks and the Priesthood? Could believing that the Restoration is fluid help a church member experiencing a faith crisis have hope? Could the idea of an ongoing restoration convince a member who is experiencing cognitive dissonance over the issue of same-sex marriage to stay a little longer and not abandon his or her faith traditions so readily? Maybe… If the Church’s leadership really gets behind the idea in both words and actions.

I understand why the Church’s leadership would be concerned about giving members the impression that behind the scenes things are more fluid than what is professed publicly. The Church is a global church with new members joining all the time. Most new members need simple absolutes to cling to while they’re building their testimonies. I understand that and I respect that as a real issue. Greater transparency could become a minefield in accomplishing the goal of supporting new members.

At the same time I hope the Church is beginning to realize that tipping their cards a little bit more can be a really good thing. In the internet age candor is rewarded. It builds trust. In my opinion it doesn’t need to diminish faith; it could strengthen it. Walking this fine line would certainly be a challenge but I believe with the Lord’s help the Church could do it.

Hope can be linked to a change of heart. Changes of heart precede charity.

LDS author Larry E. Dahl wrote, “Charity, like faith and hope before it, is bestowed by God upon those who prepare themselves to receive it. Mormon instructed members of the Church in his day, whom he described as ‘the peaceable followers of Christ, … that have obtained a sufficient hope by which ye can enter into the rest of the Lord’, to ‘pray unto the Father with all the energy of heart, that ye may be filled with this love, which he hath bestowed upon all who are true followers of his Son, Jesus Christ.’ Mormon’s plea and his earlier explanation of the characteristics of charity show that charity is an outgrowth of faith and hope that encompasses them both. How appropriate it is, then, to speak of these three principles in the order given—faith, leads to hope, and they develop into charity—charity being the ‘greatest’.”

Now let’s talk about charity.