What is the Purpose of a Christian University?

I have searched the internet far and wide for the commencement speech given by Alvin Plantinga in August of 1996.  In this speech, Plantinga begins to tackle questions concerning the purpose of a Christian University.  But since I could not find a link in any of my searches, here it is, copied and pasted, for your reading enjoyment (and in connection with this talk, I also recommend Elder Jeffrey R. Holland's 1988 talk entitled A School in Zion):

BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY COMMENCEMENT - 15 August 1996

Alvin Plantinga

John A. O’Brien Professor of Philosophy, Notre Dame

Honorary Doctoral Degree Recipient

President Monson, Elders, members of the board of trustees, President Bateman, parents, friends, faculty members, and especially graduates of 1996:

I’d like to say what a pleasure and honor it is to be with you here to take part in these exercises.  I’ve been at BYU before. I count David Paulsen of the Philosophy Department as a friend, and at least two of our graduate students in philosophy at Notre Dame are from BYU — Angela Wentz and Dennis Potter. So it’s a pleasure to be here. But it’s a pleasure mixed with a little fear and trepidation. That’s because commencement addresses are not at all in my regular line of work. I am a professor of philosophy and do just about what you think professors of philosophy do — teach classes on philosophy and write papers and books on the subject. A commencement address, though, is a very different kettle of fish.

For one thing, there are a whole lot more people here than you’d find in any of my classes — my classes hardly ever have to be held in the Notre Dame stadium. More important, a commencement is a ceremonial occasion, not an occasion for instruction. Commencement speakers are supposed to remind the graduates of the great opportunities they have had and will have, to warn them of the great challenges that lie before them as they embark upon the stormy seas of postcollege life, and to encourage them to face these challenges bravely and wisely, remembering, of course, what they have learned in college. Now that we are so close to the year 2000, a commencement speaker should probably add that we must take stock, take the long view, see where we’ve been, and see where we are going. Sometimes these stocktakings and long views don’t go exactly right; President Eisenhower once said, no doubt in a commencement speech, that “things are more like they are now than they’ve ever been before.” And ex‑president Bush once said that “things aren’t nearly as bad as they would be if they weren’t as good as they are.”  Well, at any rate, you can’t argue with that. You probably also think the main virtue of a proper commencement speech is brevity; as the commencement speaker at Notre Dame said this year, “Blessed is the commencement speaker who keepeth it short and delayeth not the party.”

Ceremonial events, in which we mark and celebrate significant occasions — occasions like this — are extremely important. Still, I want to do something just a bit different. There is something I want to say to you, something I want you to hear, something that means a great deal to me personally, and something I think is absolutely crucial to the health and welfare of the whole Christian community — Latter‑day Saints and Catholics and Protestants and Eastern Orthodox alike. This has to do with the very reason for having such universities as BYU and Noire Dame. Notre Dame and BYU are in certain important ways very much alike, and not merely because they both field impressive football teams. it is rather because both universities have a crucial religious role to play and a purpose that goes beyond this world. I want to say something about that purpose and role. Why should anyone want a Mormon university, or a Catholic or a Protestant university? Why have a BYU or a Notre Dame? Well, Notre Dame is of course a good place for Catholic young men to meet Catholic young women. It is also good  to have opportunities for worship easily available on campus, to be able to take courses in religion and theology, and to have Christian counseling available for students who need it. But these benefits, important as they are, do not go to the heart of the matter. There is something more, and something deeper.

I begin by going back to one of the truly great Christian thinkers of all time, the church father St. Augustine, who lived some 1600 years ago, 400 or so after the birth of Christ. One of his works is entitled The City of God; it is a great long book — 900 pages or so — and in it Augustine makes a leisurely tour through all of human history up to his time. (Indeed, he goes back to a time before human history, the time when Satan and his minions revolted against the rule of God and were thrown out of heaven.) Augustine sees human life and human history as involving a sort of struggle, a contest, a battle between two implacably opposed forces. He speaks of the Heavenly City or City of God on the one hand and the Earthly City or City of the World on the other. The Heavenly City, he says, is dedicated to the service of God and to his will and to his glory; but the earthly city is dedicated to the service of self. These two cities stand deeply opposed to each other: they are locked in mortal combat.

I believe Augustine was right, and right for our time as well as for his. The intellectual and spiritual world now, as at Augustine’s time, is an arena for a contest; its like a football game, except that the stakes are vastly higher. It is really a battleground on which rages a battle for men’2 and women’s souls. This battle is a three‑way contest. There are at present three main spiritual responses to the world, or perspectives on the world, or pictures of the world — three fundamental ways of thinking about what the world we live in is really like, what we ourselves are like, and what we must do to live the good life. The first of these perspectives is Christianity; since you all know a good bit about that, I shall say little about it.

     In addition to the Christian perspective there are, fundamentally, two others. The first is what I’ll call naturalism. To understand naturalism, think first of the Christian view of the world: there is God, the first being of the universe, who has created the world and all that it contains — the stars, the planets, mountains and seas, and all the living things including us human beings. We are created in the image of God; and the most important thing we can do is to get into the right relationship with him. To get the naturalistic perspective, you erase God from the picture and leave just the world. According to naturalism, there is no God; there is only nature. As Carl Sagan portentously intones, “The Cosmos is all there is, or ever was, or will be.” We human beings are insignificant parts of a gigantic cosmic machine that pays no attention to us at all. It is wholly indifferent to our needs and desires, our hopes and aspirations, our ideas of right and wrong. And the way to understand what is most important and distinctive about us — our ability to love, to act, to think, to use language; our humor and playacting; our art, philosophy, literature, history, science, morality, and even religion — the right way to understand all this, says the naturalist, is not in terms of our being images of God — there is no God — but in terms of our similarity to nonhuman nature. We are best seen as parts of nature and are to be understood in terms of our place in the natural world.

The form this perspective takes in our own day is broadly evolutionary. You know the story: the idea is that we human beings have evolved from lower forms of life. First there was just the primeval ooze; then life somehow appeared. Once living things came to be, they were subject to chance genetic mutations. Some of these mutations were heritable and turned out to be useful in the struggle for existence; they came to predominate in the population. By way of this sort of change all the living creatures in the world came to be — including us. And what is important about us human beings — religion and love and art and science and so on — what is important and distinctive about us must be understood in terms of our evolutionary origin. Each of these features arose, a bit at a time, by chance; the bits that turned out to be useful in the struggle for existence were perpetuated by natural selection.

Consider evolutionary explanations of love, for example. Love is an enormously important part of human life: love between men and women, between parents and children; love for one’s family, one’s friends, one’s university; love of church and country; love in all its diverse manifestations and infinite variety. Now, what is most important about love, and how shall we understand it? From the point of view of evolutionary naturalism, love arose, ultimately and originally, by way of chance genetic mutation; it had survival value, and therefore it persisted. Male and female human beings, like male and female hippopotami, get together to have children (cubs? calves? colts?) and stay together to raise them; this has survival value. Once we see that point, we understand the bottom line about that sort of love and see its basic significance; and the same goes for these other varieties and manifestations of love. And that, fundamentally, is what there is to say about love. From the naturalistic perspective, furthermore, what goes for love goes for those other distinctively human traits: art, literature, music; play and humor; science, philosophy, mathematics; our tendency to take morality and religion very seriously. All these things are to be understood in terms of our community with nonhuman nature.

Naturalism is enormously influential at present: newspapers, magazines, Sunday supplements, television programs — all of these are regularly full of talk about understanding ourselves from a naturalistic point of view and in terms of our evolutionary origin — not our divine origin, but our naturalistic, evolutionary origin. Those who endorse this view often seem to think that the way to find out how we human beings should live is to see how the other animals manage things; this is the naturalistic equivalent of the biblical “Go to the ant, thou sluggard” (Proverbs 6:6). I recently heard a TV talk show in which a scientist was belittling traditional sexual ethics and mores — “heterosexual pair bonding,” he called it — on the grounds that only three percent of the other animals do things this way. He didn’t say anything about plants, but no doubt even more interesting conclusions could be drawn there.

I don’t need to tell you that these naturalistic accounts of what human beings are like are completely out of accord with Christian ways of thinking. For example, the way to understand love, obviously, is not in terms of our evolutionary origins but in terms of our relationship to God. As the apostle John says, “God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him” (1 John 4:16). But naturalism assails us from all sides; it is extremely pervasive, and it is hard to escape its influence. Professor John Lucas of Oxford University declares that the orthodoxy of the academy threatens the intellectual wholeness and integrity of the Christian community and makes it hard for us to think about ourselves and our world in Christian ways.

I turn now to the second picture, the second rival to Christian ways of thinking; I’ll call it relativism. This picture begins with the startling idea that it is we ourselves — we human beings — who are somehow responsible for the basic structure of the world. This idea goes back to Protagoras, in the ancient world, with his claim that “man is the measure of all things.” The fundamental claim is that, contrary to what you might have thought, the world is the way it is because of what we human beings think and do. We apply categories or concepts to the world; and the world we live in is the way it is because of those categories and concepts. From a commonsense point of view, this is hard to take seriously: does the sun shine, for example, because of something we human beings do? If we stopped doing that thing, whatever it is, would the sun stop shining? That’s pretty hard to believe, and I don’t have the time to go into it enough to make it plausible. Not only is it hard to believe, it is also presumptuous in that it really puts us human beings in the place of God. In this way of thinking, it isn’t God, fundamentally, who is responsible for the way the world is; it is we people. This view seems implausible at first sight; nevertheless, it is extremely widespread at present, particularly in colleges and universities, and especially in the arts and humanities as opposed to the sciences.

In this second view, therefore, it is we human beings who somehow are responsible for the way the world is. This is brought out nicely by a story told about the famous big‑league umpire, Bill Clem. At a testimonial dinner, a speaker rose to praise Clem by saying, “He always calls them the way lie sees them.” Another speaker rose to disagree: “He calls them the way they are.” Whereupon Clem himself got up and said, “You’re both wrong. Until I call ‘em, they ain’t nothin’.”  This is the basic idea here: things in the world ain’t nothin’ until we human beings create or structure them. But there is a further step to reach full‑blown relativism. Suppose you think our world is somehow created or structured, made the way it is, by us human beings arid our ways of thinking. You may then note that human beings apparently do not all construct the same worlds. The world you

live in may be somewhat different from my world; and the world of Billy Graham is certainly very different from that of Carl Sagan or Hugh Hefner. Which one of these worlds, then, is the world as it really is?

Here it is an easy but fateful step to relativism as such: the thought that there simply isn’t any such thing as the way the world really is. There is the way it looks to me, the way it looks to you, the way it looks to Billy Graham, and the way it looks to Hugh Hefner: but there is no way that it is just itself. There are only these different versions; there is no way the world is that is the same for all of us, whether we like it or not, and whether we know it or not. There is no such thing as truth, objective truth, the same for everybody, no matter what we know or believe. Instead, there is my version of reality, the way things are relative to me, and your version, the way things are relative to you, and many other versions; and what is true in one version need not be true in another. So there isn’t any such thing as just plain truth; there is only truth relative to you, and to me, and to Carl Sagan, and so on. As Marlowe’s  Doctor Faustus in effect says, “Man is the measure of all things; I am a man; therefore I am the measure of all things” (see Christopher Marlowe, The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus [1604]). There is no such thing as the way the world is; there are only these different versions, and any one of them is as good as any other.

Relativism is extremely influential and seems to have seeped down into high school and junior high. When I began teaching, I noticed something I found very puzzling. When I would give reasons for or against a certain belief or claim, my students would sometimes say: “Well maybe that’s true for you, but it isn’t true for me. “I always used to think this was a peculiarly sophomoric confusion (excuse me, sophomores), but in fact it is much deeper than that. It is an expression of this relativistic way of thinking: there isn’t anything that is just plain true; there are only things that are true for you or me or Sam, and what is true for Sam needn’t be true for us. The whole idea of an objective truth, the same for all of us, in this view, is an illusion, or a bourgeois plot, or a silly mistake.

Like naturalism, relativism is obviously and deeply inconsistent with Christian ways of thinking. For, of course, the basic Christian claim is that things really are a certain way. We human beings really have sinned, really do need salvation; and Jesus Christ, the Son of God himself, really did die on the cross, making it possible for us to have life. These things, according to Christianity, are just plain true; they are not merely true for me and you but may be false for Carl Sagan or somebody else. It makes no difference what you and I, or Carl Sagan, or whoever thinks. We can categorize and carry on as much as we like; these things remain true and do not depend upon us for their truth. Perhaps this relativism is even more pernicious than naturalism, for it undercuts and does away with the very idea of truth. According to the Bible, Satan is the father of lies; and there is no bigger lie than the lie that there is no truth.

I could give a hundred more examples if I had the time and you had the patience; but neither of us has either, so I’ll go on to my conclusion. For this brings me back finally to the point where I began: What is a real Christian university like, and what should it aim at? It is many things, no doubt; but one of the very most important of its tasks is that of developing, promoting, and extending a Christian view of the world — a Christian view of the world God has created for us and a Christian view of ourselves. And this means that the Christian community must be intensely serious about Christian scholarship.

It must be intensely serious about at least two kinds of Christian scholarship. First, what is needed is Christian cultural criticism, consciousness raising — testing the spirits, as we may call it. We must see that the spiritual and intellectual culture of our day is deeply involved in this contest for basic human allegiance. We must really understand that there is a battle here, and we must know who and what the main contestants are and how this contest pervades the university and the rest of modern culture. These perspectives are seductive; they are widespread; they are the majority views in the universities and in modern culture generally. Modern intellectual and spiritual culture is secular culture; as Stephen Carter puts it, modern intellectual life is dominated by the “culture of disbelief.”  Fifty years ago William F. Buckley wrote a book entitled God and Man at Yale; in it he argued that unbelief and atheism were widespread at Yale. The Yale authorities tried to defend themselves by claiming that Buckley exaggerated. Nowadays, by contrast, one way to run Yale down among academics would be to claim that there are many Christians there. We live in a world dominated by naturalism and relativism: we imbibe them with our mother’s milk; and it is easy to embrace them and their projects in a sort of unthoughtful, unselfconscious way, just because they do dominate our intellectual culture. But these perspectives are also deeply opposed to Christianity; these ways of thinking distort our views of ourselves and of the world. To the degree that we are not aware of them and do not understand their allegiances, they make for confusion and for lack of intellectual and spiritual wholeness and integrity among us Christians. Christians of all sorts — Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, Latter‑day Saints — all must be aware of these matters. We Christians are all in this thing together.

And of course all of us Christians are in this thing together; it isn’t a problem just for academics and intellectuals. I realize that not everyone here is or intends to become an academic, and I also realize that I probably sound very much like an academic myself. Well, I can’t help it; that’s what I am, and I may as well confess it right up front. But, of course, the problem here isn’t one just for academics; we are all subject to the blandishments of contemporary culture, and we must all be aware of the spiritual roots of the culture with which we are surrounded and bombarded.

So one thing the whole Christian community needs is this testing of the spirits. But the Christian university is where the Christian community does its most sustained thinking; it is in Christian universities that this testing of the spirits can be done in the deepest and most systematic way. One extremely important job of the Christian university, therefore, is to examine contemporary intellectual culture and contemporary intellectual projects, to discern their roots, and to see what perspective these projects embody and arise from and how they fit with a Christian view of the world; and Christian academics must then make their findings known to the rest of us.

This is hard enough. But there is something even more difficult: a Christian university must work at the various areas of science and scholarship in a way that is right from a Christian perspective. We must not assume automatically that Christians can sensibly work at the various disciplines in just the same way as the rest of the academic world. There are all these different areas of scholarship: philosophy, history, psychology, economics, sociology, anthropology, biology. In working at these areas, shouldn’t we take for granted Christian answers to the great questions about God, ourselves, and creation and then go on from there to address the narrower questions of the various disciplines? Must Christian psychologists or economists or philosophers ply their trade in the very same way as it’s done in centers of secular scholarship? Certainly not. A Christian university ought to address these questions from a Christian point of view.

So we need Christian scholarship, and that is one basic and important reason why we need Christian universities. My own university, the University of Notre Dame, has a long way to go along these lines; perhaps the same is true of BYU. This task of building Christian scholarship and Christian culture, I believe, is laid upon us by the Lord himself. We must thank him for what has already been accomplished, but we must work hard to do better. And again, we Christians are all in this together, academics and nonacademics alike. The Christian academic’s most important assignment is really that of serving the Christian community; but then the whole Christian community must endorse, support, pray for, and pay for this crucial job of the Christian university. So in conclusion, I say to you graduates and to everybody else as well: seriously endorse this undertaking. Give thanks to the Lord for what this university has been and is; support it in accomplishing this task of Christian scholarship; insist that it carry out the task with zeal, patience, discernment, and deep Christian commitment. Mormon’s are known the world over for industry, thrift, sobriety, godliness, plain living, and high thinking, Is it too much to hope that this great Mormon university will be similarly known for courageous and deep and powerful Christian scholarship? That is my hope and prayer for BYU.      Thank you.

America in Decline?

Is America in decline?  Is the future bleak?  None has communicated more plainly and lucidly the reality of  our present situation than the former LDS Prophet, President Gordon B. Hinckley.  In the introduction to his book Standing For Something, President Hinckley diagnoses our national illness (what he terms "The Secularization of America") while prescribing a hopeful and effective long-term remedy.  He who hath ears to hear, let him hear. 

John Hancock: A Noble Spirit Before God

Approximately one year ago I listened to a brief presentation given by a member of the presidency of the Mount Timpanogos Temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  The speaker recounted the story of a vision received by Wilford Woodruff while he was serving as the President of the St. George Temple.  In this vision, a group of historically eminent men, including many of the Founding Fathers, appeared to Wilford Woodruff to request the redemptive blessings, ordinances and covenants of the temple.  I was surprised and somewhat troubled to learn that although many of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were among this group of eminent men, John Hancock was not one of them.

A few months ago I attended an endowment session in the St. George temple, and I was reminded of Wilford Woodruff's vision.  After doing a little research, I discovered that the reason why Wilford Woodruff did not perform the proxy ordinances on behalf of John Hancock was that others had already accomplished this task prior to Wilford Woodruff's vision.

Although I am not directly related to the original John Hancock (he had two children, a son and a daughter who both died in their youth), and although my parents may have chosen to name me after the New Testament John (John the Baptist or John the Beloved), I have, for many reasons, still felt a connection to this early American patriot.  For example, I was born in 1976, the bicentennial anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, and my father, Ralph Hancock, has written and taught extensively about the American Revolution and the American Founding (see here, here, here, and here).  When I was in grade school, I even wrote a report about his life, which included my own rendition of his famous signature on the Declaration of Independence (and for those Chris Farley fans out there, no, it's not Herbie Hancock).

But not until just a couple of days ago, after picking up a copy of The Constitution of the United States of America, and Selected Writings of the Founding Fathers, did I realize why, in spite of his obvious shortcomings, I have more than just cursory reasons to be proud of my namesake.  On March 5, 1775 John Hancock delivered a speech (The Boston Massacre Oration) that he had prepared (probably with the help of his mentor Samuel Adams) for the occasion of the fourth annual commemoration of the Boston Massacre.  If you are ever tempted to feel ungrateful, complacent or neglectful of the precious gift of liberty, might I recommend a perusal of this speech to put a little fire into your belly, so to speak.  John Hancock and his cohorts were true Sons of Liberty, as they called themselves, and they were noble men.  Their hatred of tyranny was so fierce, and their love of liberty so fervent, that even the fear of death was utterly abolished from their hearts and minds.  As Wilford Woodruff later recorded: “I am going to bear my testimony to this assembly, if I never do it again in my life, that those men who laid the foundation of this American government and signed the Declaration of Independence were the best spirits the God of heaven could find on the face of the earth. They were choice spirits, not wicked men. General Washington and all the men that labored for the purpose were inspired of the Lord. Another thing I am going to say here, because I have a right to say it. Every one of those men that signed the Declaration of Independence, with General Washington, called upon me, as an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ, in the Temple at St. George, two consecutive nights, and demanded at my hands that I should go forth and attend to the ordinances of the House of God for them.... I told these brethren that it was their duty to go into the Temple and labor until they had got endowments for all of them. The did it. Would those spirits have called upon me, as an Elder in Israel to perform that work if they had not been noble spirits before God? They would not.” (Wilford Woodruff, Conference Report, April 1898, p. 89-90.)

True Doctrine

What is the difference between how the world works, and how the Lord works?

President Ezra Taft Benson taught: "The Lord works from the inside out. The world works from the outside in. The world would take people out of the slums. Christ takes the slums out of people and then they take themselves out of the slums. The world would mold men by changing their environment. Christ changes men who then change their environment. The world would shape human behavior, but Christ can change human nature." (Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, pg. 79)

Similarly, Elder Boyd K. Packer taught: "True doctrine, understood, changes attitudes and behavior. The study of the doctrines of the gospel will improve behavior quicker than a study of behavior will improve behavior." (Little Children)



Then, what is true doctrine?


The Prophet Joseph Smith taught that “the fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.” (TPJS, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith [1976], 121)


This truth is what Elder Boyd K. Packer has referred to as "the very root of Christian doctrine."  "You may know much about the gospel as it branches out from there," Elder Packer continued, "but if you only know the branches and those branches do not touch that root, if they have been cut free from that truth, there will be no life nor substance nor redemption in them."

The Lord himself taught: "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." (John 15:5)

In a later revelation, the Lord taught his disciples:

"And again, I command thee that thou shalt pray vocally as well as in thy heart; yea, before the world as well as in secret, in public as well as in private.
And thou shalt declare glad tidings, yea, publish it upon the mountains, and upon every high place, and among every people that thou shalt be permitted to see.
And thou shalt do it with all humility, trusting in me, reviling not against revilers.
And of tenets thou shalt not talk, but thou shalt declare repentance and faith on the Savior, and remission of sins by baptism, and by fire, yea, even the Holy Ghost.
Behold, this is a great and the last commandment which I shall give unto you concerning this matter; for this shall suffice for thy daily walk, even unto the end of thy life."  (D&C 19:28-32)

Hyrum Smith, the brother of the Prophet Joseph Smith understood and followed this admonition: “Preach the first principles of the Gospel—preach them over again: you will find that day after day new ideas and additional light concerning them will be revealed to you. You can enlarge upon them so as to comprehend them clearly. You will then be able to make them more plainly understood by those who teach.” (History of the Church, 6:323)

And what are the first principles of the Gospel?

"We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost." (Articles of Faith 1:4)

For a deeper understanding of and appreciation for how the Lord works, for true doctrine, and for the good news of Jesus Christ and the first principles of the Gospel, I suggest Elder Maxwell's timeless classic Not My Will, but Thine.

The Christmas Chorus

Halloween is upon us.  But soon enough the darkness of the pagan festivities will give way to light of Thanksgiving and of Christmas.  If you (or someone you know) are looking for ways to get into the Christmas Spirit, might I suggest that you attend the Christmas Chorus on December 7 or 8, 2013.  Martha Sargent and her hosts of angelic voices will delight and inspire their audiences with traditional hymns, selections from Benjamin Britten's Ceremony of Carols, and music by John Rutter.  You will not be disappointed.  

Gather Ye Rosebuds

Today my mother sent me a picture of her father when he was a young man.  She informed me that he did exercises like clockwork from 6:00 until 6:30 every morning for more than 37 years.

Of course, my grandfather did much more than just exercise and wrestle.  I have read his journals, and I know that he lived a solid life of Christian discipleship and service.  He was devoted to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and to his family.  I have read several passages of his journals in which he shared his love for God and for others, and his conviction concerning the life and mission of the Savior.  He shared the hope for eternal life that can only come through the merits and mercies of Jesus Christ.

As I see my grandfather's face and think of his noble life, I am inspired to improve, and to become a better man. 

Then I am reminded of another image.  This time it is a picture of my father's father, who also lived a noble life and was a blessing to all who knew him (and a blessing to many who did not know him).  I have fond memories of my paternal grandfather, whether it was fishing off the Outer Banks of North Carolina, catching crabs in the Puget Sound, shooting arrows with a bow that he made from wood, visiting him in his carpet store, or just listening to him read Dr. Seuss stories.  

Both of my grandfathers have long since passed away, but there is another element of their legacy that I prize even more than any of the good memories that we shared.  You see, though my grandfathers were not perfect, each loved and cherished his wife with all of his heart.  This is certainly a tradition worth living up to, and these are big shoes to fill. (see Jacob 3:7)

Nevertheless, when I remember this legacy of love, the words of the poet come readily to mind:

"Gather ye rosebuds while ye may, / Old Time is still a-flying: / And this same flower that smiles to-day / To-morrow will be dying." (Robert Herrick, To the Virgins, to Make Much of Time)

   

Jerusalem: A City, A Movie, A Book

This evening a friend and I went to Thanksgiving Point to view the spectacular Jerusalem: The Movie, a panoramic, aerial and historical IMAX film rendering of the city that was at one time considered the center of the world.

Producers Taran Davies, George Duffield, and Daniel Ferguson take the audience on a 45 minute tour of Jerusalem as seen through the eyes of three girls: one Jewish, one Muslim and one Christian.  The views of Israel and the major holy sites of the Holy Land are breathtaking, and the cultural commentaries are balanced and informative.

Jerusalem: The Movie is a good introduction to a city that looms large in world history, and whose future promises to be as exciting, if not more so, than its illustrious past. For those who wish to delve deeper into the subject of Jerusalem, I also recommend the Deseret Book publication Jerusalem: The Eternal City. This book provides a detailed survey of past, present and future Jerusalem.  Next to actually travelling to the Holy Land for a visit, Jerusalem: The Movie and  Jersualem: The Eternal City are great resources for anyone who is interested in this unique city.  

The Lord Looks on the Heart: An Introduction to Malcolm Gladwell

If you haven't heard of Malcolm Gladwell, you probably will in the near future.  Actually, if you are reading this, then you have just heard of him.  So, who is he?

Malcolm Gladwell is a popular journalist, best-selling author and public speaker. He has written five books: The Tipping Point: How Little Things Make a Big Difference, Blink: The Power of Thinking without Thinking, Outliers: The Story of Success, What the Dog Saw: And Other Adventures, and David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits and the Art of Battling Giants.  

Thus far I have read two of his books (Outliers and David and Goliath, and a the first part of Blink), and watched his Ted-X presentation on happiness and spaghetti sauce.  He is certainly a creative story teller and a talented orator.  Plus, his hair style and demeanor are somewhat endearing.  

Gladwell weaves his tales out of research gleaned in the fields of sociology and psychology, tracing seemingly unexpected patterns and themes to form an inspirational narrative.  After finishing David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits and the Art of Battling Giants, I have gathered that Gladwell has perhaps unwittingly placed his finger on a few important principles.  The reason I mention this is because Gladwell begins his most recent book with a verse of scripture from the Bible: 1 Samuel 16:7:

"But the Lord said to Samuel, 'Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him; for the Lord does not see as mortals see; they look on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.'"

The important principles that Gladwell has perhaps innocently and unknowingly deduced from his studies and musings are that truth and wisdom are to be found in the word of God and in the lessons derived from difficult experiences.  I say unknowingly only because his focus is not to tell the truth, but to tell a story.  And I am not alone in assessing Gladwell's work as charming but somewhat misleading (see, for example, here, here, here and here). Granted, Gladwell is more of an entertainer and an rhetorician than a philosopher or a serious thinker, but his influence is pervasive enough to merit careful attention and scrutiny. 

This is not to say that I doubt his sincerity at all.  In fact, from what I have read of his work, I get the impression that he, like the rest of us, is on a quest to discover something true.  The problem is that he presents his stories as a record of patterns and facts drawn from research, and he does so to an increasingly vast audience that is liable to receive these stories as truth. Again, I don't fault him for this because at least he makes it clear in a recent interview that his writing and speaking are evidences of the process of "seeking" more than the results of "finding":

"I’ve had a different journey. I had drifted away a little bit. This book has brought me back into the fold. I was so incredibly struck in writing these stories by the incredible power faith had in people’s lives, it has made a profound impact on me in my belief. That’s been the completely unexpected effect of writing this book. I am in the process of rediscovering my own faith again."

Gladwell derives the substance of his latest book from the miraculous victory of a young shepherd over a formidable and a well-armed opponent.  In a nutshell, his thesis is that the success of "underdogs" often comes as a result of more than sheer persistence, luck or miraculous intervention, but by fighting in an unconventional manner:

"I think there has been an overemphasis of the idea that David’s victory was improbable. When you look closer to that story and you understand the full historical context, you see it from a different perspective. Here was a guy who brilliantly changed the rules of combat. He was equipped with a sling that was routinely used by armies to defeat the sort that Goliath was. David was very skilled at using the weapon and he was filled with the spirit of the Lord. Put those things together, why is he an underdog? He’s smarter than his opponent, better armed and he had this extraordinary force in his heart. When you understand that perspective, you understand that sometimes our instinct about where power comes from is wrong." (from the interview linked above)

Gladwell begins the first chapter of his latest book by posing questions that so-called "underdogs" may often ask themselves: "Should I play by the rules or follow my own instincts?" "Shall I persevere or give up?" "Should I strike back or forgive?"  In the subsequent chapters, Gladwell answers these questions by drawing inspiration from a variety of groups and individuals who have overcome challenges or adverse circumstances.

In summary, Malcolm Gladwell is a skillful narrator, almost like a minstrel, whose work is not necessarily based in solid historical facts or reliable science.  He himself admits as much:

“I am a story-teller, and I look to academic research … for ways of augmenting story-telling. The reason I don’t do things their [academic] way is because their way has a cost: it makes their writing inaccessible. If you are someone who has as their goal ... to reach a lay audience ... you can't do it their way.” 

And reach a lay audience he has.  Whether or not that lay audience will be able to examine his claims
critically without accepting them at face value remains to be seen.  Nevertheless, I am inclined to be sympathetic toward a man with such amazing hair (see right) who seems to have a great affinity for the Bible, as well as what appears to be a respectful deference toward those who have emerged triumphantly from adverse circumstances:

"The right question is whether we as a society need people who have emerged from some kind of trauma – and the answer is that we plainly do." (see here)

   

Fire for the Deed

When I was in the fifth grade I had a wonderful teacher who instilled in her students a love for American Heritage.  In fact, the school that my brothers and I attended was aptly named American Heritage School, and Mrs. Cornell, my fifth grade teacher, revered the lives and the legacies of those who did so much to help establish the United States of America.  She was a particularly devoted advocate of the young Italian who, in 1492, sailed under the auspices of the Spanish crown.

At American Heritage we prayed and recited the national anthem daily. We sang in choirs and enacted plays about the American Revolution. We were taught mathematics, science, grammar, history and other subjects. But anyone who remembers Mrs. Cornell could not soon forget her great admiration for Christopher Colombus.

If I hadn't been so busy flirting with the grade school grade beauties, battling on the playground basketball court, or getting sent home from school for valiantly defending myself in a snowball fight, I might have better appreciated that which Mrs. Cornell was trying to teach us.  In retrospect it is clear that this great teacher was imbuing her students with a sense of respect, and inculcating gratitude for the precious gift of liberty.  Of course, these principles were not alien to me at the time, but Mrs. Cornell's lessons did much to reinforce and build upon lessons already learned at home.

Unfortunately, the history of Christopher Columbus often tends toward two extremes.  The first and most destructive extreme is found in the relativism of the revisionist historian.  These are the would-be historians who despise America and anything that made America great, including one of its earliest explorers, because the discovery and colonization of America contradicts their multicultural worldview.  For a candid assessment of this extreme, consider Dinesh D'Souza's First Things article from 1995 entitled "The Crimes of Cristopher Columbus."  On the opposite extreme, others, not unlike some of the ancient American inhabitants, try to elevate Columbus to the status of a deity. Truthfully, Columbus was neither a demon nor a demigod. He was, as Mrs. Cornell taught long ago, a man who acted under inspiration for purposes greater than his own:

"The Lord was well disposed to my desire and he bestowed upon me courage and understanding; knowledge of seafaring he gave me in abundance . . . and of geometry and astronomy likewise . . . The Lord with provident hand unlocked my mind, sent me upon the sea, and gave me fire for the deed. Those who heard of my enterprise called it foolish, mocked me and laughed. But who can doubt that the Holy Ghost inspired me?" - (see Jacob Wasserman, Columbus, the Don Quixote of the Seas)

As part of an extensive vision, the Book of Mormon prophet Nephi witnessed this same voyage:

"And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land." (1 Ne. 13:12)

Consider for a moment that during his first voyage, and after having sailed for many day toward a hoped for destiny, under the rising threat of a mutinous crew, Columbus had ample courage and perseverance in the face of uncertainty to add a simple note to his diary: "This day we sailed on."  (See Lillian Eichler Watson, ed., Light from Many Lamps (1979), 138.)

"The temple work for the fifty-six signers of the Declaration of Independence and other founding fathers has been done. All these appeared to Wilford Woodruff when he was president of the St. George Temple. President George Washington was ordained a high priest at that time. You will also be interested to know that, according to Wilford Woodruff’s journal, John Wesley, Benjamin Franklin, and Christopher Columbus were also ordained high priests—by proxy, of course—at that time.  When one casts doubt about the character of these noble sons of God, I believe he or she will have to answer to the God of heaven for it. " - Ezra Taft Benson

Beyond Our Present Conception: Truman G. Madsen's Four Essays on Love

What a great time to be alive!  Have you ever wondered why you were born when you were born, and not, say, in some distant land during some obscure period of the earth's history?  You and I are alive today, a season that prophets have longed for over millennia, and that poets and philosophers have anxiously anticipated!  Addressing a group of students at Brigham Young University in 1979, Ezra Taft Benson declared:

“All through the ages the prophets have looked down through the corridors of time to our day. Billions of the deceased and those yet to be born have their eyes on us. Make no mistake about it—you are a marked generation. There has never been more expected of the faithful in such a short period of time as there is of us” (Ezra Taft Benson, “In His Steps,” inSpeeches of the Year, 1979 [Provo: Brigham Young University Press, 1980], p. 59).

More recently, President Thomas S. Monson proffered these encouraging words:

“This is a wonderful time to be on earth. While there is much that is wrong in the world today, there are many things that are right and good. There are marriages that make it, parents who love their children and sacrifice for them, friends who care about us and help us, teachers who teach. Our lives are blessed in countless ways.” – President Thomas S. Monson

Just imagine... the future is brighter still!  Yes, this is a wonderful time to be on earth; a great time to be alive.  And yet, the Apostle Paul prophesied "know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away." (2 Timothy 3:1-5)

Of these perilous times prior to His second coming, Jesus warned that "because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold." (Matt. 24:12)  In a glorious vision of the latter days, the ancient prophet Enoch beheld that the God of Heaven "looked upon the residue of the people, and he wept." (Moses 7:28)

Puzzled, Enoch meekly asked His Father in Heaven, "How is it that the heavens weep, and shed forth their tears as the rain upon the mountains? How is it that thou canst weep, seeing thou art holy, and from all eternity to all eternity?"  (Moses 7:28-29)  

To this inquiry, God, perhaps with tears still running down His heavenly cheeks, replied: "Behold these thy brethren; they are the workmanship of mine own hands, and I gave unto them their knowledge, in the day I created them; and in the Garden of Eden, gave I unto man his agency; / And unto thy brethren have I said, and also given commandment, that they should love one another, and that they should choose me, their Father; but behold, they are without affection, and they hate their own blood." (Moses 7:32-34)

As Enoch continued to listen, God told him "all the doings of the children of men" and Enoch "looked upon their wickedness, and their misery, and wept and stretched forth his arms, and his heart swelled wide as eternity; and his bowels yearned; and all eternity shook." (Moses 7:41)  These verses paint a picture: God, with tears streaming down like rain, and Enoch with arms stretched forth, a picture that pointed to the moment in time when Jesus would be hung upon the Cross, fulfilling the greatest act of love in time and all eternity.  This is the love that conquers hate and transforms the world.  God planned it, Jesus fulfilled it, and Enoch knew it:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

Charles Dickens began his famous novel A Tale of Two Cities with an observation that could well describe the time in which we now live: "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair…"

Every once in a while, an author comes along who is able to capture in words, to the extent that it is possible to do so, the kind of love that conquers hate and transforms the world; the kind of love that makes bad times good; that bestows wisdom; that makes incredulity unbelievable; brightens the darkness; and makes a springtime out of winter.  With this goal in mind, and in the tradition of others who have approached the topic of love directly (such as Plato in his Symposium, and C.S. Lewis in The Four Loves) Truman G. Madsen composed a short volume called Four Essays on Love.  I recommend that this little book be used as a hopeful spark to kindle fires of love in the hearts and homes of those who wish to read it. It has the potential to bring the reader closer to understanding that which Joseph Smith termed "one of the chief characteristics of Diety":

"Love is one of the chief characteristics of Deity, and ought to be manifested by those who aspire to be the sons of God. A man filled with the love of God, is not content with blessing his family alone, but ranges through the whole world, anxious to bless the whole human race." (History of the Church, 4:227)

The four brief chapters of Madsen's book are "Joseph Smith and the Sources of Love," "How to Be loved and Beloved," "The Language of Love at Home," and "Human Anguish and Divine Love."  In less than 100 pages, this book will delight you as it brings to your remembrance things you already knew but may have found difficult to describe.  And it might just teach you something that you didn't know, or that you were just waiting to discover... namely, in the words of Madsen himself, that "we have capacities and privileges for love beyond our present conception." (Four Essays on Love, p. 25) Enjoy!  

  

Good Timber

GOOD TIMBER

The tree that never had to fight,

For sun and sky and air and light,

But stood out on the open plain,

And always got it’s share of rain,

Never became a forest king,

But lives and dies a scrawny thing.



The man who never had to toil,

To gain and farm his patch of soil,

Who never had to win his share,

Of sun and sky and light and air,

Never became a manly man,

But lived and died as he began.



Good timber does not grow in ease,

The stronger the wind, the stronger trees

The farther sky, the greater the length

The more the storm, the more the strength,

By sun and cold, by rain and snow,

In tree and men good timbers grow.



Where thickest lies the forest growth

We find the patriarchs of both.

And they hold counsel with the stars

Whose broken branches show the scars

This is the common law of life.



Douglas Mallock

Treasure up the Word

During the past month, Elder Jay E. Jensen, an emeritus general authority and former member of the Presidency of the Quorum of the Seventy of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, taught a series of institute classes on the Book of Mormon to a group of young (and not so young) LDS single adults before embarking on his next assignment as President of the Cochabamba Bolivia Temple.  The doctrine, testimonies and insights shared during this brief time helped to fortify, deepen, and expand my personal testimony of the Book of Mormon, and to strengthen my faith in, and love for, both God the Father and His Beloved Son Jesus Christ.  In connection with the institute classes, Elder Jensen recommended a book (that I just finished reading) that he wrote as a companion to the scriptures and a source of encouragement for improved scripture study by the homiletic title Treasure Up the Word.

While it would be impractical to record everything that Elder Jensen taught, or everything contained in his slim but scintillating volume Treasure Up the Word, perhaps a brief summary of both the classes and the book may be of worth to someone somewhere who is seeking greater light and truth, or who is simply seeking to improve his or her scripture study.  Of course, the most important teachings are to be discovered between the written lines or behind the spoken word, but much of what Elder Jensen taught in the class can be found in his book.  One priceless spiritual gem to consider is found in the third chapter of Treasure Up the Word:

"Looking at the scriptures is like looking at a favorite tree, one half of which is above ground and has always been open to study and examination, either close up (micro) or from a distance (macro).  But now you realize that one half of the tree is hidden beneath the ground - the roots.  These life-giving extremities of a tree send nourishment to all that is visible above ground.  What we can see of the tree above ground can be likened to reading and studying.  Like the tree that can be examined close up or at a distance, the scriptures written in columns, verses, sentences, paragraphs, words, and so forth, can be examined either close up or at a distance.  However, the roots under the ground are hidden to the mortal eye.  It is so also with the scriptures: much is hidden to the mortal eye.  Only by searching, pondering, likening, and prayerful reflection will we discover hidden truths. / Until we discover in the scriptures the full tree- roots, trunk, branches, and leaves- we have yet to find the promised height, breadth, and depth in those holy books.  It is a truth that some of the most precious truths in the scriptures are hidden the deepest and with the greatest care.  The Prophet Joseph Smith reminded us that 'the things of God are of deep import; and time, and experience, and careful and ponderous and solemn thoughts can only find them out' (TPJS, p. 137)"

The titles of the chapters in Treasure Up the Word include "The Spirit and the Scriptures," "The Power of the Word," "The Three P's of Scripture Study," "Scripture Marking," "Principles of Substitution," "Lists," "Definitions," "Visualizing," "Homilies," "Uniting Truths," "Revelation and Scripture Study," "Story Parallels," and "Promises of the Living Prophets."  Each short chapter is replete with spiritual power and practical counsel.

In fact, while I was reading about some of Elder Jensen's family, teaching and leadership experiences, I was reminded of a few statements made by Brigham Young about the character and teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith:

"The excellency of the glory of the character of Brother Joseph Smith was that he could reduce heavenly things to the understanding of the finite. When he preached to the people—revealed the things of God, the will of God, the plan of salvation, the purposes of Jehovah, the relation in which we stand to him and all the heavenly beings—he reduced his teachings to the capacity of every man, woman and child, making them as plain as a well defined pathway. This should have convinced every person that ever heard him, of his divine authority and power, for no other man was able to teach as he could, and no person can reveal the things of God, but by the revelations of Jesus Christ." (see footnote 6 of Elder Christofferson's BYU Idaho Devotional Speech The Prophet Joseph Smith)

On other occasions, Brigham Young declared:

"What a delight it was to hear Brother Joseph talk upon the great principles of eternity: he would bring them down to the capacity of a child, he would unite heaven with earth” (459; also in JD 4:54).

and,

“In my experience I never did let an opportunity pass of getting with the Prophet Joseph and of hearing him speak in public or in private, so that I might draw understanding form the fountain from which he spoke, that I might have it and bring it forth when it was needed” (JD 12:269)

I could sense in Elder Jensen's teaching, and in his simple but profound little book, a portion of the gift that Joseph Smith possessed and that Joseph Smith's friend, Parley P. Pratt described as follows,

"His [Joseph Smith's] language abounding in original eloquence peculiar to himself—not polished—not studied—not smooth and softened by education and refined by art: but flowing forth in its own narrative simplicity, and profusely abounding in a variety of subject and manner. He interested and edified while, at the same time, he amused and entertained his audience: and none listened to him that were ever weary with his discourse. I have known him to retain a congregation of willing and anxious listeners for many hours together, in the midst of cold or sunshine, rain, or wind, while they were laughing at one moment and weeping the next. Even his most bitter enemies were generally overcome if he could once get in their ears. (45–46)."

This last statement resonates with the conclusion of Elder Jensen's book Treasure Up the Word, in a brief chapter entitled "Promises of the Living Prophets":

"However talented men may be in administrative matters; however eloquent they may be in expressing their views; however learned they may be in worldly things- they will be denied the sweet whisperings of the Spirit that might have been theirs unless they pay the price of studying, pondering, and praying about the scriptures." - Bruce R. McConkie

If you or someone you know is seeking to improve his or her scripture study and to enhance his or her communication with the Divine, I feel confident in promising that Elder Jensen's primer Treasure Up the Word will point you in the right direction and help you gain a greater appreciation for the power of the word of God.  It might just give you or someone you know that extra incentive to pay the price for a stronger testimony of the truth, and to obtain the promise of the Lord:

"And whoso treasureth up my word, shall not be deceived, for the Son of Man shall come, and he shall send his angels before him with the great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together the remainder of his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other." (JS-Matthew 1:37) 

A Little Learning is a Dangerous Thing

"A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: / there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, / and drinking largely sobers us again." - Alexander Pope, An Essay on Criticism

(see Elder D. Todd Christofferson's recent devotional address on Joseph Smith at BYU Idaho)

To the Heavy Laden

"The question is not whether we will experience seasons of adversity but how we will weather the storms." - Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf

If ever you feel discouraged, distraught, dejected, or downright depressed... I'm sorry, there is nothing that I can do for you.

However, some books that I have read, such as the Bible, would suggest that in these difficult moments you are actually in very good company.  I won't pretend to understand what you are going through, but in the spirit of friendship, I do want to share just three brief examples of individuals who triumphed over adversity.  These three individuals have at least two things in common: they each experienced debilitating difficulties, and they each triumphed over adversity through faith in God:

The first is Jack Rushton, the second is Nick Vujicic, and the third is Tom Dobson. Perhaps you will find something of inspiration in their stories, and when you triumph, others are sure to find inspiration in your story as well.

"Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? / As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. / Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. / For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, / Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord."   (Romans 8:35-39)

Fides Quaerens Intellectum

Tonight I attended the BYU College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences 2013 Summerhays Lecture entitled Hearing Cosmic Harmony Again, by Dr. Daniel Peterson.  With his usual cheerful and self-deprecating humor, Dr. Peterson unfolded the history of scientific thought, from Aristotle's unmoved mover to Einstein's cosmological constant and beyond.

Dr. Peterson used Psalms 19:1-4 as a springboard, weaving the idea of the "music of the spheres" throughout his address.  To enumerate certain clues that point to a purpose driven and divinely intelligent designer of the universe, Peterson drew upon the words of philosophers, poets, scientists, mathematicians, and prophets... people such as Aristotle, C.S. Lewis, Ibn Tufayl, Aquinas, Avicenna, Averroes, Cicero, Scipio Emilianus, Scipio Africanus, Shakespeare, Paul, Alma, William Paley, Gerard Manley Hopkins, Charles Darwin, Richard Dawkins, John Ruskin, Matthew Arnold, Steven Weinberg, Plato, Galen, Hippocrates, Galileo, Copernicus, Mohammad, Dante, Sir John Polkinghorne, Heraclitus, Sir Arthur Eddington, Goethe, Edwin Hubble, Sir Fred Hoyle, Hitchens, Georges Le Maitre, Penzius and Wilson, the inventor of chess, Planck, Sandage, Brandon Carter, Sir Martin Rees,  Stephen Hawking, Penrose, Hugh Ross, Robin Collins, Alister McGrath, Freeman Dyson, Antony Flew, Paul Davies, Jon Boslough, Edna St. Vincent Millay, Charles Sanders Peirce, St. Bonaventure, Augustine, Baroneus, Anselm, Elizabeth Barrett Browning, William James, Patrick Glynn, Ambrose Bierce and others.

This year's Summerhays lecture was a finely tuned tribute that echoed to the praise of the Creator and Divine Lawgiver.  I would highly recommend a perusal of the written contents of this lecture as soon as it becomes available to the public.  Until then, this article provides some good preliminary thoughts.

The Paradoxical Commandments

The Paradoxical Commandments

"People are often unreasonable, illogical and self centered;
Forgive them anyway.

If you are kind, people may accuse you of selfish, ulterior motives;
Be kind anyway.

If you are successful, you will win some false friends and some true enemies;
Succeed anyway.

If you are honest and frank, people may cheat you;
Be honest and frank anyway.

What you spend years building, someone could destroy overnight;
Build anyway.

If you find serenity and happiness, they may be jealous;
Be happy anyway.

The good you do today, people will often forget tomorrow;
Do good anyway.

Give the world the best you have, and it may never be enough;
Give the world the best you've got anyway.

You see, in the final analysis, it is between you and your God;
It was never between you and them anyway."

- Kent M. Keith (Inscribed on Mother Teresa's Children's Home in Calcutta)

It is a love of liberty which inspires my soul

"The Saints can testify whether I am willing to lay down my life for my brethren. If it has been demonstrated that I have been willing to die for a 'Mormon', I am bold to declare before Heaven that I am just as ready to die in defending the rights of a Presbyterian, a Baptist, or a good man of any other denomination. . . . It is a love of liberty which inspires my soul." - Joseph Smith

Stories my Uncle Told Me

"Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse." (Malachi 4:5-6)

The Spirit of Elijah touched me as I read "Stories my Daddy Told Me," a blog post composed by my Uncle Joel, the youngest brother of my paternal grandfather.  I am grateful for what he is doing to turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, and for the pioneering efforts of all those who have gone before.      

What Will You Choose?

Elder Russel M. Nelson's CES fireside talk, "Youth of the Noble Birthright, What Will You Choose?" is well worth reviewing, pondering, and applying.  At the end of his address, Elder Nelson also bestowed an apostolic blessing upon listeners.  Here are some of the questions that Elder Nelson, Lehi-like, posed to his audience:

- Will you choose to increase in learning?

- What sort of life will you choose?

- Will you establish priorities to help you make decisions in life?

- With whom will you choose to associate?

- Will you choose freedom or bondage?

- Will you choose to follow the Lord or the philosophies of men?

- How will you prepare for your personal interview with the Lord?

- In whom will you put your trust?

Shanah Tovah!

Happy New Year! Shanah tovah! (!שנה טובה)



Today marks the beginning of the Jewish New Year, Rosh Hashanah, (ראש השנה). The Hebrew term literally means "head of the year". The Jewish New Year begins with a ten-day period of prayer, self-examination and repentance (with penitential prayers called "selichot," (סליחות), culminating in the "Day of Atonement," or Yom Kippur (יוֹם כִּפּוּר). These ten days of repentance are known as "Days of Awe."

The Jewish New Year also celebrates God's creation of the universe, the creation of Adam, and the pinnacle of creation, Eve. It is the Feast of Trumpets when the shofar is blown to coronate God as King of the Universe, and to awaken all people to a remembrance of Him and of our true identity as God's children, while alerting listeners to the impending day of judgment. The "Days of Awe" are a time to prepare one's soul for the "Day of Atonement," the holiest day of the year, by turning to God, forgiving others and asking forgiveness, and caring for the poor and the afflicted. In other words, it is a time to do God's will and to serve others.

What a great way to start the new year! Happy New Year! Shanah tovah! (!שנה טובה)

Meekness

What is meekness?  This is the best definition that I have found to date.

(And this is another definition to remember)

It's not the Critic who Counts: A Review of Daring Greatly

Brené Brown, PhD is a research professor at the University of Houston Graduate College of Social Work. She has dedicated a decade of her life to studying vulnerability, and she wrote a New York Times best seller entitled Daring Greatly: How the Courage to be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent and Lead.  What does that mean, you might ask? Please allow me to elaborate.

Dr. Brown is an award winning speaker who has produced one of the top ten most viewed TED talks. She started with something very basic, an inherent human need: connection. Through her research she discovered that shame and the culture of scarcity are the great obstacles to connection, and that vulnerability is the bridge to real connection.

Dr. Brown also discovered that wholehearted people had a great ability to demonstrate love and compassion for themselves as well as others, and that they fully embraced vulnerability.  In other words, those who have the courage to dare greatly do so based on a secure belief that they are both loving beings and beings worthy of being loved.

As basic as these theories might sound, I must admit that for one that sometimes finds it difficult to be vulnerable, Dr. Brown's research has the potential to effectuate a paradigm shift in my life, and in the lives of many others.  Most of all, Dr. Brown creates a vocabulary for talking about shame, vulnerability, belonging, and worthiness that may prove useful to individuals, families, employers, and employees (in other words, everyone), who desire to be and to feel more connected.

According to Dr. Brown, vulnerability is the core of shame, fear, and the struggle for worthiness, but also the birthplace of joy, creativity, belonging, and of love.  In her book Daring Greatly, Dr. Brown examines the implications of Teddy Roosevelt's statement:

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”


Dr. Brown examines her own adventures in the arena of life, the culture of scarcity, vulnerability myths and armory, disengagement, disruptive engagement, wholehearted parenting and other vulnerable topics. Each chapter has something to offer, because the author is cheerfully giving of herself, which is perhaps one of the reasons why her book has been at the top of the New York Times best sellers list. I was impressed by her chapters on gratitude and parenting, particularly by the idea that who we are and how we engage with the world matters more than what we know. Though I am not yet a parent, it makes sense that modeling correct behavior, teaching by example, is the best way to teach.

Although I don't agree with everything that Dr. Brown has to say in her book, I would recommend Daring Greatly to anyone who wishes to find more joy, creativity, belonging and love in their lives.  I would add that Dr. Brown's willingness to dare greatly, to be vulnerable herself is one of the things that makes her book so enjoyable to read.