Finding Truth and Happiness Through our own Experiences, Not Religion

Does  religion have value?  I believe so, but it's hard to find truth, happiness, or God through religion.  That's a bold statement, I know. What's easy to find in a religion... is that religion's definition of who God is, its definition of happiness and its definition of truth.  It's hard to learn these things for yourself as long as you are listening to that religion's definitions, and not learning, questioning, and listening to your own discoveries.  The things that I have learned in my life, things that matter to my happiness, are things that I learned on my own.  Truths that I have learned, and things that bring me happiness, I learned through trial and error, and questioning.  We all do. 

I read a post the other day on reddit by an exChristian called, Quitting the church and Bible reading made me more loving. This person explained that the reason he began to analyse his religion was... "too many Christians I knew and ESPECIALLY those in ministry were impatient, sarcastic and very closed minded...Then I got to thinking why I was different from them.  I  mean, I believed in the same God and followed the same religion but the nicer and more loving I got, the angrier and more intolerant they got.  I then figured out two major differences between me and the Christians I knew.  1) I had stopped going to church.  2) I had stopped reading the Bible...It was amazing that simply stopping doing those two things created a wide chasm between me and the church going Bible readers.  They seemed to get more negative, more filled with pessimism and being judgmental and self righteous while I was being filled with a sense of wonder and longing to explore life."

So what did this person learn from his religion?  I don't know he didn't say, I'm sure he learned some good things, but the main things that he found to be true or that brought him joy, he discovered himself.  He gained a sense of wonder and a longing to explore life, and as he moved away from the confines and dictates of his religious dogma it allowed him to see life as a place of exploration; he became less judgmental, nicer, and more loving.  Of course, this is only anecdotal, but it's a very common theme among people who leave their religion. 

This is not a push for people to leave their religion.  It's an acknowledgment of my belief that it's hard to learn for yourself through a man made religion, and trust me... anyone that's in a religion and thinks they have the truth, I have been there!  I know how strong those convictions are, and if it's serving you well, then stay there.  But... if it is taking you away from any kind of relationship with family or friends, if it is separating you from others, making you believe that you have a better knowledge, understanding, or the truth regarding our existence here, it's probably not serving you well. If you are not discovering your own path, and truths, and are relying on your religion's definitions, it's probably not serving you well.

My nephew is a doctor.  He's an intelligent, kind, upstanding individual.  He was valedictorian of his high school, served a mission in Italy, attended BYU, and got married in the temple.  His life was on track for a complete Mormon success story.  Then something happened, he and his wife divorced before he got out of medical school.  Then after a year or so, he stopped attending church.  My sister-in-law was so distraught over this.  I thought, what a shame that because of our religion we worry about our children because they aren't going to church, or stopped believing the faith they were taught. Anyone on the outside of our religion, would look at this young doctor and say, wow, what a great person, that's all they would see.

These are biases that religion causes, and they can separate families.   I have two favorite books/movies that I have gained much insight from.  One is: Eat, Pray, Love by Elizabeth Gilbert and the other is, The Way of the Peaceful Warrior, by Dan Millman.  Both of these authors have learned from their experiences in meaningful ways, and have shared that wisdom with us.  In other words, they have learned truth.  They have learned things through their experiences that lead them to joy and happiness.  Here's a few of my favorite quotes from Dan Millman:

..."everyone tells you what's good for you, they don't want you to find your own answers, they want you to believe theirs."

"Everything you'll ever need to know is within you..."

"The journey is what brings us happiness not the destination."

"Life has three rules:  Paradox, Humor, and Change.
-Paradox: Life is a mystery; don't waste your time trying to figure it out.
-Humor: Keep a sense of humor, especially about yourself.  It is a strength beyond all measure.
-Change: Know that nothing stays the same."

"Enlightenment is not an attainment, it is a realization.  And when you wake up, everything changes..."

"A fool is 'happy' when his cravings are satisfied.  A warrior is happy without reason.  That's what makes happiness the ultimate discipline."

..."focus all your energy not on struggling with the old, but on building the new."

"Never struggle with anyone or anything.  When you're pushed, pull; when you're pulled push."

And my favorite one of all:

"There are no Ordinary Moments"

A Smarter Cult?

In a 2012 BBC interview between John Sweeney and Elder Holland, there was a reference to the Church and the Church of Scientology. It went like this:

Sweeney:  What they said to me (the 30 people he had interviewed who had left the church) is that they believe the Mormon Church is a cult.  They believe it's like the Church of Scientology but actually it's smarter and more powerful.

I knew nothing about the Church of Scientology, and I highly doubted that it was anything like the Mormon Church.  Are these former members of the Church claims true?  Is the Church a cult like Scientology but smarter and more powerful?  I decided to take a closer look at Scientology, check out what people who had left that Church say about it and its practices.  Would I find any similarities? 

Let me begin by saying, the ideology behind the two churches is very different, could not be more different!  BUT, having said that... I did find some similarities in the way they do things that surprised me.  Let me also state upfront, that the Church of Scientology is MUCH harsher in their tactics, then the modern Mormon Church, their tactics border if not cross human right violations, and anyone involved in that Church, excluding their celebrities, is at risk of mental and physical abuse.  But I said compared to the modern day Mormon Church, if you compared it to the early Mormon Church, especially during the Reformation in the 1850's, you could definitely find as harsh of treatment, especially when it came to things as outlandish as blood atonement.

So bucket up, let's go on a little exploration together:  (I learned about Scientology from places like This, content from that website is paraphrased or quoted from below)

The first thing I noticed is that they both claim to be the "one true church." They both claim to be expanding, and the "fastest growing" church.  Somehow that makes them "true" if they are the fastest growing.  It reinforces to the members that they are in the right place at the right time, and everyone is awakening to the truth and joining it. Members spend their life promoting the church, Mormons love to promote their church, apparently Scientologist's love to too.  Most Scientologist are caring, idealistic people, willing to dedicate their life to that effort, Mormons are too.

For Scientology, "The ultimate sin is dissent.  If you leave, you are a suppressive person (SP is a person who has harmful, evil intentions and acts on them)."  If you leave the Mormon Church, you are an apostate.  Mormons will usually try to help you see the mistake you have made and want you to come back, but you are a dangerous person, who could have a bad influence on other members.  Your opinions, especially about the Church are null and void, they carry no weight whatsoever.  Everything you say or do is analyzed.  Anything bad that happens to you is a direct result of your leaving the Church.  You most likely left because you could not hack it, you were too weak and perhaps sinning, or wanting to sin.  You are definitely wrong, you have lost the Spirit, and your association with your former friends, if you retain one, is more of a project relationship, trying to get you back into the fold. 


Scientologist's "expected to have a great expansion, long promised.  It isn't happening, but the Church management reports the contrary."  Mormon's too expect a great expansion, they think the Gospel will spread to every country and fill the earth.  They think there will come a day when the temples dot the earth and will be so busy that they will be open 24 hours a day.  They think their numbers are always increasing, but even with the great increase of missionaries they received due to lowering the age requirement, the reality is that the conversion rate is only up 4%, if that amount is even correct.  Many people are leaving the Church, but the Church controls the information on membership, so the official number remains at 15 million, there are many people who question that number.

Neither church approves of their members looking at material contrary to the church.  Mormons are cautioned not to read antimormon literature, anything that isn't from the Church would be considered antimormon.  Both churches are being adversely effected by the internet.  If you post concerns about the church on the internet, and you gain a large enough following, both churches will try to stop you.  If you are a Mormon, you run the risk of excommunication. If you are a Scientologist, the Church becomes very upset and tries to find out who you are if you are posting anonymously, "any threat to it must be stopped at any cost."  What's at stake for both Churches?  "If Church members in mass start to question it, then it will come apart.  It depends on fear of eternal damnation to keep members under control."

"Every Scientologist is taught, and it is drilled into him, that to be critical of L. Ron Hubbard, and/or the Church is to be guilty of hidden crimes."  Elder Oaks in a 2007 PBS interview said, "It's wrong to criticize leaders of the church, even if the criticism is true."  President Hinckley said, "The Church will not dictate to any man, but it will counsel, it will persuade, it will urge, and it will expect loyalty from those who profess membership therein." 

When talking with a Scientologist, "they think they know all the answers, thus they really can't communicate with you.  A Scientologist thinks L Ron Hubbard knew it all and thus Scientology has all the answers.  He is computing in his mind constantly and can never agree with you over anything, which is critical of LRH or Scientology."  Mormons love to say,  "the Church is perfect, it's members are not."   The Church is perfect because it's from God.  How could it be anything but perfect?  So if you say anything critical about the Mormon Church to a Mormon, they are not going to listen to you.  They will not even consider what you're saying.  They believe everything about the Church is true and unchanging. That's what Mormon's are taught, that their doctrine is true and it never changes, so if you happen to mention a change that they have made to a Mormon, you get a blank stare from them, it doesn't compute, because it cannot be possible, God's doctrine doesn't change and neither does his Church.

To a Scientologist the success of the Church surpasses everything.  To a Mormon the success of the Church surpasses everything.  Converting people to the Church, missionary work, spreading the gospel, it's all the same thing and it surpasses everything. 

In Scientology, the small local churches are called Missions; "Hubbard had set the Missions up to be somewhat autonomous.  They were flourishing and expanding.  They were less set in ridged adherence, they also had more money."  David Miscaviage, Hubbard's predecessor, and "his finance police wiped out the Mission network in the early 1980's.  He striped them of their assets and much of their power."  A similar change also took place within the Mormon Church.  Wards, used to be more autonomous, they had their own building funds, and fundraisers.  We used to cut and dry apricots when I was a youth, and we had Spanish dinners once a month to raise money for our ward.  I have lots of fun memories of those fundraisers.  The ward kept their money, and the ward was able to make a lot more decisions on their own, without so much oversight from the top.  But a thing called Correlation was created, and now everything is controlled centrally by the leaders in SLC.  They collect the tithing and fast offering money and then portion it back to the ward on conditions of attendance and tithing payers, etc.  In other wards they are like the government, they collect your money and then give a portion back to you because they know best how to use the money, and they don't tell you where the money is going or how much they have.

I'm no expert on Scientology, in fact I know very little about it, but if I understand correctly, the Missions are run by Orgs, which is short for church organizations, which are run by non-Sea Org members.  The Sea Org is over the Orgs, they are those who have signed a billion year contract (I kid you not) and they are management.  "The Orgs get detailed management programs from the Sea Org.  The amount of control exerted by Senior Sea Org Management over the Orgs is overwhelming, statistics are kept of production levels."  The Mormon Church has its lay clergy.  Everything is voluntary.  The Bishop is head of the ward (congregations).  The Stake President is over a group of wards, usually 6 to 12 wards.  Then there are several stakes that make up an Area, and there is an Area leader called a Seventy.  He is a General Authority, they are called to their position by the Apostles.  When they come to visit a stake, usually at Stake Conference, they bring all the latest rules for procedure from SLC, and what they say is strictly adhered to.  No questions asked, it's the "law".  Everything is said and done in a nice way, unlike Scientology, but it is strictly adhered to.  And they too are very interested in statistics, especially tithing and membership statistics.  They want to make sure those dollars are coming in and people are being baptized.

In Scientology, "the indoctrination of your mind is subtle, it doesn't happen overnight.  The early courses are pleasant, cheap, and the staff is easy on you.  You feel that you have found real friends.  Slowly you are being fed Scientology.  It is the sad truth that the church must hide its real self until a person gets hooked."  Mormonism is also presented in doses. Most members are either born into the church or are converted by the missionaries. If you are born into the church, everything seems normal, you have been raised in it.  I was, and nothing seemed more normal to me than the church.  But converts are only told the wonderful things at first, Christ's church has been restored and there is a prophet of God on the earth receiving revelation from God. Your family can be together forever.  What two things could be more appealing to someone. You are now with God's very own church and your family is going to be together in Heaven.  These are the two things that keep people in the church, more than anything else, and what you are taught about by the missionaries.  They want you to gain a testimony of Joseph Smith as a prophet of God. 

Mormons tell a lovely story of a farm boy who wanted to join a church, but didn't know which one to join.  He read James 1:5 "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him."  Joseph thought to himself, if anyone needs wisdom it is me.  This scripture was the catalyst that lead to his praying in the Sacred Grove and seeing the First Vision of God the Father, and His Son Jesus Christ, in which he was told to join none of the churches.  Of course what most Mormons don't realize is that the First Vision account that they all love so dearly is not the first version of the First Vision.  They don't know that Joseph Smith didn't tell it this way in the beginning.  He actually didn't tell it at all in the beginning!  It was first written 12 years after it occurred, and shockingly that account only tells of one heavenly being visiting him.  For details about this click here .  This wonderful picture of a humble prophet of God, restoring Christ's Church in the latter days, is such a beautiful story! Unfortunately, the prophet that is painted by the church, simply doesn't exist.  The man existed, but the image that is portrayed by the church, that man did not exist.  But if he had, and it were all true that would be awesome! 

Asking Better Questions

We watched Thor (again) the other night.  There's a scene where Erik Selvig is talking to Thor in a bar, he says, "It's not a bad thing finding out that you don't have all the answers.  You start asking the right questions."  To allow yourself to start asking the right questions is such an enlightening opportunity, but one that few people take advantage of.  I'm so happy that I did!  The reason that line resonated with me is, it's similar to a sentence that I wrote to my brother in an email a few months ago, that resulted in a nice little conversation.  My second to oldest brother had sent out a group email with a link to the John Batchelor Show in which he interviews Amir Aczel, a scientist/author who wrote a book called, Why Science Does Not Disprove God.  In the podcast Amir Aczel says ..."we just don't know very much at all and there is joy in not knowing."  I really liked that quote and decided to respond to the email.  (My brothers are devout Mormon and they don't know about my disaffection from the church).  I haven't told them because it's easier...and I'm a coward.  Some what of a coward anyway, also, if they think you are believing, you can get away with saying more then you can otherwise. So here's my email that I sent back in response to the interview:

Very interesting.  I agree that we just don't know very much at all and there is joy in not knowing.  I've learned to ask better questions, and that a good answer may not be as important as a good question.  I have learned to question literalist's claims.  Especially in light of the church's essays, many things that I was taught as literally true in seminary, in Sunday school, and even by our church leaders, have now been shown to not be true, through the church's essays.  Such as the reasons for the priesthood ban on the blacks, the translation of the book of Abraham, the way the Book of Mormon was translated, and many other issues including polygamy. I believe in a loving God, and that learning to love is at the essence of all our experiences. I have believed for a long time that God is going to save all of his children, I came to that conclusion through the scriptures.  I have learned that as we open our mind to possibilities and new ways of thinking, that God fills our mind with greater insights.  And if we stay thinking and believing as we always have, that's okay too, God allows us to grow and learn at our own pace, it's our journey.  It's all very fascinating this wonderful world that we live in, so many people with experiences and things to teach us and share with us.  So much to learn and grasp from one another. Here's an interesting thing, I don't know if God cares if someone is an atheist. I was listening to a woman's NDE, she was an atheist, and died.  She saw her grandmother, who had passed away, she said I knew I had to be dead, because I'm talking with my grandmother who was dead. Then she saw Christ, she said to him,  "I don't even believe in you, I'm an atheist," he said, "that's okay, that was just a belief, this is real." 

So when I hear something like her NDE, it allows me to think in different ways.  It helps me to be less judgmental and literal in my viewpoints.  These are just my observations, like I said I don't think we know very much, and I certainly don't, but there is joy in not knowing!

(Like I said, this response was to a group email, consisting of my 3 brothers and their wives, who all are devout Mormon's, so I had to choose my wording carefully.  Especially about atheists, whom I completely respect.)   

So in my email I'm laying out quite a bit of stuff, and in typical Mormon fashion (or any strongly held belief, where you are exposing some difficulties with their doctrine) I was ignored.  No response from my middle brother who originated the email, or my youngest brother, nothing from my sisters-in -law, only a response from my courageous oldest brother.  Here's his reply:

Deb, nice comment...I'm not sure what you mean by save all his children, do you mean like Celestial Kingdom type of save?  And all his children...meaning Satan and his followers as well or just all the children born into physical bodies?  What about those considered to be son's of perdition?

This is an opened minded query from my brother.  I was on vacation at the time, so I sent him a short email:

Those are good questions that you have, when I get home I'll try to answer them for you :) this is off the subject of what you asked, but I thought I should explain my agreeing with him that there is joy in not knowing. That's kind of contradictory to the way we normally think.  But I have found there is joy in not thinking you have the correct answer to something.  It allows for understanding of others, it allows you to be less judgmental, and it allows you to learn and grow as God enlightens your mind.  Thus finding joy! When I began to think of God in terms of love.  Plain and simple, God is love.  I began to see my relationship to him in a new way, not so much about laws and judgment or condemnation, or confessing Christ, or salvation for that matter, but just a relationship of love, and learning to love.

When I got home I went on to have a very long email exchange with my brother.  We discussed many things.  It was nice.  He listened to me and I listened to him.  There is so much we can learn from others. 

I live in a small gold rush town in Northern California.  I have a small internet business, and I get to walk through this darling town almost every day to the post office.  I was walking there the other day with a handful of packages, when I passed a man on the sidewalk.  "Beautiful day at the office," he said.  "You're not in the office" I teasingly said in response.  "I know, that's why it's a beautiful day and also I choose to look at things that way" he said.  "I'm actually in the office--see I'm on my way to the post office," I said.  "I see that" he said, "you know I have traveled all around this world and I get the most joy from visiting post offices and churches."  I laughed at his comment, "why post offices?" I asked.  "I see them as a country's way of trying to help others and do it with the most proficiency that they know how... they are not all perfect, but mostly they are trying," he explained to me.  "Oh, that's an interesting way to look at it...what about the churches...what do you see in them?"  I asked.  "Well mostly I see beauty and peace.  I have felt many things in those churches... have had some very significant feelings of peace, even though at the time I wasn't a believer," he said.  "Are you a believer now?" I asked.  "Yes"  he responded.  "What do you believe?" I asked. "In doing good." And then he vanished around the corner, as I stood starring at where he had been.  Sometimes someone will pop into your life with a golden nugget, just like this man did in mine, and if we ask a few questions they will give us a gift of wisdom.  It's not that "doing good" is a new concept for me, its just the way he told it to me, and the simpleness of it, do good, that's enough.  Why wouldn't it be enough?  This chance encounter was impactful enough to me, that when I got home, I grabbed a paper and wrote down our conversation while I could still remember it.   

Why Salvation Falls Apart

Salvation just has a lot of problems, for one, no one seems to be able to agree on who's saved, or how you're saved, or why you have to be saved.  If salvation was necessary, and it effects you throughout eternity, wouldn't a loving God be very clear on the rules?  Wouldn't God make sure that everyone knew the rules, understood them, and had every chance to access that salvation?  Otherwise, it seems a bit arbitrary, and maybe the deck is stacked, especially for a God that is "no respecter of persons." 

Here's an example of how no one can agree on who's saved:  Yesterday I watched Angelina Long on Ex-Mormon Files.  She converted to Mormonism shortly after high school, and was a Mormon for three years.   She was a very active member, and loved the church, she said it was her first "church family".  One day at the temple, as she walked up a stairway, she felt completely disconnected from her experience there.  She felt like a spectator walking through a beautiful building, she didn't feel at peace, but felt anxious.  As she and her friend returned to the dressing rooms, a lady came in with a stack of family names with the last name of Long, just like her.  As she listened to the conversation this lady is having with a temple worker, the lady mentions that she has all this ordinance work to do for her family members.  Angelina said, God touched her heart and what went through her mind was:  is this what it's going to be like for me for the rest of my life, taking hundreds of family names to the temple to assist in their salvation? Next a series of events happened... a week later teaching in Relief Society, a lesson called, Be spiritually prepared for anything that comes your way, she bore her testimony and said "I know that families can be together forever, through this church."  As soon as she said that, she felt a pit in her stomach.  Shortly after that she had two loved ones pass away.  She began to have thoughts of confusion and anxiety, and she could not bear the thought that the only way that her family would be together for ever was through temple work.  It didn't make sense to her.  She drove around one night trying to clear her head, and began to weep saying to God, "God this doesn't make sense, if you are the same God, yesterday, today and forever, and you love all of your children the same, if Joseph Smith restored your church 200 years ago, why would you deny so many of your children, millions upon millions of souls, the blessings of being together forever with their family in heaven?  And why would I be granted a better level of heaven simply because of the church that I belong to, I'm no better then anyone else." Then she heard God speak to her just as clear as day, saying, "the temple ceremonies came by revelation, which means they came from Joseph Smith, which means they came from men, and men can make mistakes, the only perfect man is Jesus Christ and he is the only way."  Then she felt this overwhelming peace, this tingling through her entire body, something she had never felt before.  She felt the Holy Spirit come and comfort her by wrapping his arms around her.  At which time she said, "Thank you Jesus, I know you, I know you now, and its just you."  She thought that makes sense, but why does my religion believe in a completely different form of salvation?  She began to look into the LDS doctrine of eternal families and came across polygamy, which she began to study, and came across other distributing things such as polyandry.  She began to attend other churches and learned that it is by Grace and Grace alone that she was saved.

This is a very touching story and frankly I believe her completely when she says that she had this experience.  It's not easy to walk away from the Mormon faith, especially when you are a convert and have had praises heaped upon you and she was in a prominent  calling, not easy at all!  She had converted her friend who is now married to a Mormon, and she has to walk away from all of that.  She has my full respect. 

The same day that I watched Angelina's interview, I received a "Friend" request on Facebook, from Jean, a member of our current ward, where we stopped attending last year.  I don't know Jean well, but I really like her.  She's a great teacher, studies the scriptures a lot, loves God, and has a great testimony of Jesus Christ as her Savior.  She loves Jesus, every bit as much as Angelina does.  Jean sent a message to me along with the Friend request, in which she says, "I wish I had the words to help you understand that as wacky as some things are in the Church, because of human fallibility, it is the right vehicle to obtain the correct ordinances and the companionship of the Holy Ghost."

I found this striking, because they are both referring to the temple ordinances.  One claiming that they are necessary, the other claiming that it is these exact ordinances that led her out of the Mormon Church, and into the arms of Jesus.  Both of these ladies, love Jesus, believe that they know him, and both believe that they are saved, and that their way to salvation is the only way!  They can't both be right, but they can both be wrong.  I'm not saying they are, I'm just saying that this is the problem with salvation.  There is no correct definition of it.  The only "correct" definition you get is by someone who believes they are saved, but their story of salvation will not jive with someone of another faith. 

Why the need for salvation, where do we get this notion, and what do different religions claim about it?   This is obviously a huge subject, so I will keep it brief.  Most Christians believe in the doctrine of, Original Sin.  Mormons don't, or I should say they have a nuanced view of the Fall of Adam and Eve.  They believe that man is in a fallen state, but they don't ascribe to the Original Sin doctrine of Christianity, which is HUGE.  The way Adam and Eve are viewed by Mormons and Christians and their view of God, why we are here, and how we get back to God again, is so different.  No matter how hard people try to reconcile these two religions, its just not possible (I don't know that anyone is trying that hard to reconcile them, probably only the Mormon PR machine tries to do this at times).  The doctrine of Original Sin is based on some New Testament scriptures, but it certainly didn't come from Christ, and it wasn't formulated until the 2nd century, a time period which in Mormon theology Christ's church was already in a state of apostasy.  Let's look at a couple non-Christian religions, and see how salvation works with them.

Jews don't believe in Original Sin, Judaism does not require personal salvation thru deity as Christianity does.  They basically believe in the Golden Rule.  God, the creator of the world provides salvation to those who honor his precepts.  There is no vicarious salvation, your redemption depends on you and your behavior. "In Judaism, salvation is open to all people and not limited to those of the Jewish faith; the only important consideration being that the people must observe and practice the ethical pattern of behavior as summarized in the Ten Commandments." (Malekar, Ezekiel Isaac.  "The Speaking  Tree: Concept of Salvation I Judaism)

Islam's salvation is entrance into heaven.  If you die disbelieving in God you will not be saved. If you are non-Muslim and you believe in God, it is God's will concerning you.  If you are Muslim and believe in the One God and in the Islam message, you are saved into heaven.

What do Mormon's require for salvation?  I'll go to their website (Mormon.org) and get it straight from the horse's mouth.  "By humbling ourselves, repenting, and striving to keep His commandments, we can receive the blessings of the Savior's atoning sacrifice."  Is that all?  No, "He administered saving temporal ordinances, such as baptism, which He Himself submitted to though He had never sinned; the Savior did this because he asked us to follow Him in all things."  Is that all?  No, "to apply  the saving grace of Jesus Christ"... requires, faith, repentance, baptism by immersion (by one having authority), and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost.  Is that all?  No, "The fundamental gospel elements are these: faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, baptism, receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit, and enduring to the end."  Is that all? No,  "In 1830 Jesus Christ restored His gospel through a prophet names Joseph Smith...The Savior also restored the keys of the priesthood and the saving ordinances at are required for His Church to accomplish His work again on earth." Is that all?  No, apparently not, since they also say, "From each of them (referring to the latter day prophets) we learn what is required of us to become more like God and to prepare to live with Him again."  Is that all? No, not really, not if you want to be saved in the Celestial Kingdom (super VIP heaven according to Brother Jake see here very humorous)!  To be saved in the Celestial Kingdom, the only one that allows for your family to be together forever as a family and for you to become exalted or have eternal life, that requires temple ordinances.  You will recall that above they said that Christ "administered saving temporal ordinances,  plural, but then only gave one example, "such as baptism"  well, some of these additional ordinances are temple ordinances, and if you want your family to be together forever, Mormonism's big trump card,  you have to receive these temple ordinances.  To be worthy to do that, you have to pay a full tithing, keep the word of wisdom, go to your meetings (yes that's right plural) on Sunday, sustain the prophet, wear temple garments, and a host of other smaller and bigger things.  Wow, that's a lot, I got tired just typing that all out, image how tiring it is to live. 

What do most Protestant Christians (not necessarily liberal Protestant Christians) believe is required for salvation?   Well that's a big group with somewhat varying views, but I think I'm safe in saying that Jesus Christ is the only way.  He paid the penalty for our sins on the cross and rose from the grave.  One must have a faith and trust in Christ, admit you are a sinner and need forgiveness, and through prayer confess that Jesus Christ is the only way to God and commit to live for Him.  Some groups would say that baptism is necessary, but confessing Christ, and for some being born again is the main requirements.  Then of course after you have dedicated your life to Jesus, you will naturally try to live like him.  (Wow, that's a lot easier than the Mormon plan, no wonder there are so many more Protestants then Mormon's!)

That is a brief summary of a very complex subject, but I think you get the idea.  Nothing coordinates, each group thinks they have the truth, they own salvation, and they are saved.  Salvation groups us into communities which is good and bad.  It causes us to have peace and dread all at the same time.  It can make a person prideful and judgmental, and it also has good effects.  Basically it is what it is, and people get very emotional over their salvation, families are brought together by it and destroyed by it.  And none of these salvations stand up under scrutiny, only to the true believers, who will not look at hard evidence to the contrary.   Anyone trying to make an argument against anyone's salvation is usually seen as evil, and should be avoided or at least disregarded.

But here's some good news! A Pew survey shows that we are becoming more open minded in our salvation quest.  In asking "Who can go to Heaven?"  When asking White mainstream Protestants if Catholicism can lead to eternal life 77% said yes, and 83% of Catholics returned the favor to Protestants.  What about Judaism, can Jews find their way to Heaven in the eyes of others?  Catholics said yes 77%, White mainstream Protestants said yes, 73%, Evangelicals were a little less gracious at 64%.  But hey, that's pretty good for a stubborn group of people, lol, I mean a strongly convinced group of people.  What about those evil atheists, how's their chance in the after life?  Not bad!  Looks like only half of us are sending them to Hell, 50% think they will too reach heaven.  They should all rest better tonight knowing that.  :)



          

They all have problems

All religions fall apart under examination, but they can and do have value for the believers.  BUT, no faith is perfect, even for the true believer.  All faiths have drawbacks that can cause harm to others, often those we love the most.  The trick is to have the courage to examine your religion, because it will fall apart under scrutiny... doctrinally, scientifically, and its historicity.  NO EXCEPTIONS!    Mark Twain once said:  The ease with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also. 

The value of a faith then lies in taking the good from it... stay if you want, but with eyes wide open.  With open eyes you can minimize the damage that comes from believing wrong things.  You can love freely, you can rid yourself of judgments that inherently come from a faith, and you can embrace other's beliefs.  What a beautiful gift to give yourself, your family, and your friends.  And you will know truths.  The truths that really matter, not the "truths" about or that come from knowing your faith is true, and right.  Real truths that you learn for yourself throughout your life. Truths like, when I'm patient and loving, I'm happier.  These real truths that all of us learn through our experiences are the most important truths, because they effect our happiness, the happiness of those around us, and the way we live our life. 

It's really that simple.  I don't think this life is about salvation.  I don't think God necessarily cares what we believe, even if we believe in God or not.  I think our experience in this life has value because of what we learn and what we do with the things we learn.  You will discover the things in life that are most important, as soon as you stop listening to a faith telling you what is most important and begin listening to yourself tell you what is most important.  Learning to think for yourself and freeing yourself from the bondage of having to think a certain way a faith wants you to think, is the single most important gift you can give to yourself. 

The Making of a Cult?

When I first researched the Church's history, I began as most, a devout Mormon who is clueless about it's history.  It didn't take too long into my research before I ran across Denver Snuffer, and many more like him, in the Bloggernacle (the  Mormon blogosphere).  So who is Denver Snuffer and those "many more" that are like him?  They are true believers in the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ.  They are basically the new fundamentalist Mormon's that are breaking off of the main Salt Lake City based church.  The reason I'm explaining this is... because there are many groups that trace their beginnings back to Joseph Smith and the restoration.  The polygamists are fundamentalists, but Denver Snuffer and these groups are not part of them.  They were Mormon's, they believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet, they believe that the Book of Mormon was translated from gold plates, they believe in the First Vision, and that Joseph Smith saw God and Jesus Christ in the Sacred Grove.  So what's their problem?  Don't Mormon's believe all those things too?  Why am I calling them the new fundamentalists?

They think the Church has veered from its roots and it all started with Brigham Young, and basically the Church has been off track ever since, and it's veering ever more off  all the time.  They doubt the leadership is getting revelation from Christ, and that basically the Church is in an apostasy. This new group is growing everyday.  A lot of the outspoken ones have been excommunicated from the Mormon Church, like Denver Snuffer, others are just up and leaving the Church.  They are being rebaptized and joining into small groups, very interesting, to say the least!

So, when I first started reading about these people, and reading their blogs, etc., I was somewhat intrigued.  I tried to have an open mind about them, and I followed them and their activities all last year.  I was interested in just watching what they were doing and saying, trying to give them the benefit of the doubt about their beliefs and activities.  But here's the problem with these guys, they are very much able to see all the wrongs that Brigham Young did and the leaders up to the present day, but they turn a blind eye to Joseph Smith.  Rock Waterman, who is among this group, who seems like a very nice person, really he does, and I think his intentions are good, and he has a lot of followers on his blog, A LOT.   It's from Rock's blog that I first learned about so many of the Church's problems, but Rock thinks that Joseph Smith was not a polygamist.  That's right you heard me correctly, even though the Church says he was, and all the evidence says he was.  Rock believes a book called, Joseph Smith Fought Polygmany, I'll leave that one for you to decide, but for me, I'm just not buying it.

Denver Snuffer wrote some books, one in particular, Passing the Heavenly Gift,  and he has a blog, and these two things basically got him exed from the Church.  He held a series of free lectures that started in late 2013 and ran through 2014, mostly throughout Utah.  I believe the first was in Boise, and the final was in Las Vegas.  His lectures from these meetings are available on his blog, if you want to read them. As a consequence of all of this, among other things, people are leaving the Church and getting rebaptized, into what I don't know; Denver said he isn't starting a new Church.  So when you do something as drastic as leave your church and get rebaptized, you need something else for these people to do, so they have set up these loose (without a lot of rules or structure) groups.  From what I understand, they collect tithing and then distribute it to those in need. 

As good intentioned as this is, is this not just fraught with problems?  I hope not, I sincerely hope for the best for these people, but aren't you naturally going to have someone, rise up as the leader?  Isn't there always one person in the group with better leadership skills or more charismatic?   Won't that person become the leader?  And what about the money?  It just looks like trouble to me.  I think it will start out benign enough, but there can't help be problems when you are putting your money in a little box and then handing it out to others, or deciding as a group who gets the money.  I just don't see that working very well.  When you are giving your hard earned dollars to the Church, and they are telling you that it is God's scared money and they would never waste it, and that God requires that of you, that is one thing, hey, God blessed me with this money and if he wants 10 percent back, to be used to help others, and the Church would never waste my scared funds, I can buy into that. I did buy into that, for 56 years!  It never bothered me to give my money to God, Never.  The fact that the Church is not transparent about those sacred funds and the way they are spent... well that's another post.  But putting your money in a box and then watching it go out, and then watching how the receiver's spend it, that could cause problems down the line, just sayin'. 

So why did I title this post, The Making of a Cult?  Well, here it is... there's another group, I think it's another group anyway, how many of these groups there are I don't know, and if they are working together or separate, I don't know that either.  All I know is, that there are a lot of people who think the Church is in a state of apostasy, and they believe in the literal restoration of Christ's Church through Joseph Smith. They are leaving the Church and being rebaptized.  I received an invitation the above mentioned group's first gathering.  It takes place in May, in Colorado.  I don't want to say too much about this gathering, because I know that these people are sincere and well intended, but I can't help thinking that this is exactly how cults begin. Maybe everyone in a cult is a victim, even the leaders.  I don't know. 

This group's expressed goal is to:  teach the doctrines of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ, as provided through Joseph Smith and in scripture, to warn others of the impending calamites, and prepare for Zion.  They say in no uncertain terms that the purpose of this gathering is NOT to start another church, they are just gathering as an informal community.  Blah, blah, blah, isn't that how they all start?  Even Shawn McCraney (Born Again Mormon) said in the beginning that he wasn't wanting to form a church, but he did.   He may have a great church for all I know, he seems like a good person, its just that you can't believe the initial claims; they have to go somewhere and do something with all their talk.  Even Shawn couldn't just criticize the LDS Church forever, things change and grow, and go in new directions.  So these communities will either have to grow, or they will wither away.  And that's the tricky part, how they grow, and who becomes in charge.  They could easily turn into  cults and take on a life of their own, a destructive life of their own.  

Now I have a better understanding of how cults begin, I never understood them before, but I think I have a bird's eye view on the possible making of a few, very interesting, to say the least!

 

Staying is easy!

Coming to the realization that the Church isn't what it claims to be, is a difficult and painful process for most people.  Almost inevitably you are surrounded by family and friends who are active members, and STAYING is the easy option.  Please know, wherever you are in this process or whichever "side" you are on, believing or non-believing, please know that STAYING is the easier option, initially anyway.   Not necessarily the right option, but the easier one.  So if you are having difficulty leaving, or someone you love is leaving the Church, please at least give them or yourself the respect that they deserve in knowing that they are choosing the harder option, Not the easy way out. 

When I first discovered things about the Church, that led to my leaving, I remember I would read so many alarming things about the history of the Church, or quotes from leaders, from well documented primary sources, not anti-Mormon literature, that left me feeling distant from it and its teachings.  Then I would go to Church on Sunday, see my friends, do my calling, I was the Young Women's leader at the time, and I would get so caught up in the familiarity of it all, the comfortableness of it all, that I would forget for the moment the lies and deception.  I liked my world, it was easy to walk in those shoes, it was easy to talk the talk and walk the walk.  EASY!!

Staying would have been the easier choice.  Just brush aside the truth and remain in the illusion.  Let the illusion fill my world, suppress the things I learned back into some dark closet in my mind, never to be opened again.  I could pat myself on the back for being triumphant to this "trial of my faith" and go on with my life, just the way it was. No Big Deal.

But here's the catch, integrity would not allow that. When I could plainly see the lies, how could I push it all aside just to make my life easy?  Knowing that staying is perpetuating the lies,  we (my husband and I) could not stay.  We could not in good conscience be used by the Church to promote their illusion of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.  That's how we began to view it.  Staying is saying we believe it and it is true, and we could no longer say that.  So we had to go, as difficult and unsettling as that is. 

And there was another reason we had to go. We have a thirteen year old daughter, we could not continue to teach her that this Church is Christ's restored gospel, with a prophet that leads by direct revelation from Jesus Christ.  How could we teach that to her, to have her discover someday that it is not true and then she has to have her world fall apart too.  No, we love her too much to do that.  So for her and for integrity's sake we walked away, when staying would have been easier.  Much easier!

But here's the beauty of it all, it is worth it!  Being free to think on your own, not tied down by religion.  Free to make your choices, see the world through new eyes.  EVERYONE should try that once in their life, let go of the things you have believed your entire life, if just for a minute to see what may be out there that you have never seen before.  It will change you forever, for the better.  Even if you go back to your beliefs, at least you got to see the world from a different view.  How refreshing, how invigorating, how freeing.  Now I let God lead me, I ask God to reveal himself to me on his terms, not mine, and not through some manmade religion, which they all are in my opinion.  Oh, and Sunday what a beautiful day it has become, truly a day of rest, pleasure, relaxation, discovery, nature, food, family, peace, no restrictions, no meetings, no things that I have to do, no lessons to teach, just a day of absolute joy!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Into the Mind of a Mormon

I would say that there are two great pillars of the Mormon faith:  Truth and God. 

We are taught that we have the truth because we are the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ, and we have a living prophet that receives direct revelation (truth) from God. Because we are the restored Church of Christ, we have God.  The Church and God are the same in essence, and God and the truth are the same, so these two great pillars Truth and God, not only do we own them, they are basically one in the same. 

As a Mormon you value the truth, and always want to be faithful to the truth.  As a Mormon you value the Church, and always want to be faithful to the Church.  Since they are one in the same, being faithful to both is easy and not in conflict with each other, and because they are one in the same you don't have to value one over the other... they are equal and the same.  Christ is the author of truth, this is his Church, they are tied together, you cannot separate them.   

This concept of the truth and the Church being one is reinforced by everything in your life.  As a Mormon you may have many spiritual experiences, these reinforce for you the truthfulness of Christ's Church, that you are in the true Church and you have the truth.  All of the Church's teachings reinforce this.  Most Mormons have many Mormon friends and family members, who all reinforce this to each other.  They all believe it and it's their walk and their talk. It has been reinforced by your family, friends, and the Church how important it is to be faithful to Christ, (which is his church) and to the truth (which is his church). 

So... when you stumble upon something or learn something about the Church, that exposes it to be false, I believe in a brief millisecond you have to choose between these two great pillars, the truth and God (the church). I believe it happens so quickly that you are not even aware of the choice that you are making, or that you are even making a choice.  I believe in our subconscious one of these is more weightier to us than the other, and whichever the one is, determines your path. 

For me it was the truth. The truth raised up, and I saw it more clearly, and the truth set me free.  For others, being faithful to Christ, (which in their eyes is the church) is most important, and anything that says the Church isn't true, or threatens the Church will be cast away immediately and quickly forgotten, while the joy of staying faithful to Christ is reinforced by everyone you associate with, and in everything you do.  For the truth to dominate, you have to want to know the truth more then you want the Church to be true.  It's that simple and it's that complex. 

So two people, one that held to the truth and the other that held to the Church, who once held these two beliefs so strongly in common will become separated.  Each one believing they are holding to the most important thing. 

This is where Mormon Faith Crisis Help comes in. Until you are in this situation, you don't know that this world view you hold can be separated, and you might find yourself at odds with your spouse or family member.  If you can see that the person is holding to the one that they have placed more value in, it is easier to understand where they are coming from, and to be less judgmental. 

What Do You Believe Now?

I have a dear friend that joined the Church when she was in her late teens.  She was raised Jehovah's Witness, then joined the Mormon Church, then left it in her mid to late twenty's; I would call her Agnostic now, I think she would agree with that.  I contacted her the other day to tell her I too had left the Mormon Church.  She asked me some questions about what I believe now, and since I had been wanting to do a post on that I will include some of my answers to her here.  Not that what I believe is that important, but I think it's helpful to share with others our beliefs, even though beliefs are not a stagnant thing and they change as we grow and experience different things in life.  That's a good thing.  We don't want to become stagnant in our thinking.  So if you are in a stage that is difficult because your belief system has been challenged, just look around at all the gifts that is bringing you.  You are no longer stuck thinking a certain way, you are now free to experiment, to question, to challenge, to ask hard questions, to peek behind a curtain, uncover that stone.  You can now get down and dirty and fall of the pedestal that says, you own the truth; it's called humility, and it's a very powerful tool for learning, growing, loving, and finding happiness.  Don't ever be afraid of humility... it's God's best tool.  As hard and challenging as it is to admit to yourself that you have been viewing life through biased lenses, (and we all view life that way) and as grave and disturbing as it is to question one's faith or to lose that faith, the fears you will loose, the compassion you will gain, the joy of questioning, learning, seeking, experiencing life in new and exciting ways, far out way the price.  Just try it on, take it for a test drive, you will love it!  You might think, it's too dangerous, too frightening to question your views.  Let me just reply to that with:  it's very dangerous to stay stuck in a mindset that isn't correct, and no matter what your mindset is, I guarantee there are things in it that are not correct.  Why live life thinking that they are?  And as for it being frightening to exam your beliefs, I guarantee that you are frightened right now, about something.  There is something in your belief system that is frightening you: the government, society, your children's choices or potential choices, global warming, the Second Coming, Obama, terrorism, racism, the economy, the future, death, illness, salvation, or a million other fears. and the sad part is, we come to these fears with a biased mind, in which we have staked everything, and we let these fears play out in our mind and life for maybe no reason.  I read a book once called, Loving What Is, it's a great read, and the author says she puts anything that is out of her ability to control into "God's" category, even if you don't believe in God, she calls it that, just to remind herself that, "I have no control over that, and I will not waste anymore time worrying about it," I will leave that up to the powers that be.  But, if your belief system is so strong and you think you are so right, you will still buy into your fears, thinking that you are wiser and know more, I guarantee it, I have lived it.
Now to my friend's questions: she asked if I had lost faith in a Heavenly Father?  At first, I felt unsure about everything, which is a good thing, leaving the Church gives you so much compassion for others and their beliefs.  I totally get atheists now, I respect where they're coming from, and I don't think they are the evil people I grew up believing they were.  I get agnostic's, everyone, I respect them, even Mormon, especially Mormons,  I am a Mormon... I understand their beliefs and the commitment they have to them.  When people say that the Bible is not factual, I get that too, it falls apart under scrutiny, just like the Book of Mormon does, I agree with you when you say you don't have any confidence in organized religion, I agree with that, but I also see the  good it does, along with the bad, but the good out weighs the bad in my mind, but an argument can be made the other way too.  I do believe there is a God, and since my concept of who God is... is Heavenly Father, yeah I guess I stick with that.  Why switch that out for another God, since I don't really know for sure, why switch out the one I understand and have prayed to my entire life, and have a history with?  Did prayer get hard for me? Yeah, it did, but there is still that desire to thank God at the end of the day for all the wonderful things in my life, and gratitude is such an important facet of happiness, that I don't want to not have gratitude.  And if God, is really responsible for all the things in my life, which I think He is, I would hate to be ungrateful.

Let me just pause from my conversation with my friend for a moment here to add: I don't think we have a pointless God.. meaning that I think there is great purpose to our life. I believe in a God that has the same destination for all of us, and our life's purpose is to learn and grow.  It's called progression in the Mormon faith and I very much believe in it.  I don't believe in the Mormon idea of progression, if that means we will eventually end up in one of three  kingdoms and remain there for eternity.  Hey, but lets give Mormon's some credit, at least they aren't sending people to Hell to dwell forever just because they don't say a "sinner's pray" (that isn't biblical anyway) or they don't "confess"
Christ just the way some Evangelicals think they should.  Mormon's believe in Christ, and they love Him, they worship Him, and they are grateful for His atonement in their life, they view Christ's atonement as:  their means of salvation, what enables Christ to forgive our sins, and Christ's ability to change our nature.  They believe all of that in spite of their church's attempt to usurp Christ's authority, so that the Church speaks for Christ, the church is Christ, basically in a Mormon's eyes.    That's why Mormon's hold to the Church so strongly, the Church is Christ's gospel, they love Christ, so they of course love His Church, and reverence their leaders way too much, because it's one in the same to them. 

What do I think of Christ?  That question actually comes from Mormon scripture, "what think ye of Christ?"  Well... I have a hope in Him, I love his teachings, I think they are a good way to live your life.  I think the Biblical Christ is hard to prove, but I have a hope in Him, and in His saving ability, if that is necessary, which it might be, but I don't think the purpose of this life is salvation.  Was a Savior necessary for God to send us to this earth so we could progress and learn?  I have always been taught that, and for all I know it may be so, but, like I said, scriptures fall apart under scrutiny, so that just leaves you with faith, doesn't it?  And if that is what you are left with, then I have to give the person who wants to believe the Book of Mormon as scripture as much respect as the person who wants only to believe the Bible as scripture.  They are both a matter of faith in my mind, and cannot be proven as fact or historical.  That maybe where faith comes in, but not about KNOWING, like Mormons like to say they "know."  Mormon's don't "know" anything... anymore then Christians "know" things for sure.  It's all based on faith and teachings and your own personal experiences.  And I'm not slamming anyone's personal feelings, experiences, or faith, it's not my place to do so.  It was Christ that taught us not to judge. 

My friend asked if we felt betrayed by the Church?  I told her yeah, we do.  We feel like we were the faithful spouse, we were loyal, we did everything we were supposed to, we upheld our end of the bargain, and the Church played the harlot.  It lied, it wasn't faithful.  So you are constantly sorting your life out, the good, the bad, that came from spending your entire life in the Church.  I used to see everything good in my life, as a result of being a member, and that may be so, but there is a lot of bad too, mostly in attitudes and in the way you view things.
  
She asked if I thought Joseph Smith was mentally disturbed?  No, I think he was a brilliant con man, and self-aggrandizing womanizer.   But I could be wrong, and I hold that possibility out there.  Did he see God, and translate the Book of Mormon from gold plates?  The evidence strongly suggests that he didn't. Did he bring some truth and enlightenment to the world, yes I think so.  So that's where I give him a little possibility of being... what I don't know, a prophet? I would have to have a new definition for prophet to call him that.   But I certainly don't know all things, and I don't know how God works, remember, our ways are not His ways, and there are the mysteries of God. 
We just don't know exactly how God does things, do we?   It's kind of the mystery of it all that leads you right back to faith again, not knowledge.  I was listening to someone the other day and she was saying that she had to learn to live with uncertainty.  Uncertainty sounds a lot like faith, this life may be based on uncertainty, perhaps faith... why?  Why would God design it that way? I don't know but my thinking is that uncertainty gives you the ability to think, test, and grow, and to come to conclusions, rethink and come to new conclusions, test and grow.  All in all, not a bad plan after all.

No Stone Left Unturned - Part one

I have been watching Nazi Hunter's on Netflix, so when going to bed last night I had the Holocaust on my mind.  As the disturbing images swirled around in my head, my attitude was, how could a loving God let that horrific slaughter of a people happen, and if God would let something that awful happen, how can I suppose that God cares about my little life and insignificant problems? Why would God come to my aide and rescue and not come to theirs?  When I awoke this morning, tears filled my eyes as my attitude changed, thinking how hard it must have been for God to have watched that happen.  What was it that compelled God to do so?  What caused God to sit back and let the Holocaust happen?  What do others think about that, how do they explain it?   
So I googled, how do Christians explain the Holocaust?  Here's a sampling of the answers that I found, if you have better ones, please leave them in the comments section, because with answers like these, I'm really beginning to understand atheists better and better:

1) God allows bad things to happen, He gives us freedom, He loves and grieves with us in our pain when bad things happen.  Believe it or not, this is the best answer that I got, but it's glaringly incomplete.  Saying that "God allows bad things to happen," is not telling me why, it's just repeating my question. Try that one on a college test sometime,  just repeat the question back to the professor, that will land you an "F" every time. "He gives us freedom"...that's not a complete answer, you would have to tell me why he gives us freedom, now that would be an answer, and that freedom had better be worth dying for in a concentration camp!  Do you see that these answers are too shallow?  They lack understanding of what and who God is.  If I'm going to watch my child take his last breath in a gas chamber, I need a better answer then: "He loves and grieves with us in our pain." Again, without knowing why God is not intervening, knowing that God loves me and is grieving, doesn't help too much to ease the pain and suffering.  This answer makes a fair attempt, but comes up short.

2)  Someone said, "I'll assume you're not racing towards the Congo to help millions of innocent people from being murdered there"..."how indifferent are you to abortion? You understand your own indifference and faithlessness, right?  Look no further until your knees are grimy from kneeling, your indifference will be the answer to everything you cannot have without faith."  This person is attacking the questioner, that is just ridiculous!  The one asking the question, how could God allow such a thing, isn't God, they have no control over what's going on in the Congo, but because they haven't stopped what they have no control over, they are not allowed to ask a question about God who does have control?  That makes no sense to me.  That is really a poor answer, that's filled with accusations. 

3)  Behold the Lord's hand is not shortened that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear:  But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.  Also, Satan is the ruler of this world and has blinded the minds of them which believe not.  Deception has caused the masses to be cut off from God.  In essence, this person is using Isaiah 59 to say that the Holocaust was the Jews fault.  They had it coming, or at least God wasn't going to do anything because of their sins.  Well, that just doesn't fly on so many levels. First, you are not supposed to judge others, so where does this person get the audacity to level such a blanket judgment against a whole group of people, which includes children?  Second, who could respect and worship such a vindictive God, that would say to a group of people who were just living their lives and worshiping God as they saw fit, that they were deserving of such an outcome?  And would that be the freedom, that was alluded to in the first answer?   That's not freedom that's coercion.  What about the second answer above, in the Congo reference, it said innocent people.  Why use that example to defend your God's actions, unless the Jews were innocent too.  Don't you need to compare apples for apples. That person allowed that murder and genocide was taking place on innocent people, how does that stack up with Isaiah 59?  According to that scripture it's because of their sins.  And the explanation of Satan ruling this world and has blinded the minds of them that believe not, and deception has caused the masses to be cut off from God.  Does not seem like a good reason to allow genocide to a reasonable mind, does it? If a people have been deceived by someone as cunning as the Devil, surely God would be compassionate wouldn't He?  If your child had been deceived by a very cunning evil person, would you take it out on your child?  If you are going to use the argument that Satan rules this world and has blinded people, that would be a better explanation for the perpetrators actions wouldn't it, then the victims?  Weren't the Nazi's the blind ones: blinded by pride, greed, fear, self-centeredness, hate and anger?  Aren't those Satan's characteristics? 

What I find interesting about all three of these answers, is a lack of compassion for the Jews and the horrific genocide they endured.  These answers were all from "loving" Christian people, who seem to be full of judgment.  A know this sampling is in no way scientific it's only anecdotal, and these people are not officially speaking for their church's, but it is interesting, the absolute lack of compassion.  I think back to the things that I have been taught about the Holocaust, and there is that same sense of judgment.  I remember, in Seminary, learning that the Jewish leaders had previous to the Holocaust signed a paper or document, claiming they were not the chosen people of God, and this was given as the justification for the Holocaust.  Maybe not in those words exactly, but I'm 56, and I can still remember being taught that when I was a teenager, so it must have lodged some where in my brain as at least a partial reason. This of course too, is anecdotal and does not speak for the Church.  But I do think there is, or at least was, a sense that the Jews were still being punished for rejecting the Messiah, and it's blatant arrogance and stupidity that allows for thoughts like that.

Let's consider some other answers, and I'm not going to pretend to know the answer, but let's examine some answers from people who claim to know.  You can decide if you think their explanation is worth considering or not.

Howard Storm, an atheist who had a NDE, while in a hospital in Paris, says he asked God about the Holocaust. He saw the Jews being transported in the railway cars to the camps where they were killed.  He says he saw "piles of naked corpses being loaded into the ovens, and began to cry 'these are the people God loves'." Then an angel told him to look up and he saw, "rising out of the smoke of the chimneys, I saw hundreds of people, being met by thousands of angels taking them up into the sky.  There was great joy in the faces of the people, and there appeared to be no trace of a memory of the horrendous suffering they had just endured."  He asked how God could allow this to happen, he was told that "it was not God's will.  This was an abomination to God.  God wants this to never happen again.  This was the sacrifice of an innocent people to whom God had given the law to be an example, a light, to rest of the world.  This Holocaust was breaking God's heart..."  The angels told Howard that "God was very unhappy with the course of human history and was going intervene to change the world.  God had watched us sink to depths of depravity and cruelty at the very time that He was giving us the instruments to make the world a godlier world.  God had intervened in the world many times before, but his time God was going to change the course of human events."

Dr. Eban Alexander, a brain surgeon, had this to say about his NDE, "I saw the earth as a pale blue dot in the immense blackness of physical space.  I could see that earth was a place where good and evil mixed, and this constituted one of its unique features.  Even on earth there is much more good than evil, but earth is a place where evil is allowed to gain influence in a way that would be entirely impossible at higher levels of existence.  That evil could occasionally have the upper hand known and allowed by the Creator as a necessary consequence of giving the gift of free will to beings like us.  Small particles of evil were scattered through out the universe, but the sum total of all the evil was as a grain of sand on a vast beach compared to the goodness, abundance, hope, and unconditional love in which the universe was literally awash.  The very fabric of the alternate dimension is love and acceptance, and anything that does not have these qualities appears immediately and obviously out of place there."

What about the Jewish people, what do they think about God allowing the Holocaust to take place? One of their religious leaders, Rabbi Alan Lurie, has these thoughts on the subject:  ..."the very question of 'How could God allow the Holocaust?' represents a profound misunderstanding of the nature of God, creation, and the spiritual dimension, because it is based on very faulty assumptions.  It posits God as a being who is totally separate from us, who observes our behavior, preventing harm from coming to those who follow certain rules (usually written in books), and punishing those who do not.  And it sees humans as helpless children.  But God is much more than that, and we are much more than that.  This image of God and humans, frankly, is childish and primitive,...the purpose of creation is to be in a loving relationship with its Creator.  In order to have a true relationship, though, there must be absolute free will, because a programmed or coerced being cannot experience true love.  Free will, then is a universal constant, built in to the fabric of creation like gravity and the speed of light.  Free will to choose love means that there must be the possibility to choose not-love to choose indifference and hatred.  So while the world may seem unfair, it must be exactly as it is in order for consciousness to emerge, and I am in complete agreement with the 17th century philosopher Gottfried Leibniz, who wrote that this is the best of all possible worlds...God deliberately does not interfere-not out of indifference, but out of great love.  God must "watch" in pain as we commit atrocities, because to interfere would negate free will, terminating the relationship and hence the very purpose of creation...This is the great gift of creation:  We can do something God cannot; we can elevate physicality by our choice to act in love."

Wow!!  Those are powerful answers, centered in an understanding of God's love for His creation and His gift of free will to us.  So yes, my initial attitude of, how can God be loving and allow such evil as the Holocaust to happen, was a shallow attitude and understanding of God.  My second attitude of, how hard that must have been for God to watch this horrific event take place, was a more enlightened, one, and makes me realize how important this gift is, and how important it is that I use it to be loving.  And I need to understand the sacrifice that the Jewish people went through for that gift of free will.   As Dr. Alexander says "...love and compassion are far more than the abstractions many of us believe them to be.  They are real.  They are concrete. And they make up the very fabric of the spiritual realm.  In order to return to that realm, we must once again become like that realm, even while we are stuck in, and plodding through, this one."

None so blind...

Yesterday the NY Times ran an article about the Church's essay on Joseph Smith and his plural wives.  The essay has been out for a few weeks, but most members were entirely unaware of it.  Why, because the Church didn't announce the publishing of the essay or any of their essays, they just quietly put them buried on their website, but everyone knows about them now, thanks to the NY Times.  So what's the reaction?  Varied of course, for some it will be so shocking they will reject the church, for others it will be disturbing, but something they can live with, at least for the moment.  My guess is that for the vast majority of members, they will just shrug it off, they will tell themselves they already knew that, and many did know about his polygamy.  I did, but it's never mentioned, and I mean never mentioned, in lessons, in Conference talks, in the manuals, so you mostly forget.  But what I'm sure the vast majority didn't know before, was the polyandry, the fourteen year old girl, and the number of women he married.  So what's the reaction to this new information?  Blindness.  And I don't mean that in a negative way, but it is blindness.  You can't jump out and scare someone, and not expect them to scream and run, and that's exactly what happened.  The NY Times jumped out and scared Mormon's, figuratively speaking, and they will scream and run. They may not scream, well... maybe they will scream at you if you try to talk to them about it, but they will run.  But can you blame them?  They weren't looking to have their beloved prophet exposed on the front page of the NY times.  They weren't even aware of most of the issues that were plastered there, how can they defend them, when they weren't aware of them, and it's not really logical of anyone to expect them to, is it? 

I knew Joseph Smith was a polygamist.  I knew that.  But like I said, it's never talked about: polygamy really isn't talked about much.  All you ever see are pictures of Joseph with Emma, and the portrait that the Church paints of him, as a kind, obedient, humble servant of the Lord, and devoted husband to Emma.  That's all you ever hear and see, period! We sing, Praise to the Man, we praise that man, that prophet of God, that gave his life to bring forth the gospel of Christ, to bring forth the blessings of heaven.  "None did more for the salvation of man, save Jesus Christ, then him," our leaders tell us.  God anointed that prophet and seerer. This is the story that's taught in General Conference, in the manuals, and in our scripture.  So can you blame someone for being blind?  The only defensive move is to shrug it off.  It's just another attack on the Church, another test of faith, to which you have covenanted to be true to, Mormon's will tell themselves.  If there's one thing that Mormonism does better than most religions, is it ties everything in one package: your family, your social world, your God, your faith, your reason for existing, your future, the truth, your value system, your view of life, your view of others, did I mention family?  It's all tied up together.  Do I need to reemphasize the magnitude of all that?  Your family, your view of the world, your God, your salvation, your truth, EVERYTHING is tied up together.  What incentive could a person possible have in wanting to unravel that?  Do you even understand what it takes to unravel that?  You would put everything at risk, your family relationships, your friendships, your security system, your reputation, and possibly your salvation.  And  what if you're wrong?  Everyone will tell you you're wrong.  They will tell you how concerned they are for you, as they shut the door to your relationship with them.  Your opinion about anything will now be tainted with apostasy.  Your opinion will not matter in anyway, it won't even be allowed to be expressed for the most part, and you will be shut out.  So given all of that, blindness is a quick easy answer.  It's not even a conscious decision, it just kicks in automatically.  It takes an incredible amount of time, energy, determination to know the truth, and integrity to put all of the things mentioned above on the chopping block, and say "go at it, I can take it."  The truth is, most of us can't take it.  And I don't blame anyone that falls into that category.  But it would be nice, although not likely, if the blind ones could show a little respect for those who do ask the hard questions, to allow them the right to pursue truth as they see it.  To give everyone the free agency that this Church so loudly touts, to make their own decisions without judgment from those who are supposed to be full of charity, to not be so "concerned" about those who have chosen a harder path, who seek truth no matter the cost. 
 
Respect from both sides of the isle should be the goal.  People have to live together in this big beautiful world.  God wants us to love each other, more than anything else, and he puts us in these difficult situations to learn just that... love. If you think there is something bigger and better to learn in life, you may not know God as well as you think you do.  Do you really think God's main objective is to just see if you can blindly hold on to what you perceive as the truth or have been taught as the truth, or do you think Gd's bigger goal is for you to learn to love others who think and do differently then you think they should.  One beautiful thing about discovering that the Mormon church does not hold all the truth, and is in fact not all what it claims to be, is the ability to reject all your preconceived notions, and with this new discerning eye, look objectively at everything, no rock or stone is left unturned.  And what you discover is that there are no belief systems or religions that don't have their dark side, unbelievable truth claims, and/or problems with their history.  But, this gives you a never ending gift of compassion and tolerance and love for others in their life's journey.  You don't hold the key to the universe and you know that other's don't either.  But, you can certainly respect their life experiences and views, and faith that they hold, and if you're wise you will learn from them.  I think God likes that.  I think God planned it that way.  But if you don't believe in God and think he has a plan like that, hey I respect that too, and I understand where you're coming from.  I believe it's integrity that took you to that life view, and I know that you have not lost any of your morals as a result, and maybe have gained some, which that too, I can learn from.

A little history fun

Our daughter came to my husband and I last night wanting us to help her study for her history test.  It was mostly on the Reformation.  As she was trying to get the main events straight, I told her, "everything was about religion and power and keeping that power."  She said, "the Catholic Church sent out more missionaries," I said "yes, they were so concerned about everyone's salvation," with a smile on my face.  She turned to me and said, "they sent missionaries out to get more money," I said, "oh, that sounds familiar," my smile now turning into a chuckle, guess who's been listening to her mom and dad talk?  As we continued to go through the history, the parallels became fascinating! So let's have a little fun with history:

The Inquisition likened to The Mormon Reformation and The Strengthening the Members Committee

The Inquisition began as a legal way to contend with heretics. You know, those who spoke out about the Catholic Church wielding its controlling power over the helpless and innocent.  Its name comes from the Latin root word inquiro, which means, "to look into".  The inquisitors, those "looking into stuff" were accountable to only the Pope, the Vicar of Christ, the earthly representative of God!   They exacted penalties, tortured, and killed, those who objected to or threatened the power of the Church, you know, only stuff that God would do if He were on the earth.  The direct result of the Inquisition was increased influence and power for the church and need I say, an increase in wealth.  The two things, power and wealth, that God hungers after and that man is able to handle so well.  I think I have that right.  Yeah, that's right; and it was kind of a big, maybe biggest, violation of human rights in history, but there was the Holocaust, so... it's a toss up.  

Okay, now let's compare the Inquisition to the Mormon Reformation.   Why the puzzled look?  Surely you've heard of the Mormon Reformation.  Remember... we studied that in Seminary, at the same time that we studied the Meadow Mountains Massacre.  No?  I guess you're right, we didn't study those did we? I was in my forties in college before I ever heard of the Meadow Mountains Massacre.  I just learned about the Mormon Reformation this year. It took place in 1856 and 1857. It was under the direction of President Brigham Young, our earthly representative of God, kind of like a Mormon Pope, the prophet, seer and revelator that speaks directly to God to get His will concerning His church.  Those overseeing the reformation, Young's counselors, were only accountable to him.  Though on a tiny, tinier scale then the Inquisition, there are similarities.  Like only being accountable to the head of the church, and wielding complete authority.   

The Mormon Reformation began with President Young's desire to increase spirituality within the church. He was unhappy with the worldliness of the saints, as they began to build up their own personal wealth.  The reformation began by strict rules being enforced over the congregants through intimidation, home surveillance through a new home missionary program, and preaching the need for repentance and change from the pulpit at General Conference and other meetings.  Young's two counselors, Heber C. Kimball and Jedediah Grant, went throughout the entire Utah Territory, encouraging members to reject sin and embrace all things spiritual.  

Polygamy had been secretly practiced for years by the leadership of the Church, but in 1852, Brigham Young announced it as a church practice and doctrine. Thus, opening it up as a possibility to everyone. It was taught that polygamy was a more righteous way to live, in fact there are plenty of quotes from Brigham Young and others proclaiming it necessary to receive exaltation. When you have that bizarre of a marriage arrangement going on, you are just asking for trouble when it comes to sexual conduct.  A monkey wrench was thrown into their entire moral culture, and as a result, men began marrying younger and younger girls, 13 and 14 years old was not uncommon.  Adultery and fornication must have been seen as a problem, at least in the eyes of Apostle Parley P Pratt, who in 1855 asked the legislature to assign the death penalty for such behavior.  In 1857 Heber C. Kimball spoke about adultery within the church and said that, those doing so, were "worthy of death, and they will get it."  

Mormon's during that time, never really lived the Word of Wisdom like we do today.  Many drank coffee, tea, and beer and smoked or chewed tobacco, Church leaders included.  There are numerous journal entries and other records that provide enough evidence that it's not really debatable that the Word of Wisdom was just that, words. Leonard Arrington, church historian, said that the current attitude we have now about these substances, began in 1867.   

By September 1856, the Utah Territory, had been suffering from a draught, there were increasingly more immigrants coming from Europe across the Great Plains.  The economy was a mess and people were suffering.  Mormon's really believed at that time, including their leaders, that they were on the brink of the Second Coming.  As this call for greater spirituality continued, almost everyone was rebaptized.  The prophet was preparing everyone to live "celestial law" in Utah.  He is quoted as saying:  "The time is coming when justice will be laid to the line and righteousness to the plummet; when we shall take the old broadsword and ask, Are you for God?  And if you are not heartily on the Lord's side, you will be hewn down."  If you think that his choice of words, "hewn down" is a bit dramatic, then you haven't heard of his doctrine of Blood Atonement. He was not kidding around when he used phrases like that.  To enforce this new "spirituality" among the saints, there were secret committees set up called "destroying angels" or Danites. There's an account of one group of people who left the Church during this time period being murdered, though probably sanctioned on a local level. 

During October Conference 1856, 2nd Counselor Grant, called several presidents of the Seventy by name and accused them of adultery among other things, and he urged President Young to "cut them off and prune the trees around him".  Home missionaries were assigned to ward families from their local teachers quorum, these were men in those days not 14 to 16 year old boys as they are now, to check on their physical needs and their spiritual progress; they were to report back to Church leaders regarding this.  This reform was the genesis of home teaching.  It just makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that the home teaching program began as a home spying program, doesn't it?  Sorry, I don't mean to criticize  home teaching, it's a helpful service to many single mothers and widows, among others, today.

And hey, how about that Strengthening the Members Committee? You haven't heard about that either?  I know, I'd never heard of the fairly secretive committee either, until I saw Elder Holland asked about it in a BBC interview by Michael Sweeney.  (Can I just digress for one moment here to formally thank Elder Holland, if he had never agreed to interviews, I would have never known about this committee, or the fact that we don't know how we got the doctrine for the priesthood ban on the blacks, even though we were always taught it was a revelation from God, and I would have never known that the reasons for the ban are now referred to as "folklore" by our leaders.  Maybe Elder Holland really is doing God's work, because without his interviews how would we ever learn these things!)  Anyway, when Mr. Sweeney asked Elder Holland about the committee, Elder Holland acknowledged that it did and does still exist, ..."to protect against predatory practices of polygamists."  Sweeney asked, "It's there to defend the church against polygamists?"  "...that is still its principal task," answered Holland. When asked its subsidiary task, Holland said..."to be protective generally, just to watch and care for... any, err, insidious influence."   There appears to be two members of the Twelve Apostles on the committee, that reports directly to the First Presidency.  A spokesman for the church, Don LaFevre, said the committee "receives complaints from church members about other church members who have made statements that 'conceivably could do harm to the church', then the committee will pass the information along to the person's ecclesiastical leader."  Kind of sounds like the Nazi Germany's snitch system.  Problem is, nobody knows about the committee, so if you saw something you thought could be harmful to the church, you would have no idea that this committee exists, so how does that work?  Elder Oaks in 1993, described the committee as a "clipping service."  Well that about sums everything up; nothing more needs to be explained there.  Except, what the heck is a "clipping service?"   I looked it up, it's someone who cuts out coupons for you.  That's nice! They used to spy on members and now they are giving them coupons.  No... wait.  It's not coupons after all, it's speeches, writings and activities of those suspected of apostasy, that's what's clipped and passed on to church officials.  Isn't that a nice, harmless little committee, paid for by your tithing dollars no doubt. What happened to free agency, and turning the other cheek, and loving your neighbor and charity and all of that stuff? I wander if the disclosure of this committee is part of the missionary discussions? 

Martin Luther likened to The September Six

The Protestants have their hero, and we have ours too.  On Halloween day, three years from now, it will be the 500th anniversary of Martin Luther posting his 95 theses on the door of the Castle Church of Wittenberg.  His criticisms threatened the power of the Pope and the Catholic Church, causing his excommunication. Luther was a scholar who had studied Aristotle at the University of Efurt.  We have our scholars too, they also threatened the Church's power and were excommunicated. These church's have no sense of humor when it comes to their power, let's just say they are very protective of it, and your loss of salvation does not cause them to loose any sleep, if you threaten their power in any way. 

The September Six, who are they?  They were a group of prominent LDS Scholars that were excommunicated, one disfellowshipped, in September of 1993. According to the Salt Lake Tribune, that did an article on them 20 years later, they were "writers that were rebuked."  D. Michael Quinn, a historian and one of the Six said, ...The tragic reality is that there have been occasions when Church leaders, teachers, and writers have not told the truth they knew about difficulties of the Mormon past, but have offered to the Saints instead a mixture of platitudes, half-truths, omissions, and plausible denials... A so called "faith promoting" Church history which conceals controversies and difficulties of the Mormon past actually undermines the faith of the Latter-day Saints who eventually learn about the problems from other sources..."  This statement made back in 1981 by D. Michael Quinn is more prophetic then anything I have heard from any of our prophets from that time until the present.  This is literally happening on a daily basis now and people are leaving in droves. 

The German and English Bible likened to the Internet

This is such a fun comparison!  Control the message, control the masses.  That bears repeating, so one more time, control the message, control the masses.  Loose control of the message and... well bad things happen, like the Reformation or the Google apostasy.  Bad things to the institution that is, the people might say differently. We all know the effects of getting the bible into the hands of the people in a language they could read, right?  They were no longer reliant upon the institution to hand pick what they heard, and interpret it for them.  The people could read it all for themselves and decide. That's exactly what is going on right now in the Mormon Church.  The Church used to have control of the history, and the way it was presented to its members, and unless you were very curious and happened to have a key to the First Presidency vault, so you could view all the primary sources that contradict the white washed history, you would never know.  But there were a few people who did get a "key" and their information has been recorded; remember D. Michael Quinn, one of the September Six, he's one of the people who had this "key".  That was several decades ago, who knew right?  Well some people knew, but they were few and far between, and you still had to be looking and know where to look for that information.  Most Mormons are not curious, not because we are ignorant, we are actually a highly educated people.  BUT, we are not curious, because we have been taught to not be curious! Not in those words exactly, the Church leaders don't put a swinging pocket watch in front of our faces, telling us...you are now getting sleepy, very very sleepy,  then tell us...don't be curious.   They just tell us that, anything that doesn't come from them is anti-Mormon and we should never look at that.  We don't want to be anti-Mormon and fall into a trap that might take away our testimony, thus our salvation, so we are not curious, super not curious.  Why would we be, for the most part, Mormons are very happy people, they have nice families and who wants to do anything that would tear at the root of all of that?  No thanks, we'll just pass on that, wouldn't you?   So even though this information was out there, it didn't look to be a problem for the Church.  All was well in Zion; but as you know, all good things come to an end, and Google was that end. 

There is so much information on the internet, good information, that is backed up by primary sources, double, triple backed up by primary sources, often the sources are the church's own publications from years past, or quotes from their own leaders, or doctrines that were once taught that have quietly disappeared with no explanation, like blood atonement.  It's so prolific and well documented, that if you happen to trip across it on the internet, well... Google apostasy.  What more can I say? 

Jesuits likened to 18 year old missionaries

The Jesuits played a very important role in the Counter-Reformation, when the Catholic Church tried to stop the bleeding from people joining with the Protestants.  The Jesuits were organized and committed, and were all in all a very impressive group of people, that did many good things. The Mormon Church has a missionary program that is also made up of a group of impressive people,  very organized, and very obedient.  About three years ago, desperate measures must have been needed, to stop the bleeding from the Google apostasy.  That's when President Monson made  the announcement that boys could now serve when they are 18, previously it has been 19, and girls can serve at 19, previously it was 21.  The Church anticipated that the announcement would significantly increase the number of missionaries, and it did. Unfortunately for the Church, the number of baptisms has not increased at the same rate as the increase of missionaries. So like the Jesuits, the increase in missionaries may help the bleeding, but like the Jesuits, who were not effective in stopping the Protestants, I'm afraid they will have little impact on the Google apostasy. 

Henry the VIII likened to Denver Snuffer

Here's another fun one.  Sometimes things just come out of left field.  Who would have ever thought that a King, Henry the VIII, would get it in his head to break away from the only church in the land and start his own church, which he would be the head of.  Kings are so busy anyway: feasts to attend, people to behead, countries to ravish, women to ravish, oh...I'm getting ahead of the story.  Well anyway, you get the idea, they are busy, busy, busy.  So why in heaven's name, pardon the pun, would you want to add, Popeship to your itinerary? Well it's just the oldest story in the book... pure love.  To get the woman of his dreams he would do anything!  Now image the shock and loss this was to the Papacy, the timing could not be worse.  Just when the Catholics thought those awful Protestants were causing havoc, image loosing an entire empire!  And the blasphemy of that wretched king proclaiming himself supreme head of the church of England. 

Now things are not looking great for the Mormon church either.  They're loosing members in bigger numbers then they'll admit to.  They tried to head off their plummeting numbers by pulling out the stops with their missionaries, lowering the age requirement, thus bringing in the biggest number of missionaries the Church has ever seen. Only to see their baptism rate increase by a mere four percent.  Enter, Denver Snuffer, forty year convert to the Church, who had been doing a lot of reading... a lot!  He read the scriptures, he read Church history, he started comparing the two, he came to conclusions that the Church was off track.  He wrote books about it, he blogged about it, he gained followers, he held seminars, he got excommunicated, his followers still follow him, they are leaving the Church, and being rebaptized.  Now, Denver is no King of England, and he didn't start a new movement over the love of a woman, but it was passion that moved him, passion for a gospel of Christ that he saw being usurped by men who are not receiving revelation from Christ, in his opinion.  And his followers hardly amount to a number to be noticed yet, but he's just in the beginning stages of his reform, so that remains to be seen.

The Council of Trent likened to the new Church Essays

Well, now we have come full circle.  Just like the Catholic Church, when they were first threatened by the Protestant movement, they tried to use force and hold firm to their doctrine and ways of doing things; and just like any other threatened institution when they discovered that they couldn't beat them, they decided to join them, to a small degree anyway.  The Council of Trent lasted for 18 years, but finally in the end, the Catholic Church did clean up some of its corruption, defined its doctrine, and made enough changes that it was able to carry on as an institution in a positive way.  The Mormon church is following suit.  It's leaders tried to clamp down, tighten their hold by excommunicating high profile dissenters, until that back fired on them, because of bad publicity.  They still are very active in excommunicating folks, but there are some that are just too high profile right now, that they have backed down from their threats of excommunication.  But if you're not well known enough to make too big of a media splash, watch out.  The Church essays appear to be an attempt to come clean about some of the sugarcoated history that its been doling out for generations.  Just as the Catholic Church had to admit in its reforms at the Council of Trent, that they had become corrupt in some areas, the Mormon Church is having to admit that they have been less than truthful and have not been forthcoming about its imperfections, which is many, and have had to admit that some of its doctrine was wrong and some of their scripture is not a translation from an ancient record, and that their founder may have not been exactly the near flawless person that they promote.  But you have to really read between the lines to find that.  They do protect his and their image to the best of their ability.  Remember their authority and divine commission, is directly related to Joseph Smith's commission being divine. 

So there you have it, a little history fun! Everything old is new again.