Six months into my experience as a missionary for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints I met with my mission president for my monthly personal interview. Being aware of my history of depression before my mission, the mission president asked me how I was doing emotionally. I responded that I was struggling to feel joy and happiness, a common symptom of depression that I experienced even before my mission.
He responded to me, with intentions to motivate, that there were ONLY two reasons a missionary would not feel joy or happiness.
- That missionary was not obeying the commandments of God
- That missionary was not obedient to the rules of the mission.
On its face, his statement was narrow-minded in the least.
I knew of many missionaries far less obedient to mission rules than myself who were having a much happier experience. Likewise, it would be obtuse to think that sorrow in life, even mission life, was exclusive to disobedience. Yet, because this was my prophet-sustained Priesthood Leader addressing me in the context of my own emotional inadequacies as God’s servant I felt obligated to consider the mission president’s words inspired.
Looking back months later, I recognized this as my first personal conflict with the words of a priesthood leader. Strangely, it was over the management of a not-well-understood health issue…a health issue given a moral twist.
In this situation I had one of two general choices:
- I could consider his words inspired, exacting my obedience to sometimes arbitrary mission rules…or
- I could consider his words as well-intentioned, but uninspired.
Both choices would have consequences. Some of those consequences could be confidently anticipated. Some of them would only manifest themselves in time.
Before I reveal how this played out, I want to point out a genuine conundrum this situation revealed to me:
By what AUTHORITY did my Mission President make his statement?
In short, was this President Johnson, the prophet called, God-ordained leader of Central Ohio’s LDS missionary army making this statement, or was this Brother Johnson, a previously successful insurance salesman who voluntarily agreed to look over 150 19 to 21-year-old kids for three years making this statement…the same Bro. Johnson who moved 1500 miles from home to serve his God…the Bro. Johnson who had far more stressful concerns among those 150 missionaries than me…the Bro Johnson who, on top of all this, was trying to care for his wife who was undergoing cancer treatment at the time?
Other important complexities followed:
- When the stress of exacting obedience makes me unlivable as a companion, will my fellow missionaries (or even God) consider the justification reasonable that my behavior was priesthood mandated?
- If I choose to disregard the guidance of my Priesthood leader can I in good conscience ask God for His help on the matter.
- When does God consider personal choice, even in the face of authoritative guidance, of more spiritual worth than exact obedience. Does God entitle us to conflicts similar to those of Adam and Eve where, by the nature of the trial, we must exercise our own agency not just without compulsion, but in absolute opposition to priesthood guidance in order to fully activate our potential to become like Him.
Shortly after my interview with the Mission President, I chose to commit myself to exact obedience. This meant asking my companion to destroy his Alice Cooper CD’s as I would my Pure Mood CD’s (remember those) that we would listen to when stressed. I also called out my district leader when he played a non-mission approved Christian Rock band album when we were all in his car. (Apparently, the greatest problem of disobedience in the mission was the listening to music not authorized by the mission president.) And, regretfully, when I got a brand-new straight-from-home missionary companion 3 weeks later I drove him into the ground with as much mission-schedule exactness as I could muster. Strangely, this increased exactness to mission rules did not make me any happier. It did however make me more stressed and depressed. And, as anticipated, I managed to piss everyone off around me.
Six weeks into my commitment, I broke with stress and anxiety. I called my mission president and parents and explained that unless I could resolve my current mental state I would have to come home.
The following 7 months were largely emotionally unpredictable. I worked with my doctor, through regular phone calls, to establish an effective medication regimen. The entire time I pushed myself, continuing my missionary service. At month thirteen, we finally established a medicine and dosage that provided the emotional stability I needed to serve without issue for the rest of my mission. Well…not entirely true…there was one issue.
Around my 19th month mark I had another one-on-one interview with President Johnson. Emotionally stable now, I had been assigned a missionary companion who was having his own troubles with the stress of the mission. We had been companions for two-and-a-half months. This missionary had made marked improvement in his effort and involvement in teaching during our time together. He was, however, still sleeping past 6:30 am, the mission standard for waking. The mission president was aware of this remaining issue and during this particular interview instructed me to physically force my companion out of bed and throw him in the shower.
I refused. I literally said to President Johnson “Force is Satan’s plan.”
The interview ended shortly after that statement. So did my hopes for finishing off my mission without any unconventional assignments. I’d spared my companion, but I lit up my Mission President and altered the trajectory of what remained of my mission. In truth, I spent many years feeling bitter about the way my mission changed following that interview. On the upside…my most fantastic mission stories nearly all come from the five months that followed.
Twenty-plus years later, our world is trying to cope with a not-well-understood health problem…a health problem with a moral twist. Caught in the politically charged complications of differing state and local government mandates sits organized religion. For the first time in our lifetime, we are seeing the power that State holds over Church even in a constitutional republic like the United States of America. Imagine then, a church wishing to maintain influence on an international level. That church must show appeasement to each and every government in the areas in which they desire to maintain influence.
Now, I’d rather not delve into the obvious complications of political influence on differing state and local mandates. But it is obvious to see that the presiding leaders of our church are trapped in an impossible conflict involving public welfare, public relations, government appeasement and religious freedom. On top of this is the Mormon cultural expectation that members are obligated to support Church Leadership (the same pressure I experienced as a missionary.) Now imagine all of these conditions existing, and upon you (Church Leadership) is given the responsibility of playing global game theory to enact and optimize what you know of God’s will.
Strange but true, this is a situation that God intends for us all to experience.
Having had a personal health experience under the influence of priesthood guidance I have the benefit of comparative hindsight to evaluate how LDS culture addresses the current scenario.
My recommendation here is broadview pragmatism – try to imagine how God looks at this worldwide event from every point of view, individually, familially, congregationally, religiously, globally, and everything in between.
The first item church members need to recognize is that mandates are made by governments. To maintain good standing with local governments churches feel an obligation to fall in line with mandates not morally prohibitive (hmmm…are mandatory masks in church a cause worth losing good global standing over?) The LDS church is no different and God is aware of this fact. True, in its infancy the LDS church resisted government overreach. However, as an international church – it does not have the same flexibility. The statement from President Nelson when he received the vaccine explaining he did so to be a “good global citizen” speaks specifically to that point. He did not say he received it because it was a commandment from God. He received it and published it via social media because it quickly communicates to the world a message that our church supports and encourages the vaccine, and we are team players. Extra points for using the buzz term “global citizen.” Excellent PR move.
However, such a PR move has other consequences when your culture commonly interprets its President’s actions as a communication of God’s will. Most, by culture, will faithfully do what their leaders have instructed. But what happens when your prophet defers protocol to national or local government officials (many of whom don’t personally follow their own protocols.) It is one thing to walk into a supermarket maskless where people think you a jerk. It is a completely different experience when you walk into church maskless and people consider you a heretic. I know of several incidents of church members (even significant local leaders) shaming other members to wear a mask or get the vaccine (even when immunization has already been naturally achieved) because the prophet told us we need to be “good global citizens.” The environment has begun to feel a bit “Scarlet Letter”ish despite what we have known about natural immunization for centuries. Sadly, people will leave the church over something like this.
Take Home Points –
- Government measures and public perception understandably influence Church policy and diplomacy. Such should be considered when trying to glean the will of God out of administrative measures.
- Masks and vaccines are not part of saving principles and ordinances. Free agency on the other hand is dead center.
- People make mistakes. The doctrine of Christ is still sound. Don’t sacrifice your relationship with God over hurt feelings.
Additionally, this is a unique opportunity for each individual to recognize that God does require us to make choices on our own, even in difficult circumstances.
“For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant…
Verily I say, men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness”
Doctrine & Covenants 58:26-27
Anybody heard anything like the following recently: “Wow!!! Things are getting crazy in the world!!! The second coming is hopefully right around the corner. Then Christ will deliver us from this madness.”
I love hearing this from an individual whose generation never experienced the World Wars, the Great Depression, the American Civil War, etc., as if, by historical comparison, COVID was the apocalyptic event intended to justify Christ’s return.
I also recognize the inertia that often accompanies the statement. It is essentially saying, “I hope my Dad will come take care of this for me.” A person so quickly looking for a deliverer is, themselves, reluctant to act without being compelled to do so, banking solely on obedience as the only measure required to earn God’s favor.
Helmuth Huebener understood that obedience alone is not enough. This young man knowingly acted against LDS Church policy of good citizenry in Nazi Germany. Huebener, a 17 year old member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, printed and distributed anti-Nazi leaflets around Hamburg in 1942, an act that ended in his beheading. Though he was excommunicated from the LDS church several months after he was captured (mostly as a public gesture to protect the Mormon population from Nazi retribution) his membership was fully reinstated and the completion of his temple work was performed shortly after the end of the war. Huebener’s is the very first European WWII civilian saint story highlighted in the church produced educational manual Church History in the Fulness of Times:
Even outside the combat zone, preoccupation with war was demoralizing and tended to diminish interest in spiritual concerns. Another problem faced the Saints in the occupied countries and in Germany. While some felt that the wisest course was to cooperate with the Nazis, others were convinced that their patriotic duty was to resist. Helmuth Hubener, a teenage member of the Church in Hamburg, for example, dared to distribute copies of news he had picked up by shortwave radio from the British Broadcasting Corporation, presenting a view contrary to Nazi propaganda. For these actions, he was eventually beheaded in a Gestapo prison.
Isn’t it interesting that while highlighting Helmuth’s heroic courage, the report blurs the fact that it was the Prophet, Heber J. Grant and other global and local church leaders who “felt that the wisest course was to cooperate with the Nazi’s” (understandable as it was to protect German Mormons from the atrocities of concentration camps to which Jews, Jehovah’s Witnesses and the like had already fallen victim.) In fairness, the Pope and Catholic church were doing the same.
It is no wonder LDS church members struggle to take a step against church endorsement of government overreach. Even those heroes who have done so have had their story censored in the interest of protecting church image. Though I do not personally advocate the shaded truth, I do understand the complexity of the scenario. By declaring the accurate church policy of good citizenry in Helmuth’s story you open a can of morally ambiguous worms that overshadows the courage of this amazing young man. Such moral ambiguity, though practically important, is not the milk that most members reading this manual can handle. Leadership understands this, hence the blurred information. Yet, they do so at the cost of blinding posterity…a calculated risk.
So now, a scenario for you to make personal inquiry. Imagine if Christ were to return to deliver us from today’s chaos…actually let’s say he returns in 20 years after an apocalyptic event. When we ask him how he could allow our children and grandchildren to be tortured by the horrors of war I imagine he would answer us with a returned question:
WHAT DID YOU THINK WAS GOING TO HAPPEN…?
Or…stated in a more Christ-like prose…
CAN A MAN BE SAVED IN IGNORANCE?
Christ continuing: Given historical context, (of which many of you neglected to study or consider) you conceded to the removal of God-given rights…you witnessed deceptive measures forced upon you in the name of safety…you allowed your children to be taught progressively corrupt principles….
So again, CAN A MAN BE SAVED IN IGNORANCE?
Luke Chapter 12 (nearly the whole chapter is applicable to our time; especially because Christ is addressing his apostles and other disciples, but 56 and 57 are especially apt):
56 Ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky and of the earth; but how is it that ye do not discern this time?
57 Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is right?
At that moment will the response…”But the Prophet didn’t instruct me specifically on these points beyond being a good citizen”…be adequately justified?
CONCLUSION: PERFECTLY IMPERFECT
As I stated previously, I was bitter about my mission for several years afterward. Bitterness is not an uncommon experience among returned missionaries. It is an uncommon experience for returned missionaries who remain active. Yet, regardless of my own bitterness, I stayed……and I worked it out…over time.
What I realized was that I had not identified the core issue. The problem wasn’t my mission president’s driven personality, nor was it my emotional inadequacies, or even that God did not care for me. The source of my bitterness was a Spiritual Affluenza – in short terms, a fallacy of thought that one’s comfort is the measure of one’s righteousness. President Johnson suffered from the same. The expectation that comfort, happiness, joy and success is entitled given righteous living is a truth drastically distorted in LDS culture. Likewise, that a righteous individual can be identified by their comfort, happiness, joy and success is a flat-earth understanding of a principle far outside our social norms. Not understanding the complexity of this issue, I held onto bitterness towards my mission, church culture, and God for strongly promoting this “If this…then that” principle in such black and white terms. Such clearly did not account for me.
With the new understanding, I pieced together the following:
- Our culture promotes (as does the scriptures) an incomplete position on emotions and righteousness.
- Mental health problems are a highly complex issue, especially when considering them under a religious view.
- The position of mission president is one of the most difficult (more like impossible) callings in our church.
- I was an anomaly 19 year old that was emotionally ill and OPEN ABOUT IT
- My mission President and I had conflicting personalities
- I was insubordinate in my rhetoric
- God needed my mission President and I to be “perfectly imperfect” for each other.
This last item – perfectly imperfect – was a phrase coined by my good friend, Jed Jones, with whom I served in a Bishopric. His meaning was that God intends for us to have constructive conflict because only in conflict have we need for intuition to identify opposition. And only by identifying opposition can we formulate change, muster improvement, and gain knowledge. As necessity is the mother of invention, constructive conflict is the mother of eternal growth.
In application, if President Johnson and I don’t clash, I never have reason to search for such spiritual answers. To become the voice for mental illness that I am today, I absolutely need a mission President who doesn’t coddle me with kindness.
Today, I am grateful for President Johnson’s perfect imperfections. I’m not quite sure he has the same appreciation for my accusing him of using Satan’s methods. But five months after that interview I walked off of a plane into the Salt Lake airport. Many of my friends and family I’d not seen for two years were there. But the one welcome home embrace that I remember to this day was President Johnson’s. He and his wife had returned home to Utah three months before and they had come to the airport. He grabbed me and hugged me before I even knew he was there. When I saw who it was I began to sob. He did the same. We both knew what we had struggled through. Though I did not appreciate it fully for several years, that moment for me was imperfection perfected.
So, as was my mission experience, this is a crucial moment when church leaders and church members, in an emotionally charged environment, must use their God-given ability to critically analyze, granting mercy generously.
As members, we should not place too harsh a judgment on fallible leaders who are placed in a socially impossible situation. Instead, we should ponder what God is trying to teach us about individual and collective crisis management in a mortal sphere. Find the value in being perfectly imperfect in yourself and others. That is likely the lesson most important to glean from this mess.
As leaders we should be cautious not to waste the confidence and faith of the members on functionally faulty, socially separating government mandates. The questionable motives of the State in this matter make the issue morally ambiguous. Policing masks or vaccines in the name of church authority is a subtle but dangerous road leading to spiritual carnage.
Both groups, church leaders and lay members alike, need to understand that of all risks from the current situation, the costliest and longest-lasting is the risk of spiritual separatism.
Post Script: Some will note I did not address the cost of lawsuit liabilities when considering church protocol. To that issue, I refer to Alma Chapters 9-14. Great courage and great costs. Yet it is clear that God did not intend for Alma and Amulek to cower to the corrupt wizardry of twisted lawyers’ threats. This may not be the answer to today’s problem…but there is precedence.
Also, it is good to recognize that from the beginning of time people have died from infections obtained at religious functions (the reason I rarely choose to eat at a church pot-luck.) Only the emotional impact and fear of Coronavirus has recently changed litigation’s perceived strength on the matter.
If you’d like to sue someone, sue the CCP.
Also below is a link to an excellent scholarly article addressing LDS policy before and during World War II encouraging good citizenship in Nazi Germany. Its information is very timely for our generation given today’s government mandates as well as the Israeli/Palestine conflict.
The Jews, the Mormons, and the Holocaust.
The article is free to read if you create an account on jstor.
1 Comment
Leave your reply.