Questions of Faith

One of my favorite discussions of this issue, a 1984 General Conference address from Elder Bruce R. McConkie.

He outlines these questions for self-assessment.
 
“Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves.” (2 Cor. 13:5.)

 Test one: Do I worship the only true and living God?

Test two: Do I believe in the fall of Adam?

Test three: Do I believe in the atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ?

Test four: Do I accept the true plan of salvation?

Test five: Do I believe the gospel as it has been restored in this final dispensation of grace?

Test six: Am I a faithful member of the true Church?

Test seven: Do I honor Joseph Smith as the great prophet of the Restoration?

Test eight: Am I enduring to the end, growing in grace, and gaining the attributes of godliness?

Test nine: Do I put first in my life the things of God’s kingdom? Is it with me and mine the kingdom of God or nothing?

Test ten: Am I so living that I will be saved in the kingdom of God?

The Church is like a great caravan—organized, prepared, following an appointed course, with its captains of tens and captains of hundreds all in place.

What does it matter if a few barking dogs snap at the heels of the weary travelers? Or that predators claim those few who fall by the way? The caravan moves on.

Is there a ravine to cross, a miry mud hole to pull through, a steep grade to climb? So be it. The oxen are strong and the teamsters wise. The caravan moves on.

Are there storms that rage along the way, floods that wash away the bridges, deserts to cross, and rivers to ford? Such is life in this fallen sphere. The caravan moves on.

Ahead is the celestial city, the eternal Zion of our God, where all who maintain their position in the caravan shall find food and drink and rest. Thank God that the caravan moves on!

Men and Women

I feel nothing but confusion coming from the discussion about "gay marriage" and California's latest voter initiative. Apparently other people have similar misgivings. I have read much discussion about it, pro and con, on the internet and in the bloggernacle lately.

I think, if we could but return to conditions closer to subsistence living, men and women would discover together fairly quickly that traditional roles work more effectively than any implementation of idealogical "egalitarian" relationship. That understanding should form the basis for any further development or refinement of civil law.

Of course, civil law should be based in the values and ethics of the culture under the laws. The scriptures read:

Now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the voice of the people. (Mosiah 29:26)

I am not certain, but I think the people of California voiced their opinion, were overruled by judges who interpret the law according to a different voice. Let us hope that ultimately the voice of those who would choose the right will prevail, in California and elsewhere. In the mean time, confusion reigns.

I, for one, do not find any need to answer all the confusing questions, just to satisfy my curiosity, or for any other reason. Though it is interesting to discuss, Church leaders have already counselled us to affirm that the marriage covenant is reserved for relationships between a man and woman. That is good enough for me. I may not understand all the implications, but I long ago committed to follow the counsel of the brethren, to the best of my ability. So there is no doubt in my mind about that, at least.