Emotion vs. Spirit

It has always interested me—and not necessarily in a good way—that so many critics of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints complain that the Church is a “brainwashing cult” or whatever. The irony of this becomes particularly apparent when one realizes that many of the most outspoken critics have done no firsthand (or even secondhand) research whatsoever, they just attended some “Mormonism” class that their own church put on and assume everything said in that class—like everything their preacher has ever said—is the Gospel truth.

Now, don’t get me wrong; I fully recognize that there are some misinformed members of the Church of Jesus Christ that fall into this same category: that of assuming that everything a leader says, regardless of what it is, is scripture on the same level as the canonical works. This is obviously not the case, as several Church leaders—even Apostles—have been officially rebuked for certain *ahem* inaccurate statements made along the way. I have personally been in a Church meeting where a particular high priest made a highly inaccurate statement and had to be corrected by the bishop, in front of the entire congregation. People are people, and Church leaders are no different than the rest of us. They make mistakes, which is why we are expressly commanded to never just take their word for it. To do so would be what the ancient prophets called “trust[ing] in the arm of flesh” (see, for example, Jeremiah 17:5 and 2 Nephi 4:34).

Because of all this, Latter-day Saints are commanded to rely not on other individuals—regardless of who they may be, or what calling they may hold; rather, we are instructed to take our questions directly to the Lord. The irony is that while many critics call us “brainwashed,” those very critics believe that if the preacher says it, it must be true; while Latter-day Saints are taught that even if a Church leader says it, only an ignoramus would just take his or her word for it. (In the case of the aforementioned high priest, for example, the Spirit let both Anna and me know, long before the bishop said anything, that the statement was absolutely not correct. I expect others in the congregation had the same experience.)

This principle, it must be said, is also inherent in the way Latter-day Saints share Christ’s Gospel with others: from the very first time someone meets with the missionaries, s/he is instructed to not, under any circumstances, just take the missionaries’ word for it. The missionaries help the person to identify the confirming testimony of the Holy Ghost, which fills both heart and mind (see Doctrine & Covenants 8:2; cf. Hebrews 8:10, Mosiah 2:9). The problem, as I see it, is that I believe many investigators (and even established Church members) have great difficulty distinguishing between a natural, emotional reaction and the confirming influence of the Spirit. As such, it becomes easy to believe that one’s emotional response to what the missionaries have taught constitutes a spiritual witness thereof, which I expect is the reason for most of the apostasy that we see: as in the Christian parable of the sower, they “hath… not root in [themselves]” (see Matthew 13:3-23).

I’ve heard it said (but have never seen cited, so if you can find it, please let me know) that the Apostle L. Tom Perry once spoke of the videos missionaries sometimes show to investigators. His purported statement was something along the lines of: “No one has ever felt the Spirit while watching a Church video. These videos contain actors telling of experiences they know nothing about, so the Spirit cannot testify to their words. What these videos do is tear at the heartstrings, which makes the viewer emotional; and in that emotional state, the heart becomes more open to the confirming witness of the Holy Ghost, which the missionaries can help to invite.”

While I’d certainly like to know if Elder Perry really did make this statement, that aspect is actually immaterial to my point. Either way, it demonstrates the principle I’ve outlined above: that emotional response and Spiritual promptings are two very different things. What‘s more, I believe that the inability to discern between the two is exacerbated by well-meaning Church members. These members, I believe, never even consider the possibility that someone might be coming to Church without a true testimony of its veracity. If the person is attending Church meetings and seems to believe what’s being taught, that must mean s/he’s had that spiritual witness, right?

Personally, I think this is a load of crap, and we need to make this more apparent to Church membership as a whole. In a discourse given in the Church’s 167th Annual General Conference, the Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley (1910-2008) stated that every new member of the Church “needs three things: a friend, a responsibility, and nurturing with ‘the good word of God.’” While he was absolutely correct in that assessment, I submit that the importance of a true, Spirit-based testimony should be underscored by being recognized as a separate, fourth necessity instead of being subtly encompassed within the third point. How about it, First Presidency? ;-)

So anyway, this (as usual) very long introduction brings us to the point I’m trying to make. This past weekend was the Church’s 179th Semiannual General Conference. These General Conferences—called “Annual” in April and “Semiannual” in October—occur twice a year and allow us to hear the words of the prophets and Apostles called to preside over the Lord’s Earthly kingdom in our day. While these very human individuals do make occasional mistakes, their discourses are reviewed, corrected, and published in the following month’s Church magazines. They should indeed be—and I would argue, generally are—the Lord’s word to us today. Just as God’s words to Adam didn’t teach Noah how to build the ark, His words to Noah didn’t teach Moses how to lead Israel out of Egypt, and so on throughout the ancient scriptures, neither are the revelations of millennia ago completely sufficient for the people of today. Obviously we can still learn a lot from them—after all, the principles of the Gospel will never change—but the specific counsel and focus will vary according to the needs of the Saints (and the world) at the time. Thus, we have living prophets and Apostles to add their testimony to that of the dead ones. But I digress… again. (I’m good at that.)

In the fourth and final general session of the 179th Semiannual General Conference, the Apostle Jeffrey R. Holland spoke about (among other things) the Book of Mormon and its—to be quite honest—indisputable veracity. He held in his hand the very copy of the Book of Mormon from which President Hyrum Smith (1800-1844) read before he and his brother Joseph (1805-1844) were murdered by a mob while imprisoned in Carthage Jail. Elder Holland argued that this, among thousands of other evidences, forms a strong indication of the veracity of the Book of Mormon: had Joseph and/or his friends written the book, neither he nor Hyrum—much less both of them—would have given their lives rather than renounce it. Of course, if this point were the sole basis for Elder Holland’s testimony, he would indeed be an ignoramus, but as this one evidence is but a piece among a patchwork of thousands—the largest being a personal, Spirit-based testimony—I think his comments are quite apropos.

So to finally get to the point of this entire post, what amazed me the most is that as I listened to Elder Holland speak, I did not feel emotional at all. Despite the stirring emotions that he personally seemed to feel—he actually got choked up several times, while defending this scriptural record he so obviously loves—I felt nothing. What shocked me was the realization that, while I could honestly say that was not emotional at all about what he was saying, I still felt the Spirit.

The reason I’m even blogging about this is because this is a first for me. There have been plenty of times when, like Elder Perry ostensibly described, I experienced an emotional response that could easily have been mistaken for a spiritual prompting. In those instances, I’ve often had to determine whether I was experiencing both of the above or only the former, as the difference—particularly when I’m actually trying to receive revelation—can be of extreme importance. This time, however, was exactly the opposite: for the first time I can remember in my entire life, I felt that very distinct, spiritual impression—an absolute knowledge that what I was hearing was the God’s-honest truth—without any emotional attachment. To be honest, I’m really not sure what it means. Have I just experienced a major leap forward in my spiritual progression, or have I just become so emotionally jaded that I couldn’t empathize on a non-spiritual level?