U Can’t Touch This (Please Uzza, Don’t Hurt ‘Em)

LDS, and Christians and Jews in general, are no doubt familiar with the phrase “steadying the ark”, and the story from whence the phrase comes.  Here’s how 1 Chronicles 13 tells the story:

9 ¶And when they came unto the threshing floor of Chidon, Uzza put forth his hand to hold the ark; for the oxen stumbled.

10 And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Uzza, and he smote him, because he put his hand to the ark: and there he died before God.

11 And David was displeased, because the Lord had made a breach upon Uzza: wherefore that place is called Perez-uzza to this day.

Assuming the story actually happened as reported, it’s all rather silly.

The ark isn’t God. The ark is a heavy gold chest, and apparently it was being pulled around the countryside by some oxen. The ark didn’t fly around on its own power, it didn’t have legs like a horse. It was a heavy box that people had to lift and carry, or animals had to be employed to move.

So Uzza is transporting a valuable gold chest, and the oxen stumble, apparently putting the ark at risk of falling to the ground. Are we really saying that if we were in his positition, we would stand still and watch the ark fall to the ground, spilling its contents? Was Uzza supposed to have faith that even though the Lord had allowed the oxen to stumble, he would miraculously save the ark from falling?

And since the Lord works through His followers, how was Uzza to know he hadn’t been placed in that position to act for the Lord in steadying the ark?

It’s even more silly how we try to apply some assumed lesson from Uzza’s tragic death in our day. Instead of using the principle of “ark steadying” to label those who we wish would be happier with the status quo, let me present some real-world scenarios:

- A seminary teacher arrives to the Church building early one morning and sees water running out from underneath the bathroom door, soaking the carpet in the hallway and seeping to the wood floor in the cultural hall. Since the facilities are not part of his stewardship, he decides not to “steady the ark” and shut off the water, and instead trusts in the Lord.

- While waiting for a Temple recommend interview in the foyer on a Wednesday evening, a man notices the Scout troop from another ward is meeting with only one adult leader two boys (in violation of the strict “two deep” adult leader policy). He sees some other things that make him uneasy about the situation, but since it isn’t his stewardship (or even his ward), he decides not to “steady the ark” and doesn’t mention it to anyone, trusting in the Lord.

- While visiting his brother’s ward, a man attends Gospel Doctrine class and in the course of the lesson, the teacher forcefully expresses views on the origin of the Priesthood ban that, while in harmony with teachings from 50 years ago, are out of step with current thoughts on the subject. The man’s brother later mentions that this subject comes up regularly with the teacher, and the same views are always reinforced, as well as some unusual beliefs regarding polygamy and other Church doctrines, policies or teachings. Instead of bringing the issue to someone in authority, both brothers decide it is out of their stewardship and to trust in the Lord and not steady the ark.

Those are all actual situations I have seen. Does anyone think that a person taking action outside of their stewardship in these cases is “steadying the ark”? How would it be any different than Uzza seeing the ark falling and instinctively trying to help.

It should also be noted that 1 Chronicles 13:7 says Uzza was driving the cart:


7 And they carried the ark of God in a new cart out of the house of Abinadab: and Uzza and Ahio drave the cart.

That being the case, it could be argued that the driver of the cart does have the stewardship to ensure safe transport of the cart’s contents.

“The Book Of Mormon Musical” : Doctrine On Broadway …a prophecy fulfilled?

NPR recently posted the soundtrack to “The Book of Mormon”, the Broadway musical from the creators of “South Park” and “Avenue Q” that has turned into a smash hit.

http://www.npr.org/2…-book-of-mormon

I haven’t seen the show, but after listening to the soundtrack a few times, I have to admit that the music is really good. I suspect from the quality of the music alone, these songs may be with us for a long time. I have dozens of CD’s of Broadway and film musical recordings, and this would definitely be in the top 5 or 10.

Posted Image

30 years ago, President Kimball expressed his vision for the arts, and the ways in which music, film and art could help tell the story of the Saints. In some way, as I see the success and reaction to “The Book of Mormon” on Broadway, I see a skewed fulfillment of that vision.

Quote

In the field of both composition and performance, why cannot someone write a greater oratorio than Handel’s Messiah? The best has not yet been composed nor produced. They can use the coming of Christ to the Nephites as the material for a greater masterpiece. Our artists tomorrow may write and sing of Christ’s spectacular return to the American earth in power and great glory, and his establishment of the kingdom of God on the earth in our own dispensation. No Handel nor other composer of the past or present or future could ever do justice to this great event. How could one ever portray in words and music the glories of the coming of the Father and the Son and the restoration of the doctrines and the priesthood and the keys unless he were an inspired Latter-day Saint, schooled in the history and doctrines and revelations and with rich musical ability and background and training?

Faithful LDS have given it their best shot over the years, to mixed (and usually underwhelming) success.

As far as the songs go when it comes to “religion”, it’s a mixed bag. Several are harmless, several are “interesting”, and some are so patently offensive that they would be extremely objectionable to anyone who is sensitive to profanity and “lightmindedness” towards the Church and its leaders.

One song stands out as particularly interesting, and I’ve listened to it more than the rest. It’s surreal to imagine this song being sung to packed houses in New York, and soon it will be heard all around the world (and, with the inevitable film version, it could help shape future perceptions of the Church in ways we can’t yet foresee).

The song is called “I Believe”. It is sung by Elder Price, as he deals with a crisis of faith on his mission in Uganda. You can hear it here:

http://www.npr.org/2…mormon#playlist

(The song has one aside line from an African that contains some profanity. If you want an edited MP3 of the song, PM me).

Here are the lyrics:

I Believe!

Ever since I was a child, I tried to be the best
so what happened?

My family and friends all said I was blessed,
so what happened?

It was supposed to be all so exciting, to be teaching of Christ across the sea.
But I allowed my faith to be shaken, oh what’s the matter with me?

I’ve always longed to help the needy, to do the things I never dared.
This was the time for me to step up, so then why was I so scared?

A warlord who shoots people in the face,what’s so scary about that?
I must trust that my Lord is mightier…and always has my back!

Now I must be completely devout…I can’t have even one shred of doubt!

I Believe!

…that the Lord God created the universe

I Believe!

…that He sent His only son to die for my sins

And I believe!

…that ancient jews built boats and sailed to America.

I am a Mormon, and a Mormon just believes.

You cannot just believe partway, you have to beleive in it all.
My problem was doubting the Lord’s will instead of standing tall.

I can’t allow my self to have any doubt, it’s time to set my worries free.
It’s time to show the world what Elder Price is about, and share the power inside of me!

I Believe!

…that God has a plan of us!
I Believe!

…that that plan involves me getting my own planet.

And I believe!

…that the current President of the Church – Thomas Monson – speaks directly to God.

I am a Mormon!

And dang it, a Mormon just believes.

I know that I must go and do the things my God commands.
I realize now why he sent me here.

If you ask the Lord in faith, He will always answer you.

Just believe in him and have no fear!

I Believe!

…that Satan has a hold of you

I Believe!

…that the Lord God has sent me here.

And I believe!

…that in 1978 God changed his mind about black people.

You can be a Mormon! A Mormon who just believes.

And now I can feel the excitement, this is the moment I was born to do.
And I feel so incredible, to be sharing my faith with you.
The scriptures say that if you ask in faith, if you ask God himself you will know.
But you must ask Him without any doubt, and let your spirit grow…

I Believe!

…that God lives on a planet named Kolob.

I Believe!

…that Jesus has his own planet as well.

And I believe!

…that the Garden of Eden was in Jackson County, Missouri.

I believe the Lord will reveal it. And you’ll know it’s all true, you’ll just feel it.
You’ll be a Mormon, and by gosh, a Mormon just believes!

I Believe!

The song touches on a few points that have been discussed among LDS for years (Eden in Missouri?), but presents them as most traditional Mormons see them (and Church publications present them). In other words, I find this song to be a plainer expression of what Mormons (and certainly energetic Missionaries) believe than one would get from some online quarters.

Certainly, there could be quibbles with the wording (God lives near Kolob, not on it!) but I suspect such quibbles would make the wrong point about our belief in such things.

What do Kraft and the LDS Church Have In Common? They Both Have Lots of Singles…

In the recent April 2011 General Conference of the Church, it was mentioned more than once that the singles in the Church (and specifically the single men) need to get married.  The encouragement didn’t get much more specific than that, so it was left to each individual to determine how, exactly, they would accomplish this, but the message was certainly clear:  There are too many single adults in the Church, and the Church leaders think that their unmarried status isn’t entirely outside their control.

As President Monson said:

Now, I have thought a lot lately about you young men who are of an age to marry but who have not yet felt to do so. I see lovely young ladies who desire to be married and to raise families, and yet their opportunities are limited because so many young men are postponing marriage.

I realize there are many reasons why you may be hesitating to take that step of getting married. If you are concerned about providing financially for a wife and family, may I assure you that there is no shame in a couple having to scrimp and save. It is generally during these challenging times that you will grow closer together as you learn to sacrifice and to make difficult decisions. Perhaps you are afraid of making the wrong choice. To this I say that you need to exercise faith. Find someone with whom you can be compatible. Realize that you will not be able to anticipate every challenge which may arise, but be assured that almost anything can be worked out if you are resourceful and if you are committed to making your marriage work.

Perhaps you are having a little too much fun being single, taking extravagant vacations, buying expensive cars and toys, and just generally enjoying the carefree life with your friends. I’ve encountered groups of you running around together, and I admit that I’ve wondered why you aren’t out with the young ladies.

Brethren, there is a point at which it’s time to think seriously about marriage and to seek a companion with whom you want to spend eternity. If you choose wisely and if you are committed to the success of your marriage, there is nothing in this life which will bring you greater happiness.

I was fortunate to have met my future wife in high school, so I haven’t had an extended period of post-mission singleness in my life.  So I can only say this as an observer.

But it seems odd to me that unmarried adults would be a problem in the Church in this day and age.  I mean, in the past, men and women had a minuscule pool of potential partners from which to choose, and yet somehow they were able to find someone.  Now, with modern transportation and communication methods (and the size of the Church worldwide), the pool of potential spouses is absolutely [i]huge[/i].

I can only guess that an oversupply in the single LDS population stems from an unwillingness to get married on the part of the men and women, meaning that even with so many potential candidates, they choose not to marry because they are waiting for an unlikely “ideal” to come into their lives.

So the solution to the problem would have to be a shift in the culture and expectations of LDS youth and single adults.  Since many of these attitudes probably stem from the culture at large (and the influences of advertising, movies, music, books and idealistic messages in Church lessons and videos), I doubt a few talks in conference are going to do much to discourage the single men from waiting for the “perfect”  woman (however they define it) to come along.

In other words, President Monson may need to counsel the single women to do everything they can to look like Kim Kardashian if he wants this problem solved.

The Future of the Book of Abraham

The Book of Abraham has an odd and interesting history in the Church, from the arrival of the mummies in Kirtland to the final publication of the Book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price.

But in recent years, the true nature of the book (and Joseph Smith’s translation) has come into question by believers and critics alike.  While most believers defend the translation (sometimes with the caveat that Joseph Smith was translating something else and not that papyri that the Church has today), it isn’t inconcievble that the Book of Abraham could continue to fall into scholarly disrepute and eventually become a liability to the Church.

What then?

While some might foresee (or just wish for) a dramatic removal of the Book from the LDS Canon, if Church leaders decided it was time for the sun to set on that particular book, I suspect it would be done much more subtly.

Basically, the Church would, if needed, gradually remove the Book of Abraham from the “canon” over the course of a few decades.

I’m not referring to an actual physical removal, but a spiritual removal, where it is left in the Pearl of Great Price but it is de-emphasized in talks and lessons, and it gradually becomes forgotten and irrelevant. Kind of like the last 38 verses of Section 132.

There would be no public pronouncement or retraction. Within a few generations, only a small percentage of Church members would be aware of the BoA and its history, and it would be looked at as nothing more than an obscure curiosity. Kind of like the last 38 verses of Section 132.