Before the Lord’s appearance to the Nephites, society broke down into tribes consisting of family and friends. Immediately before the Lord’s return we should expect something similar. Therefore, part of the preparation by God’s house for coming social chaos is likely to include some preliminary preparations by families and friends to fellowship with one another in local gatherings, perhaps completely apart from control by the LDS hierarchy. Only by independently functioning can they hope to prepare for social chaos prophesied to accompany Zion and precede the Lord’s return.page 314 40 Years in Mormonism PDF
If I were to “lead” and standardize things it would be a return to correlation. Why return to what has damaged Mormonism? It is the system that has done the damage. You cannot improve that flaw by choosing to make me your new correlator. I will not do it. It will darken your minds and would corrupt me. I am no better than you, and I believe some of you to be better than I. We need hundreds of independently functioning believers adapting the Gospel to their needs. Doctrine does not change, and the scriptures are constant. Your needs will vary. Therefore you apply what is changeless to your peculiar circumstances. You can do it better than any distant authority could possibly do it for you.page 339-40 40 Years in Mormonism PDF
When you submit to the rule of God, you then place yourself in a position where you must be dependent upon Him. Then every one of you will immediately realize your own weakness. You will be tempted to have others tell you how to please God. You must resist that temptation. You must arise and seek Him directly. Every one of you has to grapple with the uncertainty of, “is this right or is this wrong?” Every one of you has to grapple with the fact, that in answer to some questions, there is silence. You all must be forced to choose. If you choose right, you do not know you chose what was right, because He refused to answer you. Then you act in reliance on your own decision, going forward to do what is right, only later to be told, "If you had have made the mistake, I would have corrected you. But you needed that experience.” God answers prayers. Sometimes He forces you to make choices, and very often, I can't tell you how often, but very often I make the wrong choice. It is almost like I got a compass pointing south. I often choose wrong and then I get an answer correcting me. But I got an answer because I made a mistake.
Those who are familiar with the ten lectures in this PDF will recognize that those are words Denver Snuffer said at the beginning of what we have now. (The bold in all quotes in this post are mine.)
More and more, this movement has been heading toward one religious entity that has rules all fellowships must obey. Conferences are called, votes are taken, and all fellowships are expected to abide by the majority vote, even though we were supposed to be separate so that if one was corrupted the whole would not be corrupted.
Most recently, one fellowship (or is it just a couple of women from different fellowships? I honestly don't know) are meddling with a decision made by another (with great drama posted online so the world can see how evil and contentious some of us are) - and a vote is being called (with a lot of contention from what I hear, a lot of shutting down of opposing voices during zoom calls by one particular woman, according to a ChatGPT synopsis (I have not been involved in the arguing going on, and I trust that ChatGPT reported accurately)) that all fellowships will be expected to abide by.
I see us heading more and more into a big group with rules all must obey. It reminds me of this quote from Denver Snuffer's blog (yes, he's talking about power, but I think it applies anyway):
If you never consolidate power into a single place but every person must stand on their own—and every person has their own volume of Scriptures, and everyone has the ability to get access to the heavens through prayer—then it doesn’t matter who you corrupt, you cannot corrupt the whole.
https://denversnuffer.com/2024/12/corruption/
When the Covenant of Christ book came out, we were told that we had permission to keep using the Book of Mormon if we wanted to. What nonsense is this? Are we children, hidden away in dark depths from God that we cannot choose what we consider scripture?
What is all this nonsense that we have created for ourselves? Truly, as it now stands, if "one" is corrupted, the whole will also be corrupted because "the one" creates great drama and does their best to force their views on the whole. And, of course, there is Denver's role in receiving revelation for the movement, when we were supposed to come to Christ ourselves and have a personal relationship with Him so that "none need say, Know ye the Lord, for they will all know him."
Do I blame Denver for any of this? Do I blame Denver for being the go-between between us and God? I do not. He does his best to stay out of the fray, but God answers people according to their idols. He answers them according to what they insist on having.
Let's say that I'm in a fellowship that chose to use the 1840 Book of Mormon as their Nephite scripture, never took the 2017 Boise covenant because they had a previous covenant with God, peacefully never accepted the Guide and Standard (because it was a strong man model pushed through, quoting only Joseph Smith and Denver Snuffer, or maybe for other reasons), and generally mind their own business, ignoring the drama and trauma that gets shouted from the rooftops.
Let's say I'm in one like that (I'm not). I think that fellowship is doing what fellowships were originally intended to do (be independent from rules imposed by people in other fellowships, and never having Denver as a go-between between them and God. In fact, never elevating Denver nor Stephanie to any special importance other than that Denver gave us a call to repentance that we sorely needed in the 10-lecture circuit. Respecting him as a teacher, but believing he was being honest when he said, "To the extent that anyone is trying to displace your faith in God, and attract attention to themselves, myself included, that is a perversion and it will not save you. It is a distraction, it is evil, and it is wrong. It is damnable. Anyone who tries to attract your worship, myself included, ought to be sent to hell. It's why I continually remind you, talking about me is a waste of time. Talking about the things that I'm saying, talking about the content of the scriptures, talking about the doctrines that will save you, that is very important. But you can leave me out of that. You don't ever need to mention my name again in your life." (40 Years in Mormonism PDF, page 34)
If I'm in a fellowship and we remove a man's certificate, he is perfectly free to move to a different fellowship and seek a brand new one. Now, if his wife is unwilling to endorse him, he can't do that according to the instructions given in Lecture 10. But the bottom line in all of this is that he is not going to be able to perform ordinances in our fellowship. What we do is not the business of another fellowship.
That's all.
I would like to know your thoughts on how/why the idea of a 12-women council to suspend a man’s certificate was not included in the tenth part of the Forty Years in Mormonism series, where we were first introduced to the new form of 7 women sustaining a man in priesthood ordinance works and then signing a certificate. I am wondering why it was left out, only to be included in the expanded material within “Preserving the Restoration” book. I confess to being stumped.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good question.
ReplyDeleteI think it was because it didn't occur to Denver that it would be needed when he wrote the talk. I expect he was asked about it some time later, and got an answer in his soul that worked (I don't know; this is just speculation). I would suppose he added it to the book because he knew others would have the same question.
Because of your question, I searched to see when he first said this because I don't recall. I can't find it anywhere. (I did a general online search, as well as searching his blog.) So, then I looked at the book I have. Like you said, the 12 women thing is there, but no mention as to why he added it (what I was looking for was something like, "People asked, so I took it to the Lord, and am sharing the answer in this edition, though it isn't in the original talks nor PDFs of the talks").
I have to say that the idea makes sense to me. 12 women forming a temporary council for the purpose. It is unfortunate that it would ever be needed. I was on one council several years ago. Had they had enough women without me, I would have said, "No." It is not pleasant, even though the only thing being removed is the women's vote of confidence in the man to perform ordinances in °their behalf.
°"their" meaning the fellowship
I think the only way to know the answer would be to ask him. In my experience, sometimes he replies to emails and sometimes he doesn't. If you haven't already, it might be something to try.
Thank you for the suggestion. I’ve never emailed Denver or met him, but perhaps asking him would prove fruitful.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate what you’ve articulated here in the post and agree, with the exception of trusting ChatGPT haha. I reflect on and listen to the FYiM talks frequently, and find myself wondering if we’ve collectively missed some important points.
I, for one, wish there was a discussion about men judging themselves before asking for a certificate and thereafter.
I question if every single man needs one NOW, or should wait until the need truly arises and he seeks Christ’s confirmation on the when and whom to involve.
Christ gave power and authority to baptize to 12 disciples, but then instructed that only one of the 12 would be ordained to bless the Sacrament emblems. (3 Nephi 8:18) It’s just one of those curious things that has given me pause.
Additionally, anyone with an LDS background has been conditioned to expect a certificate to accompany ordinances. By the time a man reaches 18 he may have six certificates in hand—naming & blessing, baptism, deacon, teacher, priest, elder, with more to follow depending upon his advancement in the priesthood. We women will have two.
I’ve just found there is a lot to consider and reflect upon as I’ve studied the subjects of sustaining, certificates, and councils over the last several years and discussed them with my husband. I also have done searches for when Denver began discussing various topics. Certificates in general were spoken of rather negatively.
What I am certain of is that I am ignorant of Heaven’s Ways, so I’ve grown more cautious in what I say and do. And I am wrong often and need to always be willing to offer that up when I have made a decision. Christ will test us to see if we will look to Him or some other.
I don't trust ChatGPT on a lot of things, but this document I read sounded like it was trustworthy, because the bot didn't seem like it was making anything up.
ReplyDeleteI've listened to the talk many times, and continue listening to them. I think they should be the basis for what we are trying to do. I'm hoping that a lot of people have not forgotten them with so many things that have been happening over the last 10-11 years.
I like the idea of men judging themselves. In the first fellowship I was in, two of the men asked for a new certificate after several months. They felt that the original ones were given before the women really had a chance to know them and how they acted. By the time they asked for new ones, everyone in the fellowship knew everyone else much better.
Waiting until the need truly arises is something I haven't thought of before. I think there would be nothing wrong with waiting. Like you said, the LDS have been conditioned to expect certificates. This may very well have bled over into the movement. In fact, it would be difficult to imagine it had not.
I've noticed that about Jesus saying only one ordained to bless the sacrament, and I've wondered about that in light of the thousands or more in the LDS religion, and the hundreds in this movement. Did he mean one each time they did it (rotating through the men over time), or literally only one person for all of those people? I don't know.
Interesting that certificates were spoken of rather negatively. I don't recall that, most likely because I didn't pay enough attention to it.
I think being cautious is good. I know I am not offended to discover I'm wrong about something because I have come to know that I don't really know anything. The more I know, the more I realize that I know so little.
Typo in that second paragraph. It should have said I've listened to the talks (plural).
Delete