In my interactions with the critics of the LDS Church, and in reading their arguments, I’ve taken note of something that I believe to be of immeasurable importance in our dialogue with and about other faiths. Indeed, I believe it is a key by which the judgment of one’s character can be quickly discerned (D&C 46:23). It is simply this:
- How do people treat that which others hold sacred?
As I see it, there are three general modes of conduct that could take place:
- Do they respect those things which others hold dear? Are they reverent around things which they may not personally believe, but which others find to be the pinnacle of holiness? Are they tolerant of other religious views? Do they honor the wishes of others to keep sacred those things others hold sacred? What is their esteem for the beliefs of others? Do they conduct themselves with concern for that which others hold in the highest regard?
- Or perhaps they are indifferent towards the sacred of others, not caring one way or the other for others values? Are they unconcerned with keeping things sacred which are held sacred by some? Are they disinterested in the beliefs, customs, traditions, teachings, and practices of others? Does apathy replace honor?
- Or do they cast the sacred things of others to the ground and trample them under their feet (Matt. 7:6; 1 Ne. 19:7)? If they do not personally believe certain things, do they attempt to expose them in the most profane ways? Do they disrupt the reverence of others? Do they flaunt and deride the hallowed things of other faiths? If they don’t believe in consecrating the venerated things of others, do they desecrate and blaspheme them?
Many of the things I’ve read from critics of the Church about our teachings, particularly the temple, are held in no reverence whatsoever, and tend to fall in the second, or more likely, the third category. So-called “exposés” of our sacred teachings are not hard to come by. But there are some, who are not members of our faith, who still respect our teachings and honor that which we hold most sacred. These we most gratefully appreciate.
So what is the appropriate way to treat the sacred things of others? What does this reveal about one’s character? If a person falls into the second or third category, how might they treat other things or people, besides Mormons, with which they do not agree or personally believe? It is a harder road to follow the first category, because it forces us out of our own belief system to teach us to regard with respect the humanity and beliefs of others. Those that can do so are infinitely more honorable and esteemed among their fellow men than those who can’t. These who regard the sacred of others with honor are perfecting what the late Krister Stendahl would say is “holy envy,” leaving room to admire those elements in other faiths which you wish could be reflected in your own tradition. Those who can’t do this, I believe, epitomize the character extremes of selfishness, pride, and arrogancy, traits which the scriptures strongly warn against (Ps. 10:2-11; Prov. 16:18-19; Prov. 13:10; Prov. 6:17-19; Isa. 2:12; Isa. 5:20-24; Jer. 13:15; Mal. 4:1; Matt. 23:12; Rom. 1:29-32; 1 Tim. 6:4-5; 2 Tim. 3:1-5; 2 Nephi 9:28; 2 Nephi 26:20; 2 Nephi 28:12; 2 Nephi 28:15; D&C 88:121; D&C 90:17; D&C 121:37).
We must understand that we, too, are not immune from acting inappropriately. We must constantly be cognizant of regarding the sacred and holy of others with respect and reverence, and honor those things that others wish to hold sacrosanct. Of course, we must also judge righteous judgment in whether those things may be intruding on that which others hold inviolate (John 7:24).
Generally, the golden rule still stands – do unto others as you would have others do unto you.
People being disrespectful in holy space (whether it is holy to me or not) is one of my pet peeves. Drives me insane. Last year I got to travel a bit in Europe. I adore beautiful cathedrals and other churches and mosques, so tried to visit a lot of them. Most people would whisper and act respectfully, but some people… didn’t. I wanted to smack them. Once I gave a dirty look and shushed someone who was actually yelling to his friend to come over to him, but it didn’t do any good. He didn’t care that he was being a jerk.
I enjoy holy space in general and find it fascinating, but I have a more selfish reason for wanting people to treat those spaces respectfully: if enough people don’t, the beautiful cathedrals, etc., will be closed off to the public, and that would be terribly sad (though understandable).
Bryce:
Good points. I think on this from time to time. Here are some of the problems as I see it:
1.) Many are just profane, on both sides of the river. They don’t care about others and don’t consider other people as their brothers and sisters. They like to insult them. Or they just really don’t care. People who are holy care about sacred things, that is the definition of holiness. Even if the other person is misguided, if something is holy to them, a decent person respects that.
2.) People often take disagreement as attack. We can love, honor and respect others and disagree with them. And they with us. This idea is often muddled in the minds of some. Many people demand consensus or they feel attacked. We can disagree, and at a minimum be civil.
3.) I like to intellectually mix it up with others from time to time. It helps me keep sharp, and perhaps enlighten someone else along the way. But, people need to learn how to do this within the bounds of propriety,
4.) If we are going to discuss these things, we can’t be to thin skinned. It is hard to have a substantive debate on these things, with any amount of volume, and put everything into a flowery setting. Two people who can vigorously debate without being offended can really benefit each other. Those who are easily offended stifle real communication. If we can’t say a murderer needs to repent, how can we ever discuss the finer points of the gospel?
These these are some of the things I have had to learn along the way, especially in the blog world.
-David
I’d suggest that the key isn’t so much to “hold sacred” what others consider sacred, as it is to hold other people as “sacred.”
For example, I am no longer LDS, and I no longer consider LDS garments to be “sacred.” At the same time, however, I’m well aware of the feelings of LDS members who do hold LDS garments as sacred. As such, I’m disgusted when I see that protesters outside Temple Square make a public show of attempting to “desecrate” LDS garments. Behavior like that only demonstrates that these people lack basic respect and compassion for their fellow beings–hardly a trait which encourages me to adopt their religious teachings.
Krister Stendahl’s three rules of interfaith dialogue come into play here:
“let the other define herself (‘Don’t think you know the other without listening’);
compare equal to equal (not my positive qualities to the negative ones of the other);
and find beauty in the other so as to develop ‘holy envy.'”
http://www.hds.harvard.edu/news/article_archive/stendahl.html
Bishop Stendahl explains this beautifully in the “Between Heaven and Earth” video.
If Protestants had a secret ceremony where we called your bishops hirlings of Satan (much like former LDS ceremony), what would you think if I said it was too ’sacred’ to talk about?
You know, this really becomes nothing more than hypocritical tripe when you consider that millions of Christians hold a very high regard for the creeds of their faith. Yet, I don’t recall the LDS Church refraining from quoting the First Vision comment that calls them an abomination. Apostle Jeffrey Holland had no problem blasting the doctrine of the Trinity in conference recently. Millions of Christians hold these things very sacred. Anybody on this blog going to complain about that or are double standards OK here?
Bryce, I think you understand the spirit of the question. I’ll modify it to help bring clarity:
If Protestants had a secret ceremony where we called your prophet and apostles hirlings of Satan, what would you think if I said it was too ’sacred’ to talk about?
By saying that you would choose to not to expose a ceremony that others hold as sacred, regardless of its content, you disobey scripture. If a ceremony is shameful, you have a biblical duty to expose it.
Was the Holy Spirit irresponsible in inspiring Paul to write this?
When people often tell me they wouldn’t have joined Mormonism if they had known what goes on in the temple, it only reinforces for me the fact that it is humane and Christian to help investigators make choices with more heplful information.
Actually, if you wanted to be more accurate, it was a defense and an attack at the same time. He didn’t merely state a positive reason for what Mormons believe, he also stated an alleged negative reason why one shouldn’t believe what traditional Christians believe.
Holland is simply being passive-aggressive by prefacing with, “It is not our purpose to demean any person’s belief nor the doctrine of any religion.” Saying that, and then attempting to tear down the notion of the Trinity, is still an attack.
Try saying this to your wife sometime: “Honey, I don’t mean to criticize your cooking, but I think this meal tastes like cardboard.” Do you think your preface really negates the fact that you’ve torn down and criticized her cooking?
Aaron
“Bryce, then I guess its all about semantics. As long as a person says he means no foul, that is OK. It still offends nonetheless. Do you give the same latitude to Evangelicals who also claim the same thing? Don’t get me wrong, I am a firm supporter of free speech and I don’t think anyone has a right not to be offended. I just think the posters here are being a tad hypocricital. Call the Christian creeds an abomination if that is what you believe, but don’t whine when you find the sacred things of Mormonism being challenged. You ask, “How would you treat that which is holy in a Buddhist temple? Or a Muslim shrine? Or a Jewish synagogue?” I would certainly never desecrate their building or interupt their services, and in many ways I would tend to agree with Tanya when it comes to behavior in their buildings, but I don’t think anything religious is so sacred that a self imposed censorship should prevail. Ideologies need to be discussed and to say some things should be off the table because they tend to offend quite frankly offends me to the core; but hey, express your opinion to your hearts content, just don’t be hypocritical about it. You can say you don’t like it, but to say it is “unchristian” strikes many thinking people as nothing less than absurd. Christianity has been offending people since Jesus walked the earth.
So you guys believe you have the divine prerogative like Jesus to withhold information from people about life and salvation and things that help a person have a better relationship with God?
If that’s not arrogant, I don’t know what is. I’ll stick with Deuteronomy 29:29:
“The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.”
Can’t you see the utter hypocrisy of this? Mormon missionaries go to the doors of my fellow Christians every day and attempt to replace nearly all their distinctive beliefs. Our belief in the Trinity is ripped apart, our belief in justification by faith alone is ripped apart, our belief in the obsoleteness of the Aaronic priesthood is ripped apart, our belief in the reliability of the Bible is ripped apart. All those things are sacred to us and yet your missionaries attempt to replace them with things we find heretical and abhorrent and profane. Sure, the missionaries do it with a soft voice and a smile, but it is what it is.
If you want to stop ripping apart Protestant teachings, then stop sending missionaries out to teach of the “Great Apostasy” and of the “Restoration” which calls all our creeds an “abomination”.
Listen, I have Mormon friends that get along with me, but few things are more offensive and disrespectful than a passive-aggressive, hypocritical view of religious criticism. I liked Mormonism better in the days when political correctness wasn’t a beloved golden calf. Just put your claims and criticisms out on the open table and stop pretending to take a supposed moral high ground. The Mormon friends I have who I best get along with, who I best know as honest, forthright, and respectful, put all their cards out on the table.
I believe in free speech, and think that it is good to know things up front. It just appears that we are comparing apples to oranges here. I don’t know if there is anything that Aaron holds sacred enough that he would not like disclosed. It’s not my position to speak on his behalf and so won’t presume to do so. Until he has something like the temple ordinances that he holds sacred enough, I don’t think that there will be an understanding.
As a follow up point, I have great respect for Muslims and for Muhammad. Some of my best friends are Muslims and I enjoy going to mosques. That doesn’t mean that I can’t think that it is not true nor speak about why I think it is wrong. I think that it is a matter of showing respect when doing it, that’s all.
But again, until there is something that outsider’s have in comparison, I don’t know if there will be an understanding. I think a muslim would understand the idea better as Mecca serves a similar function.
Bryce, I see you missed my point entirely. You wrote:
“Can we not let our emotions subside and not go on the offense whenever anyone says anything that is different than our personal beliefs? ”
Can you? Can other Mormons? Latter-day Saints tend to allow themselves the right to complain when people challenge their “sacred space,” but always find a way to justify themselves when they invade another’s. Again, don’t misunderstand. I am defending wholeheartedly your right to invade, complain, and critique. I am not offended at all by that aspect. My personal beliefs are not so frail that I feel the need to silence those who do not share my worldview. What offends me personally is when a Mormon (or any religious person), publicly makes truth-claims and then cries foul when a person or persons with an opposing view challenges them on their position. Perhaps you can explain how a person who finds the endowment ceremony to be extremely troubling should express those feelings.
I re-submit my earlier comment:
A missionary at a door offering his religion is not “ripping ” anything that person has. And as a “Christian ” how could we avoid the great commission to preach to the world? The JW’s visit my home on a regular basis; I don’t feel they are ripping anything I believe; I am still intact when they go. People have become way too thinned skinned.
-David