confsatpriesthood-cit-c-1-3117

My General Conference Odyssey

Words of prophetic counsel are a constant presence and fixture in most Latter-day Saint lives. But it wasn’t until I started studying them intently that something changed inside me.

I have been an observant member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for my entire life. I got baptized when I was eight when my family also gave me a journal and a check for twenty-five dollars to start my mission fund. I got my first part-time job at age fourteen as a janitor and worked a variety of jobs to save up for half of my mission. I put in my papers when I turned nineteen and served for two years. I came home, dated a beautiful Latter-day Saint girl, and we got married in the temple and started a family together. 

Yet there’s a sense in which I did not get serious about my faith until a decade later. By the time 2015 rolled around, I’d already been blogging about religion and faith in a faith-affirming way for a few years. If I’d spent my entire life on the covenant path and dedicated many hours to exploring and defending that faith in public, then in what sense was I not already serious about my faith?

The brutal answer is this: I was hedging my bet.

What if the claims of the Restored Gospel were not true? That Joseph Smith never saw God in a sacred grove? What if there was no Lehi, no Mormon, and no Moroni? But let’s go further. What if the man named Jesus died, was buried, and never rose—and was only a man, and nothing more? What if God did not exist?

The reality was that even if all those unsettling possibilities ended up being true—that none of my religious beliefs were real—at the time it wouldn’t have changed all that much for me. I still would have wanted to live a life filled as much as possible with peace and love. All the things I wrote about (epistemic humility, love of family), and all the things that brought me peace and joy (my faithful marriage, my beloved children), I would have sought to treasure regardless. 

This left me with a kind of Schrodinger’s faith: as long as I didn’t really have to differentiate between what I wanted to be true and what I believed to be true, my faith was half-real and half-fake. If I opened the box of my heart and looked inside, would I have found my own tree of faith alive and thriving at the time? Or just a plastic, painted replica? I was afraid to look. And as long as I kept my faith just a little abstract, and just a little vague, I didn’t have to. 

I didn’t have the guts to question whether or not my convictions were true when for so long I had found them useful.

Although I’d been wrestling with these issues for a while, maybe for most of my life, the struggle culminated in late 2015 when I came across a quote from a talk that President Hinckley gave during the October 1981 General Conference, entitled, “Faith: The Essence of Religion.” The talk challenged me directly. After all, I’d started my blogging run at Times and Seasons with a series on epistemic humility and the importance of acknowledging uncertainty. And here was a prophet of God pretty much telling me the opposite. The quote that initially grabbed my attention was this one:

Great buildings were never constructed on uncertain foundations. Great causes were never brought to success by vacillating leaders. The gospel was never expounded to the convincing of others without certainty. Faith, which is of the very essence of personal conviction, has always been, and always must be, at the root of religious practice and endeavor. … Without certitude on the parts of believers, a religious cause becomes soft, without muscle, without the driving force that would broaden its influence and capture the hearts and affections of men and women.

I’d never heard the quote before, and I immediately looked up and read President Hinckley’s talk. It led me to some serious soul-searching. First, about how to reconcile my emphasis on epistemic humility with President Hinckley’s emphasis on certainty. (You can read my Times and Seasons post, The Assurance of Love, to see how I started to work through that clash.)

I claimed to believe that this Church was indeed the Restored Church of Christ. But I hadn’t been acting like it.

More broadly and, for me, more consequentially, this became the occasion of my long-overdue reckoning with my Schrodinger’s faith. If I was to maintain my personal integrity, I had to fundamentally rethink my relationship with the Restored Church of Christ. A casual alliance of shared values could no longer cut it. If I believed that the Church was what it claimed to be—and if I believed Christ was who He claimed to be and that God lived—then it was time to start acting like it. For starters, I could take the trouble to read the words of the modern prophets and apostles.

Like most Latter-day Saints, I had been immersed in opportunities to read and seriously consider prophetic teaching for many years, but the abundance of it all had become too often background noise, with infrequent instances of deeply studying their words for myself. I decided it was time to do more than passively hear; it was time to actively listen.  

And so, in December 2015, I launched the General Conference Odyssey, a 14-year project to read every single General Conference talk going back to the first messages easily accessible on the Church’s website (April 1971) at the rate of one session per week. (I preferred to read them on the Church’s site where I could mark up and annotate them. Other folks who participated printed copies out or even watched the videos instead of reading).  If that sounds like an impressive goal, let me hasten to add that after six years in, I’m already more than a full year behind. But—despite my lackluster performance—the endeavor has blessed me and reshaped my spiritual life.

The proximate blessing has been a fundamental shift in my understanding of the teachings of the Church. Prior to embarking on this experience, I was under the impression like a lot of people today that prophets in earlier eras taught a very different gospel message—and one that most often (surely) lacked sufficient love. After reading scores of sessions of General Conference from the 1970s and 1980s, the dominant conclusion I am left with is the incredible consistency of the General Authority teachings, and the adamant emphasis on gentleness, love, and compassion. The very first session I ever read included Elder Ashton’s talk Love of the Right where he said:

Following one of our recent general conference sessions, a troubled mother approached me and said, “I need to know what is meant by the statement, ‘No success can compensate for failure in the home.’” Knowing a little of the burdens this friend of mine carries in her mind and heart because of a rebellious, wayward daughter, I shared this meaning with her: I believe we start to fail in the home when we give up on each other. We have not failed until we have quit trying. As long as we are working diligently with love, patience, and long-suffering, despite the odds or the apparent lack of progress, we are not classified as failures in the home. We only start to fail when we give up on a son, daughter, mother, or father.

This love and concern are not what I thought I would hear out of a 1971 General Conference talk, but that example is far from exceptional. Later on that same day (in the Priesthood Session), President Harold B. Lee began his talk, Today’s Young People, with an affirmation of Elder Ashton:

I would have you remember a remark of Brother Marvin J. Ashton in his very excellent address today when he said no home is a failure until it gives up on that son, or that daughter, or that husband, or that wife. It must not give up, no matter how difficult the task to save one of ours.

Of course, there have been some significant changes in tone and even in content on some important issues between now and 1971. It would be superfluous to have living prophets and apostles if they said the exact same things in the exact same way across the decades. Without pretending these shifts and updates don’t exist, my overall impression remains one of steadfast consistency on the core Gospel of Christ and on preaching that Gospel with an abundance of love, compassion, and consideration.

The secondary but more profound blessing that has followed from this experience is that at last, I’ve found the courage to abandon my Schrodinger’s faith. The act of taking these General Conference talks seriously has been my way of holding the Lord’s hand and taking a step beyond the light of my own understanding. It was a small step—more an act of basic integrity rather than any kind of bravery. I claimed to believe that this Church was indeed the Restored Church of Christ. But I hadn’t been acting like it. 

It was a small act, really. All I’m doing is reading some talks—and writing some blog posts based on what I’m learning. But it was my way of giving up the safety of the hedge. If life were a poker game, I would have stopped hoarding a pile of chips in front of me and, instead, picked a chip off the stack and thrown it into the pot.

Life is messy. As I said, I’m way behind on the General Conference Odyssey. And while I try to watch every single talk of every current session of conference now, with an infant and a toddler that’s more aspirational than anything else. It turns out you can’t go all-in in one fell swoop. Every day you get a new chip, and you have to decide if you want to hold onto it or risk it. 

This weekend, when the general authorities of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints gather to share their counsel and the Lord’s instructions for us, I’m going to listen. And I’m going to toss one more chip into the pot—doubling down one more time on the risk I’ve placed. In doing so, I hope to take one more step toward the Savior Who calls us with a voice that grows clearer and clearer with every faltering step we take towards Him.

Join Latter-day Saints all over the world this weekend to tune in via the internet to sessions of conference on Saturday and Sunday, April 2nd and 3rd. Come listen to a prophet’s voice! Click here to see broadcast and scheduling details.

About the author

Nathaniel Givens

Nathaniel Givens is a writer and blogger. In addition to Public Square, he has written for Meridian, Real Clear Religion, First Things, and Square Two. He blogs at Nauvoo Neighbor, Times and Seasons, and his own blog: Difficult Run.
On Key

You Might Also Like

Under the Banner of Heaven Episode 6, “Revelation”

Summary – The detectives show up at the Lafferty home to interrogate Ma Lafferty about the whereabouts of Ron and Dan. She claims they are not there. Pyre takes Brother Brady to the basement to interrogate him about the School of the Prophets meetings there. Brady claims that he experienced a “burning of the bosom” during those meetings and questions why Pyre is so sure those revelations weren’t true. In a flashback, Ron travels to Oregon in search of “true Mormonism” from a man named John Bryant. He discovers Bryant’s commune practicing a “free love” version of polygamy and drinking wine, claiming it’s natural and spiritual and that the Word of Wisdom is an outdated part of the temperance movement. During a communal bath, Bryant explains that he’s received a revelation that he is the One Mighty and Strong and asks to baptize Ron. After he does, Ron is overcome with love and kisses Bryant. Ron returns home to find the School of the Prophets working hard to print pamphlets of warning to the Church based on Prophet Onias’s revelations. They demand that polygamy and the priesthood ban for black members be restored. Onias tells Ron he believes that the six Lafferty brothers are chosen to help him in his work. He takes Ron up the mountain to his Dream Mine, where he believes a great treasure is buried under a capstone. Onias tells Ron that he believes Ron is the One Mighty and Strong and that Diana will come back to him when she sees how blessed he is in this work. Later in the episode, Ron writes a revelation to Diana and reads it to the School of the Prophets. They vote on its authenticity and approve it as true, declaring Ron as the one mighty and strong. Meanwhile, in the present, Taba finds a recently sawed-off shotgun and takes this as evidence that Ron and Dan are nearby. When the detectives confront Ma Lafferty, she calls Taba a dark-skinned Lamanite and claims that the only law she’s subject to is the law of God. When they press her, she blames everything on two men who were with her sons, Chip and Ricky, who had long hair and smelled like skunk. In flashback, Allen comes home to Brenda who is distressed about baby Erica’s fever, but Allen refuses to let her go to a doctor until he can figure out whether his brothers are right about not trusting modern medicine. They get into an argument during which he hits her. Brenda stands up and walks out. A little while later, Brenda’s sister comes to take her to the doctor while Brenda’s dad, Bishop Wright, stays with Allen and grills him about being too extreme in his religious beliefs. Meanwhile, Brenda tells her sister she wants to leave Allen because “this is how it started with Diana,” but her sister pressures her to stay or to let her bishop make the decision for her.  At the Pyre’s home, Pyre visits with Bishop Wright and Brenda as he tries to reassure them. The Wrights wonder if Pyre will be swayed by the “power” of the Lafferty name and question what he’ll do if the case causes trouble for people “above.” Pyre swears loyalty to Brenda alone and says that the Laffertys have no hold on him. Brenda’s sister gives Pyre a pile of her sister’s letters, hoping to piece together the events leading up to the murder. After the Wrights leave, Pyre gives his mother a bath. Grandma Pyre admits that she pinched Pyre’s wife and claims “the devil made me do it.” Pyre uses a “fake” priesthood blessing to calm her and get her to rinse her hair. In flashbacks, Diana and Brenda’s letter got her a meeting with a member of the Seventy. The men offer the solution that “true revelation causes an increase in love and appreciation for the brethren.” Allen brings up the Mountain Meadows Massacre as a counterargument, saying that Brigham Young commanded it and it couldn’t have been inspired. The seventies try to push the issue aside, but Allen accuses them of inconsistency and storms out. Brenda asks the seventies to approve a divorce, but instead, they give Brenda a blessing, calling her to bring the Laffertys back into the fold. Brenda takes up this cause very literally, buying forbidden store-bought goods for her sisters-in-law and sending missionaries to talk with them. As a result of this meddling, Matilda arrives on Brenda’s doorstep with a warning: “A wife who alienates her husband from her children risks her life.” Because of this threat, Bishop Low and his wife smuggle Diana and her children out of town, though Brenda insists on staying to carry out her calling. Pyre asks Allen about the likelihood that his brothers will leave Diana alone, but this conversation devolves into a discussion of Pyre’s faith crisis. Allen says he “tried to defeat the Church in my mind and see what was left.” He tells Pyre about a red book in his house that tells “a truer story of our people.” Pyre takes Allen’s book home and is reading it in the car and sobbing when his wife discovers him. He admits that he’s struggling, and she asks him to pray with her. He tries but he can’t. She tells him that she refuses to struggle through this with him and demands that he bear his testimony in church to strengthen their children’s faith.   Church History – Allen brings up the Mountain Meadows Massacre as the ultimate example of how revelation is inherently unsafe and unclear. He claims that Brigham Young ordered the massacre. The historical record about whether this is the case is complex, and beyond my scope of expertise. However, I do know that the Church was much more hesitant to comment about the massacre in the 80s, whereas now it has published an essay about the topic as well as supported the publication of a thorough book

The Ordinary Saint’s Guide to Under the Banner of Heaven

In an age that claims to value “own voices” media, it is sad that Under the Banner of Heaven is probably going to be the biggest story that the public sees about members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints this year or this decade. While the tale it tells is based on an actual occurrence and about some actual problems within the broader movement of people hearkening back to Joseph Smith, one thing that can’t be said for either the book or the show was that they were written by a member of our community. The producer may have “grown up” as a Latter-day Saint, but he left the faith before he was an adult. If you’ve never had the experience of holding a calling, making temple covenants, or negotiating the relationships that make up a ward (Latter-day Saint congregation), are you really the best person to interpret our community? So I’m stepping in to offer my perspective. I am not a historian or theologian. So, though I try to be informed about the difficult parts of our religion’s past, I can only give you the perspective of what an average member would know or believe about these situations. I undoubtedly will get some of the nuances wrong. This will not be the best place if you’re looking for information about the historical accuracy of the show. (Consider checking FAIR’s guide or Book of Mormon Central.) However, I am an active participant in the larger Latter-day Saint literary community. I’ve written essays about my own life as a woman in the Church and fictional stories about others. I studied Latter-day Saint literature in college and continue reading contemporary Latter-day Saint literature. I am on the board of the Association for Mormon Letters, an organization that promotes literature written by, for, or about those who tie back to the prophet Joseph (including members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but not exclusive to our denomination). So you might say I have some experience with portrayals of the Latter-day Saints and separate fundamentalist communities. The purpose of this series of recaps is two-fold. First, I want to summarize the series for ordinary Latter-day Saints who don’t intend to watch it so they won’t be surprised around the metaphorical watercooler this week. Second, I will catalog the series as it compares to Latter-day Saint literature more broadly. As a writer, reader, and advocate of Latter-day Saint literature, this is my home turf. I am interested to see where the show gets things right and wrong. Granted, my experience isn’t the experience of every member; like any community, Latter-day Saints are not a monolith. But I will compare the show to my personal knowledge of our community and talk about what sticks out. Without further ado, here are my impressions of the first two episodes of Under the Banner of Heaven. Episode 1, “When God Was Love”  Summary—The episode opens with Detective Pyre being called away from his family’s Pioneer Day celebrations to visit a crime scene. At an ordinary suburban house, he finds a scene of chaos with a mother (Brenda Lafferty) and her 15-month-old daughter (Erica) murdered in a gruesome way. (Luckily, we are only shown large quantities of blood on the floor and walls; the show shies away from showing the bodies, though we will get hints through dialogue about the exact method of killing.) Soon the husband (Allen Lafferty) is taken into custody, his clothes soaked in his wife’s blood. The killer claims that his wife was murdered by men with beards like “Mormon prophets” and continually ties his wife’s murder back to early church history stories, particularly Joseph and Emma marrying against her father’s will. We then get a flashback to a young Brenda. She is an energetic and ambitious young woman who transfers to BYU after being tired of “holding girl’s hair back while they puked” at her party school in Idaho. Allen introduces Brenda to his family at a large family dinner. His brothers seem both strangely attracted to her and judgmental of her for her ambition and less strict faith (caffeinated soda is mentioned). The Lafferty family band together to clear a neighbor’s land to prevent it from being seized by the federal government to build a highway. In the present, Detective Pyre’s partner Bill visits Allen’s brother Robin’s home and finds the house abandoned and papers burning. They arrest Robin after a chase through a motel. This episode depicts the First Vision. It shows Joseph going to the woods to pray and a light shining down on him. The script draws parallels between Joseph’s prayer and Robin’s prayer in the woods before he is caught by the police, which doesn’t really make much sense except that they are both kneeling in a natural setting. We also get a scene of Joseph and Emma discussing whether to marry against her father’s wishes. The show tries to make a big deal of them choosing between “God’s will” and her father’s authority, implying that the problem is that they can justify almost anything as God’s will. I found this assertion pretty strange, given that Joseph and Emma were hardly the first couple to marry against a parent’s wishes. It seems a thin justification on which to hang a condemnation of trusting God. Shibboleths—It’s apparent that the showrunners have made an effort to try to include jargon of Latter-day Saints in the dialogue. Sometimes this works: the Pyre family prayer scene feels exactly like the ones that take place in my family. Others make it apparent that the writers are not members of the community. While we do refer to God as Heavenly Father, particularly in prayer, we don’t use this term exclusively like the characters in the show. I regularly hear members refer to him as “God” or “the Lord,” and a brief search of the church’s 1980’s general conference talks shows that this isn’t a new innovation. While there is

New Database Shows Church Strength

Amid frequent claims that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is in decline, a partial database of the Church’s landholdings released today shows impressive strength. The database would make the Church the fifth largest private property holder in the United States. The holdings show that the Church’s land connects well with its mission. The holdings include land for temples and meetinghouses, land for agricultural projects to support the Church’s welfare, land to help sustain city areas around temples, and land used as part of the Church’s stewardship of tithing funds. The news should be welcome for Latter-day Saints knowing their faith’s long-term is secure.

The Wisdom of the Aged

Increasingly, older and senior members of our communities are seen as backward and not worth considering. That’s a mistake. General Conference will provide an opportunity to listen to the hard-earned wisdom of age that we should seek for.

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!