I strongly believe that agency, our right to choose for ourselves, is among the greatest gifts that God has given to us. In fact, I believe that it is agency that caused worlds to be created, a loving Heavenly Father to sacrifice His Son for all mankind, a boy to go into the woods to pray and for loving parents to bring most of us into this world.
Why then, does it seem that people, especially some Church members, are so willing to give it up?
Here’s what I mean. We are given a lot of counsel from Church Leaders, both general and local. Most of the counsel tends to be general in nature because they are usually talking to large groups of members who have very different circumstances. Some counsel, like daily scripture study, might apply to all those present. But, a topic like getting married might not.
Church Leaders also give counsel on moral issues, like gay marriage, for example, that might involve taking public action, such as in the case of Prop 8 in California. They may even couch their request in terms such as “The Prophet has asked” or “you are expected.” But, are you?
This is where agency plays a role. We have to decide for ourselves where the counsel given is applicable to us and, whether we think it is the right course of action for us or for our family. We are the sole “deciders” in all matters that require a decision. No matter how it is presented, as good advice, as “thus saith the Lord” or in any other way, it is still our job to make a determination.
Yet, I find that many members seem to abdicate this responsibility. They assume that if a Church leader has told them to do something that is it automatically the right thing to do. I am not saying it is not the right thing to do, but question the “automatic” obedience I see from some members.
In reality, there are very few “musts” in the Church. There are a lot of “shoulds,” or “good ideas” or “things to think about.” But, if we judge the “musts” by whether we qualify for a Temple Recommend, there are only a few. No one asks about Family Home Evening, Scripture Study, daily prayer, Sabbath day observance, how many earrings or tattoos one has, or a host of other things that we receive counsel on.
I recently heard a former member say that the “Church taught her” not to have gay friends. I never heard that. Many things are given for the weakest of the members, so things like “do not get in a car with a member of the other gender” may be good advice for all of us, but may only be a problem for certain people. But it’s not a commandment.
The scriptures teach us “that you must “study it out in our mind” and we will be prompted by the Holy Ghost whether “it be right” and we will “feel it is right.”(D&C9:8). So we are obligated to put things to the test to find out whether they are right for us. Because everyone’s circumstances are different.
Whether it has to do with how to do scripture study, women working outside the home, supporting a ballot measure, or anything else, we are required to decide for ourselves.
Again, why wouldn’t anyone want to use this incredible freedom that God has given us?
In many cases, you might get that witness that the thing is right, and then you are obligated to do it or suffer whatever consequences result from not doing it.
But, in other cases, you might find it is not good for you or your family and you don’t do it. Again, whatever legitimate consequences occur, you have to accept that.
I had a situation with seminary and two of my kids a few years ago. We tried to get them into home study because of a set of circumstances involving a long drive, a short time to get to school afterwards and a young baby at home. However, the Stake came back and said, “The Brethren asked that you send your kids to the seminary class already set up.” My wife and I discussed and thought about it and respectfully declined because we felt it was not a good situation for us. The Stake declined out request for home study, even though one son was in his fourth year and the other in his second. So, they didn’t graduate from seminary even though my wife taught them the seminary lessons each morning in our home before school. They probably learned more that year!
What I find also interesting is those who become disaffected or leave the Church seem to cling to the belief that in many cases, we don’t have our agency because they think our leaders demand things from us as members. And while, as I stated before, many members seem to give up their agency, leaders cannot demand us to do anything.
There is even a claim that Church Leaders can take away our eternal salvation if we don’t “obey.” Now, there are instances, where upon violation of certain commandments, one can get excommunicated from the Church, but, if this is done wrongly, our eternal salvation is really unaffected since it come from God and not from a certain Church leader. They can potentially keep us out of the Church, but they have no say on our status in the next life. However, just to be clear, one may do something which puts their eternal status in jeopardy and that might result in Church discipline, but again, that is a choice each of us makes and one suffers the consequences of our actions. I hope I’m clear on that. I realize not everyone will agree with this concept, but we can discuss this.
The bottom line is we are ultimately responsible to make choices which affect our lives here on this earth. We cannot give that away. And why should we? This is one of the ultimate gifts God has given us after the gift of His Son. We do not honor Them but not exercising our agency.
Wheat & Tares 
people want to be commanded in all things. life is easier if you dont have to think. Because mormons believe that prophets receive divine revelation, they think “if only the prophet would tell us everything, we wouldnt have to think at all!”
The desire to be commanded (or compelled) in all things is probably one of the pervasive arguments for the plan of the adversary. When we decide to wait for explicit instruction or take absolute commandment without getting a personal witness of something, we are voluntarily giving up our agency in that matter and accepting whatever consequences come from that use of agency.
It bothers me when people declare that they have no “real” agency because they belong to the Church. They are trying to place the responsibility on someone else for the agency they ceded, which is not possible.
The church is an organization where most decisions are made by consensus even though there is this thread of obediance and hierarchy. Trouble usually occurs when someone at midlevel tries to enforce what he/she sees as the mandate from above on those of us lower on the organization chart. Going along to get along isn’t giving up agency but may be a matter of practicality. It’s a fact of life that if someone opposes or disobeys actively or passive aggressively there are consequences and you have to be ready to accept them. Just like real life.
Frank,
“It bothers me when people declare that they have no “real” agency because they belong to the Church. They are trying to place the responsibility on someone else for the agency they ceded, which is not possible.”
Amen, Bro!
GBSmith,
“It’s a fact of life that if someone opposes or disobeys actively or passive aggressively there are consequences and you have to be ready to accept them.”
I think you are right from an organizational dynamics standpoint. But no one can force you to believe what you don’t want to believe nor do anything you do not believe in. You may chose to do that for whatever reason, but then it’s on you.
But, it is another pet peeve I have, that in some cases, the organizational dynamic/structue and the culture override the Gospel.
jeff, I am surprised to hear your stake pres wouldn’t allow an exception for home study. why so rigid?
I think that too many people I know don’t use their agency. Most of my friend defer to church position without any thought. One of my annoyances is that I think the church over steps it’s bounds in telling people what do do outside of church matters.
But I really do think that the manuals and classes should be directed to teach everyone how to use their agency and be willing to not move as quickly in growth but ultimatly retention. Why don’t we do that. Agency can be used to be obedient but not when that is the only option and you risk discipline for other ideas.
MH,
“why so rigid?”
Not sure it ever got to the SP. I just got the “The Brethren ask….” Which goes against the grain. I need to know why and it needs to make sense. and the story is slightly more involved than what I wrote.
Jeff, great post. Sorry about your specific experience with seminary. Good for your wife and kids for doing it at home anyway.
I think you’re spot on regarding agency. Some might believe they offer their agency back to the Lord as a gift in the form of obedience to His servants. I know for me, however — and I’m pretty TBM — it would be hard for me to do something I didn’t believe was right.
I do think that not everything requires me to seek specific spiritual confirmation. Perhaps it’s because I already had confirmation about the calling of the person asking me to do something. Perhaps it’s because something is just not that important to me.
For me, one of the important elements of this lesson is around my kids. Even if something isn’t a big deal to me, I need to recognize that my kids WILL exercise their agency, and I need to know what kind of safe environment to provide them while they do that. Telling a 14-year old “because the Prophet said so” is often a very, very bad idea.
Paul,
“Telling a 14-year old “because the Prophet said so” is often a very, very bad idea.”
that’s for sure. Telling an adult that is even worse. I had a Temple President tell me that when i first moved here and wanted to continue to be a veil worker as I had for the past 5 years in California. When he said I’d have to shave my beard, I asked why and that was the answer I got.
I do agree with you on spiritual confirmation. some things just sound right and I have no problem following that counsel. Or, I don’t mind it.
For instance, I do not like to feel I am forced to do Missionary work, but, at the same time, I have no problem discussing the Church when the topic arises. Or inviting someone out to an activity. I want to pick and choose when a conversation happens and not try to force it.
Jeff,
I agree it’s bad to say it, especially if it isn’t true. Re: shaving a beard to work in the temple — you and I have talked about that before, and it seems odd that you’d get that response. It’s lazy and it probably isn’t quite true that President Monson (or President Hinckley) called your temple president and told him that.
There’s no reason someone couldn’t have shared the history of the decision in your temple.
I remember with our oldest kids we were quick to point out what the prophet or the church taught as a reason for doing something. We found over time tha the kids just decided they didn’t like the prophet or the church. It was an eye-opener for me.
Paul,
Yes, we have talked about this. What I could not understand at the time, since we had just moved, is how could a decision be made in less than two months from the time I worked my last veil in Oakland to the time we attended the Temple in Denver. And us not hear anything about it. Though, I must admit I didn’t find out about the last changes in the Temple (not standing up so much)until we did a session one day. And it was like Uh?
Anyway, we know that kids challenge authority as part of their growing up experience. I suppose it is easier for them to dislike a remote authority that always seems to tell them NO.
My Patriarchal Blessing says about me being “expected” to do something so I am to prepare for this thing. It is a good question though, Agency vs. Obedience. In Elder Stephen Nadauld’s book about Priesthood leadership something he says that there needs to be a balance in the stakes of having the stakes doing things on their own accord and having a GA telling them how do something.
You make some good points, but you kinda passive-aggressively diss people who left your church, for stuff like … believing what its leaders say about who’s going to heaven and who’s not.
I agree that someone who has healthy boundaries and a more lenient conscience can deal with Mormon leaders better, but that’s no reason to rub it in others’ faces. Mormon culture kinda presents its own problems to people with those qualities, anyway, and sometimes it can be the leaders’ intractibility that creates no-win scenarios for people who’d want to stay otherwise.
Taryn,
“You make some good points, but you kinda passive-aggressively diss people who left your church, for stuff like … believing what its leaders say about who’s going to heaven and who’s not.”
I have no idea where you get that. I do not think it is anything to do with healthy boundaries or not, it has to do with who is really responsible for our own eternal salvation. And it’s not a Church Leader. it is between us, as individuals and God.
If some folks do not understand this, then it is easy to see why they might feel intimidated by a Leader who says that it affects their salvation. But the Leader is not the one who has control.
Is this when the term ‘cafeteria Mormon’ applies?
I still haven’t figured out a good rebuttal to “you can’t pick and choose commandments” without looking like an apostate.
I do think it is funny that the talks about praying and knowing for yourself go almost unknown where as an opinion statement about earrings goes all the way up to standard norm.
“I need to know why and it needs to make sense.”
I respect the first impulse, but honestly, how much luck have you had getting that second need met? My understanding is that Mormonism is a kind of revealed religion, so how important is “making sense” to your average Mo anyway? From my experience, what most Mormons need is the feeling that they’ve got some special conduit to God/his holy hierarchy here on Earth that sets them apart from the rest of the confused mopes on this planet.
“Chino Blanco on January 28, 2012 at 9:11 AM
From my experience, what most Mormons need is the feeling that they’ve got some special conduit to God/his holy hierarchy here on Earth that sets them apart from the rest of the confused mopes on this planet.”
Here and all this time I thought we wanted what everyone else wanted, world peace and an end to hunger. Sometimes it just takes someone with a keen sense of observation and insight to tell you what you really think and really want. ‘preciate it.
Newly Housewife,
“Is this when the term ‘cafeteria Mormon’ applies?”
yes and no. It isn’t just what commandments we choose to follow cause I think that is not the point. it is which things are we going to believe.
IMO, a cafeteria might e someone who does not accept the historical aspect of the Book of Mormon but appreciates the messages and things contained it in. Or, someone who might not choose to attend the Temple every single month as we are asked. things like that. I don’t think you can do too much equivocating on the things contained in the TR questions, though I am sure some do.
Chino,
“what most Mormons need is the feeling that they’ve got some special conduit to God/his holy hierarchy here on Earth that sets them apart from the rest of the confused mopes on this planet.”
snark alert!
Choosing to do what someone else thinks you should do is hardly giving up agency. It may be a bad idea, but you are still making a decision to act. That’s hardly giving up agency.
-Brigham Young
Jeff,
Why do you claim agency here but when it comes to politics you are the exact opposite wanting to enslave your brethren to do your desires?
Since this post isn’t about politics you need not answer the question but it does seem inconsistent.
That says to me that we need to watch out for ourselves and trust not in the flesh but God. Yes, listen to the prophets, but if they err and you follow, you have the liberty of yourself, and in the end, are responsible for yourself even if false counsel is given.
Great post, Jeff! M Miles I clicked thumbs down on yours, but then changed my mind and wanted to do thumbs up. It is all about one’s personal choice. It’s valid to follow the persuasion of another person in a matter that is less material and which they care strongly about in the interest of that relationship. It is not valid to always yield to a friend who takes advantage of your compliance.
There is no accountability when we don’t own our choices, which to me is related to shelves crashing down. We put too much weight on things others told us to do or believe and not enough on our own choices.
“Freedom of choice is what you got, freedom from choice is what you want.”
-Devo “Freedom of Choice”
Jon,
“Why do you claim agency here but when it comes to politics you are the exact opposite wanting to enslave your brethren to do your desires?”
What on earth are you talking about?
Jon,
“but if they err and you follow, you have the liberty of yourself, and in the end, are responsible for yourself even if false counsel is given.”
I agree wit hyou here, but, we have been taught that if the Prophet is wrong and we follow, we are still blessed for it.
Never quite got that one. Causes me to ask, “So, what is the mission of the Holy Ghost again?”
“I agree with you here, but, we have been taught that if the Prophet is wrong and we follow, we are still blessed for it.”
Which, it appears, would be a false teaching, and so we are responsible to reject false teachings. Like the prophet will never lead the church astray. What does it mean “astray” does that only pertain to our salvation? If so, then what about the blacks and the priesthood and going to the temple? Does that not constitute astray? Since Pres. McKay said it was only a policy but never doctrine, doesn’t that mean people were lead astray?
I think we are responsible for our own salvation regardless of what our leaders say. Just like Nephi, when his kooky father said they needed to leave Jerusalem, what did Nephi do? He asked God and then God told him, through the HG, that his father wasn’t so kooky and that his father was following God, so Nephi did likewise. But when Nephi’s father murmured, Nephi refused to fall into line and trusted in God.
There’s a ton of scriptures like these, unfortunately people blindly follow their leaders and refuse to think for themselves (and follow the HG) and are left with “darkened” minds.
So, yes, we do actually agree on something. Which is nice.
As for the politics, I was just referring to progressive politics, which typically takes away people’s right to choose and receive consequences for their own actions.
Jon, actually Nephi believed first, then sought confirmation of the spirit. The record is quite clear on that point.
I would not say that the prophetic utterances of an earlier era were leading saints astray. President McKay also was clear that he had sought the Lord’s approval to make a change and did not get it.
Jeff, I think the decision to obey a prophet’s counsel is an exercise of agency. Just because one obeys does not mean he has not chosen to.
Paul,
Actually, Nephi first obeyed his father first (as any good Israelite would) and then he sought confirmation from God to make sure that Lehi was doing what God wanted him to do. It is instructive that Laman and Lemuel also went with their father because of the overriding tradition among the Israelites to obey their parents.
Paul, From all the quotes I gave the record is quite clear that it is follow to put your trust in the arm of flesh, it is better to obey God first and find out from Him if a prophet is saying His words. It is false to believe that man will always say what God wants, else, how could their be false clergy among the Israelites as clearly stated by the scriptures.
Even Joseph Smith never claimed to be perfect. If a man does and if a man claims that all his words come from God and never errs, you know then that that person is not of God. I don’t believe our current leaders profess that, but some of the teachings do imply it.
I’ll leave it at that. It is your choice to lean on the arm of flesh or to follow God first and foremost.
Paul,
“Jeff, I think the decision to obey a prophet’s counsel is an exercise of agency. Just because one obeys does not mean he has not chosen to.”
I do agree with this so long as the spirit of it, I choose to obey, rather than I must obey. There is a bit too much of the later sometimes.
Jon,
“As for the politics, I was just referring to progressive politics, which typically takes away people’s right to choose and receive consequences for their own actions.”
So does repressive politics, I mean Republican politics, who wish to re-distribute wealth from the poor and middle class to the rich.
Jeff, #35: I know what you are saying. And I don’t disagree. But I also acknowledge that some are like me. Having gained a witness that the prophet is a prophet, we tend to do our best to do as he counsels. The seeking for additional witness may come when there is a conflict rather than on every bit of direction. I don’t see that approach as a ceding of agency, nor do I see it as blindly following, because the obedience is born of a witness of the spirit.
I should add: when we use the prophet’s counsel to bludgeon our fellow church members into submission, that is, in my view, unrighteous dominion.
Jeff,
Hence the reason I don’t like the conservatives nor the progressives (btw, the progressives redistribute to the rich also). People need liberty and need to stop looking at government as the solution, when it is really just themselves.