In his talk entitled, “One Eternal Round,” Brother Hugh Nibley taught that “Origen [Greek, cir. 185 to 254 A.D.], the first and foremost of Christian theologians, divided the church itself into two bodies of members--the ‘esoteric’ and the ‘exoteric’--corresponding to two different ways of comprehending the teachings. The words are his, and they speak volumes. Both societies shared the common membership, but while the exoteric side made up the popular congregations, the esoteric community was limited to those who understood and could be trusted with the deeper meaning of the doctrine. This division between the people is not a natural one or an inevitable one, for normal human beings are capable of qualifying for either society. . . . Throughout the Book of Mormon the church itself regularly splits into a worldly society, notably the religion of the Nehors, and another consisting of ‘a few . . . humble followers of Christ’ (2 Nephi 28:14) to whom special gifts and revelations were given (Alma 12:9). These were Origen’s exoteric and esoteric churches respectively. That is why true Israel was called a peculiar people; people often ask today in what sense the Latter-day Saints are still peculiar, and it is not always easy to find an answer” (Temple and Cosmos, 386-388). The particulars of Nehor’s activities, end, and effects upon the society of his time are to be found in Alma 1:1-16.
In this writing, Origen’s division of the believers of his era into the esoterics and the exoterics is being used to illustrate the apparent differences of approach of Church members today between those who are actively seeking to perfect themselves over time with their sights fixed upon eternal life and those members who apparently seek some lesser goal as the purpose of their membership. Bluntly expressed, many members of Christ’s true Church will find themselves eventually judged as having fallen short of the reward of living for eternity in the celestial kingdom.
So, what brought me to this subject? The impetus was an intermittent string of poorly prepared and presented church lessons to classes the members of which in varying degrees appeared prepared and ready to learn. The original title of this piece might have been “Teaching and Learning in the Church.” However, without much thinking on the narrower topic, it became clear that the problem was more pervasive. It was about this time that I read Brother Nibley’s talk on “One Eternal Round,” and the thought once again forcibly struck me that seemingly far too many of us Saints simply are not taking the gospel and our Church membership seriously enough. Thus for our consideration, here are some possible evidences of Origen’s dichotomy to be found in the Church today.
If we were truly concerned about excelling in the callings and assignments we received from our leaders, would we find it adequate to begin our preparation for a talk in Sacrament Meeting or the teaching of a classroom lesson one or two days before hand? Would lessons in our priesthood and auxiliary meetings be taught from the manuals themselves as opposed to a lesson plan we had written ourselves based on the assigned and supplementary materials? Would lessons consisting of overwhelming class participation at the expense of the lesson subject matter being presented for its intended benefit be our objective? And if gospel learning, understanding, and progression were truly our desire, would we not take our scriptures to church with us as well as our study materials furnished by the Church for adult priesthood and Relief Society lessons? If learning were our sincere objective, would we not prepare ourselves for the lessons that are scheduled to be taught on a given day? The answers to these questions may seem so obvious, but the reality of what happens all too often in fact is not conducive to proper teaching and successful learning. All too apparent is the distinction between those who are approaching their study of the gospel from the exoteric as opposed to the esoteric perspective.
How successfully has the home teaching program been implemented in our wards? Up until recently, there were approximately nine hundred members on our ward’s roster. Of these, about three hundred had taken no recognized or remembered overt action to make their presence manifest to ward leaders. Some few months ago, a senior missionary couple was assigned to our ward. Their present assignment is to locate and identify as many of these members-in-hiding as possible. There are at least two concerns illustrated here. First, a very high percentage of all the members known or suspected to live within our ward’s boundaries are not actively pursuing their salvation as made apparent by their shunning the necessary participation with the Saints. Second, why are we who live in the ward and consider ourselves actively involved not able to locate and identify those of our brothers and sisters who are not so participating? Would the time and effort of a full-time missionary couple not be better spent working with members who are more or less known to ward leaders and who are in need of strengthening? How do these practices illustrate the differing motivations of Origen’s exoterics and esoterics?
When it comes to the mysteries of God, there are mysteries and then there are mysteries. Those that we may know and that are available to us for our advantage here and now may be learned if we but qualify ourselves for a temple recommend and attend a temple regularly and thoughtfully. Of these mysteries the Lord said, “But unto him that keepeth my commandments I will give the mysteries of my kingdom, and the same shall be in him a well of living water, springing up unto everlasting life” (D&C 63:23). Is temple attendance in your temple district what it ought to be? In ours, it is not, and temple presidencies are limited as to the means they may use to encourage increased temple attendance. Why? Because the Lord’s will is that members attend His house in response to personal feelings of need or desire and not as a result of external pressure. So here we have another illustration of Origen’s dichotomy. For those who preside over us in the stakes and wards of the Church, the distinction between those of their flocks who are actively seeking to better themselves and live the gospel evermore diligently are more or less distinguishable from those who lack the required faith and hope to make gospel living an integral part of their lives.
My personal belief is that in order for us to eventually qualify for eternal life we must strive unceasingly to more fully live our lives according to God’s will as prescribed in His gospel and taught by His chosen leaders in our day. And for those who believe that the Church’s success and growth today provide sufficient evidence that “all is well in Zion,” they should consider the teachings of the Prophet Nephi who saw our day in fact. All is not well in Zion, for Satan will pacify many “and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion; yea, Zion prospereth, all is well--and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell” (2 Nephi 28:21).
The Lord himself pointed out the distinction that is the subject of this writing when He taught that there are those who “seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand” the things of God (Matthew 13:13). Clearly, it behooves us to so live that His Spirit may be with us making it possible for us to see and to hear and to understand the marvelous truths the Lord has made manifest for our betterment and our enlightenment.
No comments:
Post a Comment