I was speaking today with a woman who is not a member of the Church who was asking me about apologetics and the work I do with FAIR. She said that recently she discussed Mormon apologetics with a former LDS bishop and was surprised to hear him say that doing apologetics is contrary to the doctrine of the Church. I certainly don’t want to act in any way that is contrary to Church doctrine, and if anyone can convince me that it is contrary to God’s will that I defend the Church, I’ll stop right now.
However, as I read the scriptures, it seems to me that apologetics (defense of the faith) is not only permissible, but required of all believing members. We should “be ready always to give an answer [apologia] to every man that asketh . . . a reason of the hope that is in [us] with meekness and fear: Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of [us], as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse [our] good conversation in Christ.” (1 Pet. 3:15-16.) Likewise, Joseph Fielding Smith once said, “Every member of the Church ought to know that [the Book of Mormon] …is true, and we ought to be prepared with an answer to all those critics who condemn it” (“The Book of Mormon, A Divine Record,” Improvement Era [December 1961], 925.) And Harold B. Lee wrote, “The term ‘elder,’ which is applied to all holders of the Melchizedek Priesthood, means a defender of the faith. That is our prime responsibility and calling. Every holder of the Melchizedek Priesthood is to be a defender of the faith. (Conference Report, April 1970, 54-57).
Rather than wait for a specific calling by a bishop, or for the Church Public Affairs office to issue a statement, or wait for apostles to tell us to defend the Church on the internet (which, incidentally, they have done here and here), all Church members have been told to “be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness; For the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves.” (D&C 58:27-28.) In addition to simply bearing my testimony to others, it is my understanding that I should “reason with them.” (D&C 49:4. See also D&C 66:7 & 68:1.)
I am aware of the discomfort some members of the Church feel with respect to apologetics. In responding to critics, it is often difficult to avoid contention. However, as Elder Hales has counseled, “[w]e can answer with love those who have been influenced by misinformation and prejudice.” He suggested a number of ways: “a kind letter to the editor, a conversation with a friend, a comment on a blog, or a reassuring word to one who has made a disparaging comment.” (Robert D. Hales, “Christian Courage: The Price of Discipleship,” Ensign, Nov. 2008.)
As I discussed with my non-member friend whether or not it is against Church doctrine for its members to engage in apologetics, it occurred to me to refer her to Section 123 of The Doctrine and Covenants, which is described in the chapter heading as setting forth the “[d]uty of the Saints in relation to their persecutors.” It is worth quoting most of it here, with a few comments from me in brackets:
1 And again, we would suggest for your consideration the propriety of all the saints [not just the leaders] gathering up a knowledge of all the facts, and sufferings and abuses put upon them by the people of this State;
. . . .
4 And perhaps a committee [or a non-profit organization?] can be appointed to find out these things, and to take statements and affidavits; and also to gather up the libelous publications that are afloat;
5 And all that are in the magazines, and in the encyclopedias, [and on the internet] and all the libelous histories that are published, and are writing, and by whom, and present the whole concatenation of diabolical rascality and nefarious and murderous impositions that have been practised upon this people—
6 That we may not only publish to all the world, but present them to the heads of government in all their dark and hellish hue, as the last effort which is enjoined on us by our Heavenly Father, before we can fully and completely claim that promise which shall call him forth from his hiding place; and also that the whole nation may be left without excuse before he can send forth the power of his mighty arm.
7 It is an imperative duty that we owe to God, to angels, with whom we shall be brought to stand, and also to ourselves, to our wives and children, . . . .
11 And also it is an imperative duty that we owe to all the rising generation, and to all the pure in heart—
12 For there are many yet on the earth among all sects, parties, and denominations, who are blinded by the subtle craftiness of men, whereby they lie in wait to deceive, and who are only kept from the truth because they know not where to find it—
13 Therefore, that we should waste and wear out our lives in bringing to light all the hidden things of darkness, wherein we know them; and they are truly manifest from heaven—
14 These should then be attended to with great earnestness.
15 Let no man count them as small things; for there is much which lieth in futurity, pertaining to the saints, which depends upon these things.
16 You know, brethren, that a very large ship is benefited very much by a very small helm in the time of a storm, by being kept workways with the wind and the waves.
17 Therefore, dearly beloved brethren, let us cheerfully do all things that lie in our power; and then may we stand still, with the utmost assurance, to see the salvation of God, and for his arm to be revealed.
So, unless someone can convince me that I should stop, I intend to continue “gathering up a knowledge of all the facts” and to “cheerfully do all things that lie in [my] power” to bring “to light all the hidden things of darkness.” It seems to me to be “an imperative duty that we owe to God.”
The references and in-text citations you have provided are not only appropriate, but critical in understanding the broader meaning of the word ‘apologetics’ within the context that it is given. Clarity from the outset is most important if members are to realize its function in defense of the faith.
Last week, I spoke with a sister member (born in the covenant) who was experiencing ‘shaken faith syndrome’ on the account of reading anti Mormon literature concerning horses in the Book of Mormon. After a brief discussion on the matter and a general introduction to apologetics, she was glad to follow up on some online resources I provided for her.
I suspect that she is not the only one. I can also bear first-hand witness that the work of apologetics, like the gospel itself, provided me with a shield ‘to withstand the fiery darts of the adversary’ as I was confronted with anti-LDS literature, half-truths and factual truths that were and continue to be somewhat obscured and decontextualized in order to portray the Church in a negative light. However, this was an epic failed attempt to ‘lull’ me away from not only restored spiritual knowledge, but also intellectual knowledge that is both liberating and vindicating.
For me, I can highly recommend that having an intellectual testimony (knowing) is just as important as having a spiritual testimony (feeling) similar in a sense when Joseph Smith Jr said that baptism by water is only half effective if it is not accompanied by a baptism of fire. As an academic, including the sister member, the provision of evidence, theory, data, analysis, interpretations and findings (which contributes to the greater scheme of knowing) is critical to presenting and defending the core argument of a piece of research, with ‘faith’ as a primary component because we are invited to ‘seek learning, even by study and also by faith’ (Italics added), (D&C 88:118). Anything less runs the risk of assumption and conjecture to say the least.
I would like to point out here that I am not advocating that everyone adopt an academic or scholarly approach to apologetics (it’s just what I like to do) as you might have some other approach that works for you. Either way, researching facts and knowledge in order to present and substantiate a claim, like one would do in preparation for a talk in sacrament, is a worthwhile cause.
I have always felt the need to establish a similar organisation and agenda to help our members prepare for every needful thing so that we, like the dear sister, will not fear. Apologising for nothing, but being ‘apologetic’ for everything that we cherish and hold sacred. For some, this may be a worthy cause in which they are already anxiously engaged and for others, it may be a pearl of great price, yet to be discovered in a field of weeds and thorn bushes.
My own personal witness is that the work of apologetics is a complement to the work of the Church and if that means saving members and potential members from the winds of false doctrine and accusation, then roll forward I say like the stone rolling forward cut without hands in its grand mission of validating the authenticity of the work of the Church.
God willing.
Michael (convert 1995): New Zealand
“Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.” Jude 3
As members of the Church, we have the responsibility to defend the truth. This we are to with Love and understanding. People most times talk about things they hardly understood, however, ours is the responsibility to let them see the truth, we should NOT argue unnecessarily, but allow the Holy Ghost guide us in our love for the gospel, and as we faithfully share it with others.
As a returned Missionary, I find it fulfilling when I enlightened someone about the truths found in the Restored Gospel. Most times they do that to see if we really love the truth we have. Allow God to guide you.
This post reminds me of the day FAIR was announced…I heard some people wonder if it was a good idea, or appropriate, or consistent with our gospel of peace. But I was rejoicing, inwardly and out loud, that there would be a place for all those tricky questions to be answered from a perspective of faith! I am so grateful for all those (here and elsewhere) who put their time, talents, and energies toward thinking through the tough questions for those of us without the necessary expertise to answer the questions on our own.
Right on, Steve!!
Experiences over the past few months have led me to the conclusion that there are two major divisions in the church. One group considers themselves as having a single “saved” experience much like a protestant born again Christian. They need no more of the word of God. If they accidentally learn something new that might otherwise strengthen the hope that is in them, they quickly say, “What does it matter?”
The other faction in the church are evidence gatherers and continually collect evidences upon with they can base their faith. They are supported by a myriad of scriptures like D&C 123 and D&C 88 as well as The Lectures on Faith.
I suppose one would find a predominance of one or the other in any given unit. Since moving from Dallas, I’ve found the “saved” variety dominating, yet I know that there must be pockets of truth seekers somewhere in the valley. There are times when I wish I had known before buying a home in the area that I would be barraged by, “What does it matter?”
maddog:
Interesting observations. I have also encountered the attitudes you describe. I suspect it is not so much a distinct division between two types of people, but rather a spectrum between two approaches. But it does seem that people tend to gravitate more to one end or the other rather than being a healthy mix, which is what I think we should all be striving for: study AND faith.