What Does It Mean To Follow Jesus Christ Today?
by Cory Bushman
“Christ’s teaching to live each day as if it were your last is much smarter than the world’s teaching to get more and more money for the future. Both sides will die, but only one will die prepared and happy. Disciples of Christ will be poor, but that does not mean that they will be sad. It may mean that they will live out on the land or sleep under the stars, that they will be hungry three times a day (just before each meal), that they will be so tired at night that they will fall asleep easily and sleep right through the night, that they will use their time to listen to and help others, and that when they die, their death will have meaning.”
--Leo Tolstoy (What I Believe)
Remember the worth of souls is great in the sight of God.
D & C 18:10
THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT
The late American novelist and humanist Kurt Vonnegut expressed the importance of The Sermon on the Mount in his last work, A Man Without A Country. Vonnegut wrote, “How do humanists feel about Jesus? I say of Jesus, as all humanists do, If what he said is good, and so much of it is absolutely beautiful, what does it matter if he was God or not? But if Christ hadn’t delivered the Sermon on the Mount, with its message of mercy and pity, I wouldn’t want to be a human being. I’d just as soon be a rattlesnake.”
In A Man Without A Country, Vonnegut tells of a man by the name of Powers Hapgood who was born to a middle-class family in Indianapolis, Indiana. Hapgood became involved in organizing to gain better pay and safer working conditions for his working-class brothers. Powers Hapgood was arrested in a picket line and brought before a judge. The judge, knowing Hapgood’s history asked, “Mr. Hapgood, here you are, you’re a graduate of Harvard. Why would anyone with your advantages choose to live as you have?” Hapgood answered the judge: “Why, because of the Sermon on the Mount, sir.”
Recently I was given a gift of a small box with the words, “Plans for the Overthrow” wood burned into the top. Inside of the box is a copy of The Sermon on the Mount. These radical words literally tell us exactly what we must do in order to overthrow chains of oppression and follow Christ.
“Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away. Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust.” (St. Matthew 5:38-48)
Aware of the label of insanity given to those who chose to live the teachings of Christ literally, Tolstoy wrote, “What will sound most crazy in the future will be when they tell how we had a Teacher who showed us clearly and simply what we needed to do to have a better life, and we all said that his rules were too difficult.” We have read, reread, shared and committed to memory the Sermon on the Mount, but has it penetrated our hearts? Has it caused a stirring of the soul and a desire to change the way we live and to obey the teachings Christ? In the Book of Mormon, the prophet Alma asks us this same question.
“And now behold, I say unto you, my brethren, if ye have experienced a change of heart, and if ye have felt to sing the song of redeeming love, I would ask, can ye feel so now?”
(Alma 5:26)
THREE SAINTS
Kurt Vonnegut referred to saints as “people who behaved decently in a strikingly indecent society.” We are surrounded by saints. In Anne Applebaum’s Pulitzer Prize winning book, Gulag, she includes an account of Margarete Buber-Neumann’s arrest and imprisonment at the Butyrka prison. A fellow inmate had been arrested while wearing “a light summer dress which had turned to rags”. Applebaum tells of Margarete and her fellow cell mates determination to make this woman a new dress. They used rough towels, and burnt ends of matches to mark the pattern. Lighted matches took the place of scissors, and the thread used to sew the dress together was removed from existing clothing. Margarete wrote of the finished product; “The towel dress...went from hand to hand and was beautifully embroidered at the neck, the sleeves, and round the bottom of the skirt. When it was finally finished it was dampened down and carefully folded. The fortunate possessor slept on it at night. Believe it or not, but when it was produced in the morning, it was really delightful; it would not have disgraced the window of a fashionable dress shop.”
Emma Goldman, a famous Jewish anarchist and outspoken atheist, had a similar prison experience, which was recorded in her biography, Living My Life. “Christmas was approaching and my companions were in nervous wonderment as to what the day of days would bring them. Nowhere is Christianity so utterly devoid of meaning as in prison.” Due to their circumstances, few of the women had outside family and friends who would remember them on Christmas day, but Goldman stated that her inmates “clung to the hope that the day of their Saviour’s birth would bring them some kindness.” Long before Christmas, Goldman began to ask “family, comrades, and friends” to send her gifts including; bracelets, earrings, necklaces, rings, brooches, and other trinkets. Goldman was allowed to store these items in her cell and on Christmas Eve, while the rest of her prison mates were attending the cinema, the gifts were distributed, with the help of three of her neighbors and the prison matron. Goldman recorded, “When the women returned from the cinema, the cell-block resounded with exclamation of happy astonishment. “Santa Claus’s been here! He’s brung me something grand!” “Me, too! Me, too!” reechoed from cell to cell.” Goldman wrote of that Christmas in the Missouri penitentiary as the Christmas which brought her “greater joy than many previous ones outside.” She continued to express her gratitude for friends who allowed her to “bring a gleam of sunshine into the dark lives of (her) fellow-sufferers.”
Another saint, who was caught “behaving decently in a strikingly indecent society” was President Spencer W. Kimball. During one of his many layovers at an airport, he noticed a young pregnant woman with a small child standing in a long line. The woman had been advised by her doctor not to pick up her child unless it was absolutely necessary, which caused onlookers to criticize her parenting skills. President Kimball, then an Apostle of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, was the first to ask the woman if she needed assistance. President Kimball not only arranged a flight for the woman and encouraged others in line to assist her, but he also took the time to pick up the child and calm her. When all was made right, President Kimball moved on.
This is an experience that President Kimball most likely did not remember, until he received a letter years later from a returned missionary. The letter told the story of the airport, that he was the baby that the expectant mother gave birth to, and that through President Kimball’s kindness and example, the family became acquainted with the LDS church. Mother Teresa said that, “following Jesus is simple, but not easy. Love until it hurts and then love more.”
The women of Butyrka prison, Emma Goldman and her cellmates, and our beloved Prophet Spencer W. Kimball are all great examples of saints. It is important to note that their actions, their great acts of service, are all things that each one of us are capable of. We can all behave decently in a strikingly indecent society.
ENTERTAIN STRANGERS
In Hebrews 13:2 it reads, “Be not fearful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.” In September of 2003, I saw a young boy sitting on the sidewalk, in the shadows of the Salt Lake Temple, holding a sign which read, “talk to me.” The boy wasn’t accepting food or money, just conversation. I was struck by the loneliness and isolation that the world offers, that would cause one to beg for human interaction on the street.
On moving into an apartment in a populated area, I was given a packet of community information. Included in the packet was a pamphlet discouraging residents to give to panhandlers. I was struck by the information found in the pamphlet, and immediately my thoughts turned to The Sermon on the Mount and what the Savior would think of the promotion of neglecting His children. Mother Teresa stated that “In the poor we meet Jesus in the most distressing disguises.” It is easy to help those who we feel deserve help or who we can relate to, but that is not what Christ has asked us to do. Catholic Worker Dorothy Day wrote, “The true atheist is the one who denies God’s image in the ‘least of these.’”
DEATH WITH MEANING
Leon Gieco urgently wrote, “All I ask of God is that I not be indifferent to suffering, that parched death does not find me empty and alone without having done enough.” We should all have such fear, fear that we will not do all that God has asked of us, that we will not relieve the suffering of the world, that we will find ourselves having not done enough. We will all die. We are all mortal beings. Each of us must make the choice to live a life that will give our death meaning. It is that simple. There is a Russian peasant saying which states, “If you drink, you’ll die, and if you don’t drink, you’ll die. Better drink and die.” This is what it means to follow Christ today, to drink of life, to walk in the path of Christ, and to live a life which will give death meaning. We must learn to live lives of meaning, lives that not even death can destroy. Tolstoy said that if Christ were here today he would plead, “For thousands of years you have been doing it your way. Now try my way.”
Even when they call us mad, when they call us subversives and communists and all the epithets they put on us, we know we only preach the subversive witness of the Beatitudes, which have turned everything
upside down. —Oscar Romero
box that stated "Plans for the overthrow" with the Sermon on the Mount in the
box. What a clever gift idea.
I believe that too many times we only look at the actual charitable act in determining how Christlike one is. I don't believe that Christ just did his thing and then left the person to themselves. He taught them concepts and then once he was gone, his disciples taught them more to enable them to become what they could become. We think that by giving someone money on the street we fulfill our obligation to the stranger in need. We think that by giving them our coat, we clothe the naked. I suggest that we are only taking the first step. If we or others do not continue down the road and teach them the things that they need to know to make it in this world or the world to come then we have failed in our obligation. That is not to say that I don't give money when I have it to the stranger on the street, because I do when I can. I am saying that too many feel that we do not have a responsibility to go further.
I believe that the policy of many places to not allow panhandling is correct. I believe that if you want to help them, you do not continue to enable their destructive behavior. We must move back to the idea that we work for that which we receive. In that way we can bring dignity and honor back into our nation and bring the true teachings of Christ back to the forefront. To use the old saying, "give a man a fish and he has food for the day, teach a man to fish and he has food for a lifetime".
who ask." doing that in and of itself is important, not for the asker, but for the
giver.
But more to the point. The homeless, typically have multiple disabilities,
physical, cognitive and emotional. Surveys of the homeless population here
in LA point out this fact. It's a simplistic and uninformed view that in essence
blames these people because they have not learned to take care of
themselves. A very high proportion of these people are unable to take care
of themselves, they are not able to be self sufficient even under the best
circumstances. This is how they became homeless in the first place.
Providing food, or clothing or money to these people may seem wrong to
some. But for the folks on the street it means making it through another day.
Though governments can often serve positive functions, Anarchists feel that moving beyond governments would lead to a society with less poverty, less crime and less oppression. Such a society is in accord with Mormon doctrine which calls for economic and social equality (ie 4 Nephi). Much progress has been made since the US government was initially formed (ie abolition of slavery, civil rights movement, womens' suffrage, labor laws), and yet more progress is needed. When people wonder if Anarchism is against the basic tenets of Mormonism because of the 12th Article of faith, they are ignoring some basic Mormon doctrines and history. The 12th article of faith says that Mormons believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. This does not mean that a better political/economic system than the one we presently have cannot be established. Mormons are challenged to build a Zion society, where all things are held in common, and where everyone is equal in temporal things. Mormons are also challenged to renounce war and proclaim peace (D and C 98). A society in which some degree of economic equality exists and where we do not fight offensive wars for material gain is impossible to achieve with the current system we have.
Those who wonder if Anarchism is compatible with Mormonism also feel that Mormons can never oppose the government or break the law because we are supposed to be subject to rulers as the 12th article of faith suggests. History shows that Mormons often opposed the US government in the early years of the religion's existence. Examples include Joseph Smith raising a militia to fight the Missouri state militia, Brigham Young non-violently resisting the US Army as it marched to invade Salt Lake City, Mormons deliberately practicing polygamy (and going to jail for it) after it had been banned by the US government. Obviously, if the government asks us to do something that is contrary to the basic commandments of the Gospel, obeying Christ trumps obeying the government. Surely no Mormon would have been justified in, say, gassing Jews in Natzi Germany, simply because the German government told them to, and because the twelfth article of faith tells us we should be subject to our rulers. That article of faith is just a general rule Joseph Smith felt Mormons should follow most of the time. It was neither a commmandment, nor a revelation from God. Joseph wrote the articles of faith in response to a query from an Illinois newspaper about what Mormons' basic beliefs are. They are simply his opinion. He never claimed they were divine in origin.
thought that there was a bit about judge not lest ye be judged, or something
to that effect. i've always applied that bit to giving, in that there is no
judgement i can pass on someone who asks for something of me. whether
they are going to use the money to harm themselves or grab a burger or
even harm me isn't necessarily something that i can concern myself with.
(it might be pretty dumb i know, but i'd rather eschew suspicion in stead of
misplacing it.)
i very much feel though that setting a small example for those around me
by altering my lifestyle in this small way is preparing the way for someone
with greater power to make a greater difference in the lives of those around
me than i can.
like when a friend decides to focus on social work rather than trickle-down
economics when plotting school curriculum.
or when a committee member puts the "yes" on a grant proposal for a
youth specific homeless shelter.
or when a ceo decides that cutting jobs is just a short term solution and with
a little more thought and fiscal restructuring might be able to promote both
the bottom line and the welfare of the workers.
not that seeing some bloke give a buck will cause that kind of change, but a
sense of charity can be magnified into a zeitgeist by sheer force of habit i
think.
or change my situation if necessary, and do the best with what I've been
given or with what I give. I'm a LDS from Europe, and I do not see
anything radical or new in most of the articles. Simply common sense.
Even though I might disagree with political or societal opinions of
mainstream Utah Mormons, I do not think opinions matter in terms of
personal salvation. Sincerity and effort will.