{"id":3624,"date":"2014-07-17T15:11:17","date_gmt":"2014-07-17T22:11:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.newcoolthang.com\/?p=3624"},"modified":"2020-01-09T04:19:37","modified_gmt":"2020-01-09T11:19:37","slug":"obedience-vs-self-sufficiency","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.newcoolthang.com\/index.php\/2014\/07\/obedience-vs-self-sufficiency\/3624\/","title":{"rendered":"Obedience vs. Self-Sufficiency"},"content":{"rendered":"

Over at Wheat and Tares<\/a>, Hawkgrrrl wrote an interesting post on the difference between obedience and self-sufficiency.\u00a0 She mentioned how pretty much everybody teaches both perspectives to their children, but if push came to shove and they could only teach one, religious people would teach obedience while secular families would choose self-sufficiency.<\/p>\n

In the comments to that post I pretty much rehearsed the reasoning behind my post, \u201cThe False Prophets We Follow<\/a>\u201d, wherein I suggest that self-sufficiency in the sense of not following or obeying what anybody else teaches us is a myth which serves to reinforce secular values at the expense of religious values.\u00a0 Our thoughts and values have almost entirely been taught us by other people and\/or spirits.\u00a0 Thus, the question is not whether we or our children will obey or be self-sufficient (this is not exactly the question that Hawkgrrl was asking); the question is whether we or our children will construe the choices we make in our lives in terms of obedience or self-sufficiency.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, while I do think that my perspective sets the problem up differently and in a certain sense more accurately, I don\u2019t think it really does justice to that perspective which sees itself in terms of self-sufficiency.\u00a0 This perspective does not see itself as believing and valuing things totally independent of the people who teach or profit from them.\u00a0 I think a careful reading would not<\/em> suggest that these \u201cself-sufficient\u201d people believe themselves capable of escaping or rising above the web of discipleship in which we inevitably swim during this life.\u00a0 Rather, they see themselves as not allowing any other person to evaluate these teachers and their teachings for them.\u00a0 They see themselves as being self-sufficient in their evaluation<\/em> of all teachings and teachers, all prophecies and prophets.\u00a0 Obedience is not following the person who says something, but following something because<\/em> of who says it.<\/p>\n

This reframes things squarely in terms of the Euthyphro dilemma which I think is at the heart of the disagreement discussed in my last post<\/a>:\u00a0 We all agree that personal revelation trumps both authority and human reason, but does priesthood authority trump human reason or the other way around?\u00a0 It is my contention that the gospel can be framed as follows:<\/p>\n

Human reason ? Priesthood Authority ? Personal Revelation = Private<\/p>\n

In one sense, this equation definitely puts a premium on obedience over self-sufficiency, but in another sense it does not.\u00a0 Yes, our obedience to priesthood leaders is trumped by our personal \u2013 and therefore self-sufficient \u2013 revelation.\u00a0 The problem is that this personal revelation is not at all a clear case of self-sufficiency in the relevant sense.\u00a0 When we pray about the Book of Mormon, the church or its priesthood leaders, we are thus allowing another person to evaluate these teachings and teachers, these prophecies and prophets for us.\u00a0 We are most definitely not given reasons or information about these things according to which we can then self-sufficiently decide for ourselves.\u00a0 In other words, our discipleship and testimonies are, at bottom, also a case of obedience winning out over self-sufficiency.<\/p>\n

Even more importantly, I would argue that this obedience to authority generalizes down the chain of command.\u00a0 In the same way that we are typically not given reasons or information regarding the church and its leaders in order to self-sufficiently decide for ourselves what we should do with respect to them, we cannot assume that our priesthood authorities are given such reasons and information in their efforts to exercise righteous dominion.\u00a0 Furthermore, we should not expect our priesthood leaders to necessarily give us reasons and information on some topic after which we can then self-sufficiently make our own decisions.\u00a0 It is for this very reason that the Lord has given a measured amount of the exact same authority that He has \u2013 including the authority to evaluate teachings and teachers for those within their stewardship.<\/p>\n

In conclusion, there is no self-sufficiency in the gospel of Jesus Christ.\u00a0 Not only do we inevitably follow some person or another in essentially all of our beliefs and values, but the gospel actively encourages us to trust the evaluation of these teachings and teachers to those in authority.\u00a0 Personal revelation is the most basic case in which we trust and obey somebody else\u2019s evaluation of various teachings and teachers.\u00a0 Priesthood authority is an extension of this same expectation that we trust and obey somebody else\u2019s evaluation of various teachings and teachers.\u00a0 In neither case are we expected to allow our self-sufficient evaluations of various teachers and teachings to trump our faith, trust and obedience to these authorities.