Pages

Tuesday, September 2, 2025

Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother





Genesis 2:24

...therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh. 

The same from Matthew 19:

Have you not read that he who made man at the beginning made him male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be one flesh?

A common LDS reading of this passage, specifically "leave his father and mother", is in terms of where you live and who you live with.  Meaning that when you get married you move out of your parents' house and in with your spouse to start a married life.  But what if that's dreadfully shallow? What if there is so much more to leaving your father and mother?  What' if it goes way beyond just changing your address, and committing to a new relationship?    

What else could leaving your mother and father entail?  Do we dare look?  Do we dare ask the question?  Sometimes you need to be careful what you ask for.  

In an insightful passage from the book "The Middle Passage" we get a fresh and sobering gut check on how we are doing in terms of little considered inner-self elements of leaving our father and mother. 

This is from the first chapter: 

When I was in fifth grade, just after World War Two, our teacher bought some glass prisms which had been intended for submarine periscopes. Before and after class we would amuse ourselves by lurching down the aisles, running into walls and each other. We were fascinated by the question of reality and how to find one’s way by such bent angles of sight.

I wondered if those children who had to wear glasses all the time saw better or only different worlds. When I considered that the lens in our eyes also refracted the light, I had to wonder further whether the reality we saw might wholly depend on the lens through which we saw it.

​It remains useful to borrow that youthful perception, to acknowledge that whatever reality may be, it will to some extent be shaped by the lens through which we see it. When we are born we are handed multiple lenses: genetic inheritance, gender, a specific culture and the variables of our family environment, all of which constitute our sense of reality. Looking back later, we have to admit that we have perhaps lived less from our true nature than from the vision of reality ordained by the lenses we used. ​

Therapists sometimes assemble a genogram which represents an emotional family tree. The history of the extended family over several generations reveals recurrent motifs. While genetic predispositions play their role, it is clear that families transmit their vision of life from generation to generation. The lens passes from parent to child, and out of that refracted perspective choices and consequences are repeated. And just as we see some aspects of the world through any given lens, so we will miss others.

​Perhaps the first step in making the Middle Passage meaningful is to acknowledge the partiality of the lens we were given by family and culture, and through which we have made our choices and suffered their consequences. If we had been born of another time and place, to different parents who held different values, we would have had an entirely different lens. The lens we received generated a conditional life, which represents not who we are but how we were conditioned to see life and make choices. All generations are seduced into anthropocentrism, tending to defend their vision of the world as superior to that of others. So, too, we succumb to the belief that the way we have grown to see the world is the only way to see it, the right way to see it, and we seldom suspect the conditioned nature of our perception.

Even in the most privileged of childhoods, life may be experienced as traumatic. We were connected to the heartbeat of the cosmos in our mother’s womb. Suddenly we were thrust violently into the world to begin an exile and a search to recover the lost connectedness. Even religion (from Latin religio, “bond between man and the gods,” or religare, “to bind back”) may be seen as a projection of the search for lost connections onto the cosmos itself. For many, given the impact of poverty, hunger, abuses of various kinds, the initial experience of the world is devastating to their sense of self.

These wounds, and the various unconscious responses adopted by the inner child, become strong determinants of the adult personality. The child cannot incarnate a freely expressed personality; rather, childhood experience shapes his or her role in the world. Out of the wounding of childhood, then, the adult personality is less a series of choices than a reflexive response to the early experiences and traumata of life.

​So we all live out, unconsciously, reflexes assembled from the past.

The problem is not that we have complexes but that complexes have us. Some complexes are useful in protecting the human organism, but others interfere with choice and may even dominate a person’s life. ​

Complexes are always more or less unconscious; they are charged with energy and operate autonomously. Although usually activated by an event in the present, the psyche operates analogously, saying in effect, “When have I been here before?” The current stimulus may be only remotely similar to something that happened in the past, but if the situation is emotionally analogous then the historically occasioned response is triggered. There are few who do not have an emotionally charged response around such issues as sex, money and authority because they are usually associated with important experiences in the past. ​

Of all the complexes, the most influential are those internalized experiences of parents we call the mother complex and the father complex. These are generally the two most important people we have ever encountered. They were there for the laying of the keel and the launching of the vessel. It was their treatment of us and their strategies toward life to which we were exposed.

Ok, with that in mind, consider again the passage to leave your mother and father and join with your spouse in a new united life. Oh boy, God embedded a whole lifetime inside those words to leave father and mother.  It may be that we have underestimated the magnitude and implications of what God is saying.  And the amount of work it may take. If we are to leave father and mother... that's no easy task.  At one point of development such an idea was not even conceivable.  Even as an adult, and perhaps despite moving halfway around the world, we may still need to leave our mother and father and join with our spouse in oneness. 

T&C 157:35:

Marriage was established at the beginning as a covenant by the word and authority of God, between the woman and God, the man and woman, and the man and God.

It's interesting that the man and woman both have an individual covenant with God.  There's individual work involved and only then does it start to look like what was established at the beginning. 

Continuing on with excerpts from the same chapter from The Middle Passage:  

Another ego-related hope of youth is the desire for the perfect relationship. While one has seen less than perfect relationships all around, we are prone to assume we are somehow wiser, better able to choose, better equipped to avoid the pitfalls. The Koran warns, “Do you think that you shall enter the Garden of Bliss without such trials as came to those who passed before you? We imagine such advice applies to others.

One may look at the sorry remains of a parent’s marriage and conclude, “I know better than they and will choose wisely.” One may still expect to be CEO, write the Great American Novel, be a terrific parent. 

Heroic thinking is useful, for were one to suspect the trials and disappointments ahead, who would have set off into adulthood? I have yet to be asked to give a commencement address, but loathsome as such speeches usually are, I still might not have the heart to tell the truth. Who could bear to say to eager and hopeful faces, “In a few years you will likely hate your job, your marriage will be in peril, your kids will cause you fits, you may very well experience so much pain and confusion about your life that you will think of writing a book about it.” 

Who could do that to the dewy-eyed, hitching their wagons to a star, even as they lurch down the same confused and wounding way their parents trod? ​Heroic thinking, with its hopes and projections barely tempered by the world’s ways, helps the young leave home and dive, as they must, into life.

More will be said later of the role of projection in marriage, but perhaps no other social construct has so much unconscious baggage imposed upon it. Few at the altar are conscious of the enormity of their expectations. No one would speak aloud the immense hopes: “I am counting on you to make my life meaningful.” “I am counting on you to always be there for me.” “I am counting on you to read my mind and anticipate all my needs.” “I am counting on you to bind my wounds and fulfill the deficits of my life.” “I am counting on you to complete me, to make me a whole person, to heal my stricken soul.” Just as the truth cannot be told in a commencement address, so the hidden agenda may not be spoken at the altar. One would be too embarrassed, if one acknowledged them, by the impossibility of these demands.

These are sobering remarks from psychologist James Hollis. I found his insights fascinating and humbling.  I disagree that marriage is just a “social construct” but that wasn’t the point he was making. The unconscious baggage is what we can work to “leave” as we contemplate leaving our mother and father and entering marriage. 

I don't detect anything in the scripture or those passages that suggests we be ungrateful, or discard anything good that a persona's mother and father offered or provided.  We ought to be grateful and honor our parents, as the original 10 commandments taught.  What I do see in these words is that we can't really claim it as “us” or claim authentic living if we are unconsciously acting out automatic extensions of our parent's worldview, lens, values or belief system. If we had different parents, we would be unconsciously living out those patterns. And very likely be part of whatever their religion happened to be.  

So, what is to be done?  The author of that book suggests we recognize it and work to make what’s unconscious more conscious and reclaim (or allow) unknown parts of ourselves to live more fully, more conscious, and (in my interpretation) allow our God given identity to surface and bring new and additional meaning to life. 

Leaving parents seems to include this inner work.  Connecting to God yourself.  Then, having reconnected to the God of the universe yourself, creating a united life with your spouse. Conscious and full of light, taking responsibility and accountability for the gift that is your life.  

Sunday, August 24, 2025

Who cares about savor, more salt!


A Reflection on Church Metrics and Meaning

There are moments during church when I want to speak up, but doing so wouldn’t be constructive. For those times, I’m grateful for a blog to reflect, question, and explore what we’re taught.

Today’s lesson was based on Elder Rasband's talk, Right Before Our Eyes. The title comes from a quote from President Nelson.  The phrase seems meant to evoke majesty (President Nelson's description) and wonder at events currently taking place.  The talk followed suit, highlighting the rapid increase of temples, the surge in missionary work, rising baptism numbers, and the growth of Church-run education. These statistics were presented as evidence that the Church is thriving by every measurable standard, and by extension, that it is the Lord’s work. And further evidence that the lord is hastening the work.  

But something felt off.

The Metrics We Choose to See

The lesson focused exclusively on positive indicators, temples, and new temple announcements, membership totals, and institutional reach.  A lot of it was construction focused.  Not once were we invited to consider less flattering metrics: member activity rates, church attendance, temple participation, retention, modern revelation, new light or knowledge from heaven, or spiritual vitality. These were and typically are, absent from the leader's talks. 

When only favorable and cherry-picked statistics are shared, it creates a misleading narrative that risks becoming more about institutional pride and vanity than useful, honest truth.  How can we repent when we insist on avoiding the truth that would lead to repentance?

Salt, Savor, and Stats 

The instructor referenced 1 Nephi 14: “And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few.” He (and all others) connects this to the global LDS membership, suggesting that our small numbers fulfill that prophecy.  The members are likened to the “salt of the earth” from Matthew 5.

Supposing we go with the analogy and presume our self-identification with the salt is accurate, we then must also wrestle with Christ’s warning: “If the salt has lost its savor, wherewith shall it be salted? It is thenceforth good for nothing but to be cast out and trodden under foot of men.

It’s easy to identify as salt. Self-identifying with the good guys in scripture, the salt, the saved, the exalted, the righteous etc...  that's the norm for religious people.  But what if we're wrong? It’s harder (but more spiritually helpful) to ask whether we are salt that carries savor.   

We were reminded by both the talk and the lesson that “hundreds of temples” were once a dream, and now they’re a reality. But how many of these temples are actually built? How many are attended regularly? How many were announced without local awareness or preparation?  I've seen several examples where the city (or the country, like China) that is going to house the new temple puts on social media that they have no knowledge of any such temple being proposed. 

Likewise, we were told that 18 million members was once unimaginable. Now it’s a milestone reached, and one to be congratulated.  Hundreds of missions? Another fulfilled dream. But selected statistics fulfilled on paper can be terribly flattering, pacifying, and misleading.  

A Warning from 3rd Nephi

Jesus warns in 3rd Nephi (Covenant of Christ wording):

"But if they won’t return to Me and obey My voice, I’ll let My people, O house of Israel, go through them and trample them down. They’ll be like salt that’s become useless, which is then good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled underfoot by My people, O house of Israel."

How can "My people" trample the salt, if they ARE the salt?  Our identification with salt seems like something we shouldn't just presume. Even if we identify with the salt, we can still be trampled underfoot by the Lord's people.  In other words, even those who once had savor can become useless and change which group they are associated with.

Honest Reflection

When Church leaders again and again focus solely on positive indicating metrics, it can feel like vanity dressed as righteousness and progress. When perilous spiritual realities are ignored in favor of institutional triumphalism, I worry we’re building assumptions that are false, vain, and spiritually fake. 

Honesty, even when unflattering  (perhaps especially) helps build trust. Without honesty, how can we claim to even see or know the truth?  

Tuesday, August 12, 2025

All diseases caused by evil spirits?

At church last week the instructor shared some interesting ideas and claims based on a quote from Brigham Young. He explained that Brigham taught that diseases and bodily problems and pain are all caused by evil or unclean spirits.

The room was initially very quiet. Then one guy asked for the idea to be repeated as it was surprising to him.  What struck me was how quickly the group accepted the idea without discussion. It seemed beyond scrutiny simply because Brigham Young said it. Perhaps some questioned it silently, but no one spoke up. I thought the quote sounded strange, yet I stayed quiet too.

The instructor didn't quote the exact quote as it didn't seem to be part of his prepared materials.  So I went and looked up the quote to see what he was talking about.  

Here’s the quote:

Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 4, pp. 129–134 (discourse 28), December 4, 1856, Tabernacle, Great Salt Lake City:

“You never felt a pain and ache, or felt disagreeable, or uncomfortable in your bodies and minds, but what an evil spirit was present causing it. … Do you realize that the ague, the fever, the chills, the severe pain in the head, the pleurisy, or any pain in the system, from the crown of the head to the soles of the feet, is put there by the devil? You do not realize this, do you? … When you have the rheumatism, do you realize that the devil put that upon you? No, but you say, ‘I got wet, caught cold, and thereby got the rheumatism.’ The spirits that afflict us and plant disease in our bodies, pain in the system, and finally death, have control over us so far as the flesh is concerned.”


That first sentence is quite a claim. It attributes about everything to evil spirits. The last part of the quote attributes evil sprits as even what's behind our eventual death.  Such sweeping teachings seemed to merit some exploration.

Brigham seemed to anticipate such responses as "I got cold" "I got wet" and that's why this or that consequence happened with my body.  He predicts people will say such things and seem to refutes such thinking, saying those aren't the real cause.

 If we broaden “evil spirit” to include any lapse in body mechanics, judgement, or vision, like stubbing your toe or stepping on a Lego at night, then maybe this could make sense. But that still doesn't really make sense.  I stepped on a Lego recently. It hurt. It blended in with the carpet so I didn't see it.  It was inevitable give the amount of Legos my kids have on the table in the living room at any given moment. 




Should I conclude that a false spirit caused me not to notice the Lego?  Where would that line of reasoning take the mind?  Do evil spirits rally for flu season and take a break in summer? If we take these ideas to their conclusion where does that land us?  This teaching seems to lead to a very strange place with evil pulling all the strings as it relates to the body.    

What Do the Scriptures Say?

Brigham specifically mentioned fevers, so let’s check the Book of Mormon/Covenant of Christ:

Alma 15:3
Now Zeezrom lay sick at Sidom with a burning fever caused by his great mental distress over his iniquity.

Here, the fever was caused by the guys own mental distress, not an evil spirit.

Alma 46:40–41
And there were some who died with fevers, which during some times of the year were very common in the land — but they could control the fevers because of the excellent qualities of the many plants and roots God provided to remove the cause of diseases which affected people due to the climate — still there were many who died of old age.

These fevers were "very" common during parts of the year.  The verse says they were due to the climate, not evil spirits. The solution was herbal, not spiritual. If evil spirits caused the fevers, why not just cast them out? The scripture instead taught about plants and herbs and their respective qualities.  People still died, of old age. There's no suggestion in that passage that evil spirits were the cause of fevers or death.  People got old and died. Same as everything else on earth. Which God himself ordained as part of this earth life. Gen 3:19: “By the sweat of your face You will eat bread Until you return to the ground, For from it you were taken; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return.”

Mosiah 17:16, 19

Abinadi prophesied that diseases would afflict the people as a judgment from God, not from evil spirits.

John 9:1–3
When Jesus healed the man born blind, He was asked who sinned, the man or his parents. Hs reply was that the blindness was not caused by sin but so “the works of God should be made manifest.”

 Jesus cast out evil and unclean spirits on plenty of occasions but it doesn't say that's what he did for the man born blind. These examples do not appear to be caused by evil spirits.  

Contrasting examples:  

There are examples in the new testament where someone did have some physical issues as a result of an evil spirit. 

Mark 9:17–27  

And one of the multitude answered and said, Master, I have brought unto thee my son, which hath a dumb spirit; and wheresoever he taketh him, he teareth him: and he foameth, and gnasheth with his teeth, and pineth away: and I spake to thy disciples that they should cast him out; and they could not. … When Jesus saw that the people came running together, he rebuked the foul spirit, saying unto him, Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come out of him, and enter no more into him. And the spirit cried, and rent him sore, and came out of him: and he was as one dead; insomuch that many said, He is dead. But Jesus took him by the hand, and lifted him up; and he arose.

Matthew 12:22 

Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw.

There are clearly occasions where evil spirits are involved with the physical issues. Brigham’s teachings however overgeneralize and over simplify the issue in an odd way.  Various scriptures seem to contradict much of his statement. The scriptures attribute some bodily issues to personal choices, some to climate, some to God's judgment, some to God’s purposes, and yes, some to evil spirits.  But definitely not all. Brigham's teaching (at least that one, and a few others) frankly gives evil a pretty hefty dose of power.  

If you get the cause of the pain wrong, then you are very likely to get the remedy wrong too. For example, suppose we look at diet and the bodily effects and diseases stemming from what we put into our bodies.  The Word of Wisdom has instructions about keeping the body healthy.  What if we mis attribute something to an evil spirit when in reality it was something we repeatedly consume?  And that's to say nothing about the health effects of our beliefs, family patterns, and how we manage stress.

Brigham's quote ends like this:

“The spirits that afflict us and plant disease in our bodies, pain in the system, and finally death, have control over us so far as the flesh is concerned.”


They have control over us as far as the flesh is concerned he says. They plant diseases, pain, and finally death.  Well that sounds pretty terrible. So are we doomed to being controlled by these evil spirits as long as we have a body?

Contrast Brigham's statement with this from Joseph Smith:

“A man is saved no faster than he gains knowledge, for if he does not get knowledge, he will be brought into captivity by some evil power in the other world, as evil spirits will have more knowledge, and consequently more power than many men who are on the earth.”


Perhaps Brigham’s statement illustrates Joseph’s warning.  Lack of knowledge leads to captivity by some evil power. What's ironic here is we are encountering a teaching that every pain and disease is caused by evil spirits. If that's not correct doesn't it give them more power and lead you into captivity? 

I'm not saying evil spirits don't also jump at the opportunity to afflict a person while they are down, sick, or dealing with some disease. Sounds reasonable that evil would afflict someone who's temporarily more vulnerable. In my experience that is common. But as for being the underlying cause, scriptures have enough examples to show that disease and illnesses can have many causes, physical, emotional, environmental, or divine, not just spiritual. And that in turn should inform how to go about addressing it.  

We do need knowledge otherwise we are liable to be brought under the influence of some false idea, IE false spirit.   

Sunday, August 3, 2025

D&C 84 section heading hides the Church's Condemnation

In my local LDS Sunday School this week the instructor was giving us a summary of the D&C sections being covered this week.  He relied on the section heading to give some context and the gist of the various sections.

We came to D&C 84.   Here is the section heading summary online and in the printed versions of D&C for verses 54-61. "The Saints must testify of those things they have received".




Here's what 54-61 says, see if you think that summary is an even remotely appropriate way to cover the below: 

54 And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received—5 Which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation. 56 And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all. 57 And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written— 58 That they may bring forth fruit meet for their Father’s kingdom; otherwise there remaineth a scourge and judgment to be poured out upon the children of Zion.

59 For shall the children of the kingdom pollute my holy land? Verily, I say unto you, Nay. 60 Verily, verily, I say unto you who now hear my words, which are my voice, blessed are ye inasmuch as you receive these things; 61 For I will forgive you of your sins with this commandment—that you remain steadfast in your minds in solemnity and the spirit of prayer, in bearing testimony to all the world of those things which are communicated unto you.

That is one of the most serious warnings and collective rebukes in all of restoration scripture given through Joseph Smith: the Lord declares that the entire Church is under condemnation, specifically for treating lightly the Book of Mormon and prior revelations, not just failing to believe them, but failing to live them. That's all completely absent from the section summary summarizing those verses. The summary is arguably so lacking and misleading as to be false. It reduces a critical reproof and explanation of the Saint's status into a soft encouragement to “testify".  Based on a single out of context phrase from only 1 of the 7 verses summarized.

After over 100 years of editing (measuring from the time the first section headings were introduced) this has never been corrected or updated.

I can only speculate on why this section heading is so misleading and neglects mentioning the Church is under condemnation and why. But after decades in the Church I can do more than speculate about what some of the consequences of this misleading section heading have been. Many lifelong church members are not even aware of the condemnation. They assume all is well. Teachers who rely on the section headings to prepare their lessons or check out what's important won't even know about it, much less teach about it.  If people are not aware of it, how can anyone act on it? 

Here's a more accurate section summary for those verses:

54-61 The Lord condemns the entire Church for unbelief, vanity, and for treating the Book of Mormon and other revelations lightly. Because of this, their minds are darkened. The condemnation will remain until they repent and live what they have received. The Lord commands them to remain steadfast, solemn, and prayerful in proclaiming the things He communicates to them.

So, as it stands, the commandment is to proclaim what the Lord has communicated.  And this is one of those things He communicated.  So rather than hiding this condemnation or shying away from it, the commandment is to proclaim it!