Friday, July 1, 2016

Bringing about Zion

So the Church™ hasn’t really talked about bringing about Zion in my lifetime (or in the life of anyone currently alive) from what I can tell.  Oh there's the occasional lip service to some general idea (usually if it helps bolster an argument by a GA to give/pay more to the Church™).  But nothing tangible.  Nothing concrete.  Nothing serious.  And I find that very distressing.

It’s clear they are supposed to.  The Lord commands us to “seek to bring forth and establish the cause of Zion” (D&C 6:6, see also D&C 11:6; 12:6; 14:6)

Maybe they forgot.  Maybe they don’t even know what that is, or what it might look like, so they ignore it.  I could infer sinister motives, but I tend to subscribe to Hanlon's razor (Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity/ignorance.)

Well, maybe we ought to know what Zion is if we’re going to talk/think  about it.  Certainly, if we are going to seek to bring it about.

Google says Zion is the hill of Jerusalem on which the city of David was built (or it’s Africa if you are a Rastafarian)

Wikipedia says it’s a place name often used as a synonym for Jerusalem, which commonly referred to a specific mountain where a Jebusite fortress of the same name stood and later became a metonym (a figure of speech which is a substitute for reduction) for Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem, the city of Jerusalem and "the World to Come", the Jewish understanding of the hereafter.

In the well hidden Young Women’s unit on building up the church, lds.org says: “Zion refers to the Lord’s people who are of one heart and one mind and dwell together in righteousness. We can establish Zion by building unity and spiritual strength in our homes, wards or branches, and communities.”  Well, maybe.  But like most things that come out of the correlation committee, you can bet there’s a LOT more to it than just that.

If you actually looked up the scriptures I cited above, you’ll see that 3 of the 4 D&C versus actually say “the cause of Zion” rather than Zion.  Is there a difference between the cause of Zion and the Lord’s Zion?

Honestly, I don’t know.  If anyone thinks they do, I’d be pleased to hear from you.

At first blush, I’d think that the cause of Zion is the doctrines and/or concepts that when practiced actually bring about the Lord’s Zion.  And what would those doctrines and/or concepts be?  I think Alma had it pretty well in hand when we’re told of his initial ministry:

20 Yea, even he commanded them that they should preach nothing save it were repentance and faith on the Lord, who had redeemed his people.
21 And he commanded them that there should be no contention one with another, but that they should look forward with one eye, having one faith and one baptism, having their hearts knit together in unity and in love one towards another.
22 And thus he commanded them to preach. And thus they became the children of God. (Mosiah 18:20-22, emphasis added.)

I’d submit that the cause of Zion is to become the children of God; and that when we do so, we are well on our way to bringing about Zion.

Perhaps there’s more though.

Scripturally, Zion is the Lord’s people. (“And the Lord called his people Zion, because they were of one heart and one mind, and dwelt in righteousness; and there was no poor among them.”) (Moses 7:18)

It is also the City of Holiness which came to pass in Enoch’s days, after his continued preaching in righteousness unto the people of God  (Moses 7:19) The abode of the Lord forever. (Moses 7:21)

And Zion is also the Kingdom of God on earth.  The Kingdom the Lord prayed for in “Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.” (Matt 6:10)

And Zion is also the pure in heart. (D&C 97:21) In their latest attempt to create scripture without revelation, the correlation committee says in True to the Faith, that “Zion is often used in this way [the pure in heart] to refer to the Lord’s people or to the Church and its stakes.” (They then cite D&C 82:14, which says nothing of the kind)

I prefer to believe that the pure in heart is a reference to those with real charity.  Those possessed with the pure love of Christ.  Those who have the both the same love Christ has for each of us, as well as the love Christ has for our Father.

So it seems that if we preach nothing but repentance and faith in Christ, and look forward to his return by being united with, and loving our neighbors with true charity, we actually can bring about Zion.  And maybe we don’t need the Church™ to follow the injunction to seek to bringing about Zion.

Perhaps if we just act Christlike, the others around us who are observant (watchful, not necessarily rule following), would not only notice, but seeing our good works, would emulate that example, thereby allowing their eyes/minds to be opened and in turn their hearts to become pure.  I have no illusions that such a course would be quick, nor that there would likely not be that many who’s hearts would actually be turned.  But I’m sure there would be some.  More importantly, I believe that it could lead to the ultimate creation of a critical mass of such folks, who could then band together to actually bringing about the physical Kingdom of God Zion that we are supposed to be seeking.

So what do I mean by just act Christlike? When Rock Waterman recently blogged about The Refiner's Fire , he spoke of Mosiah 4:17-18 and called it the “easiest and most rewarding of God's commandments.”  He then concluded: “Doing my meager part to assist someone in having a bite to eat now and then turns out to be the one thing I can do that actually brings me closer to God.”

I think that keeping this commandment (to do unto the least of these) is the first step in becoming pure in heart and having charity.  Not the act of giving to the beggar itself, but the desire behind the act to help your brother/sister in need.  Without regard to how the need arose.  Without assigning blame, or finding fault.  For aren’t we all beggar’s?

Until I hear of a better method of bringing about Zion, this is my plan.  Feel free to adopt it yourself.  Or not.  After all, I'm Dence.

1 comment:

  1. I find the post I just made where a guy from my mission tried to claim that the Church tm making business investments was actually bringing about Zion to be quite disconcerting.
    Anyone else?
    Or am I just Dence?

    ReplyDelete