What has come to be known as the "social gospel" is a tool of devilish deception. Satan uses sophistry at many levels to challenge the most basic action that must result from the acquisition of faith: obedience.
The scriptures teach that God is merciful and forgiving, but a the same time, they warn us that no unclean thing can enter the Father's presence. We are taught that we are sinners without exception, even when we have done our very best. We only obtain mercy and forgiveness because the Father sent Jesus, who alone had lived a perfect, sinless life, to suffer unimaginably on our behalf. Our natural focus on Jesus' supreme sacrifice often causes us to become somewhat myopic. Looking past the infinite mercy of the atonement is the infinite exigency of justice.
There is probably no more insistent scriptural command than for us to repent. Because of our total helplessness to save ourselves, we must forsake sin, change our hearts, and obey God's commandments. It is here that our Protestant friends go awry. For them, salvation is free for the asking and, once forgiveness is given, it is a permanent grace that one cannot lose. They are inconsistent in this, however. Certain things, like believing Joseph Smith was a prophet, seem to disqualify you. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the American South consists largely of former Baptists who converted to the Restored Gospel. Their former faith fellows regard them as apostates, even though their Calvinist precepts teach them "once saved, always saved."
A good Southern Baptist would argue until he is blue in the face, that Mormons will go to hell for trying to keep the commandments of God. Meanwhile, he would argue that a mass-murderer who says the "Sinner's Prayer" on his way to his execution is saved in eternal glory. The Latter-day Saint is trying to "work his way to heaven" while the murderer relies solely on grace for deliverance, according to the good Baptist brother.
The pendulum swings both ways. On the other side of the grace and works arguments, you have Catholics, who believe that "holy works" like lighting candles, offering prayers, confession, and ordinances are necessary for salvation. They believe that a faithful, observant person can acquire a surplus of grace that can be used to benefit others. It becomes a noble quest of service in the mind of a devotee or it can become hollow ritual to the casual believer. The grace and works fight historically belongs to these two extremes. The two historical antagonists both attack Mormonism because we are in between those two extremes.
Satan uses these extreme proponents to attack Latter-day Saints who believe in the necessity of receiving grace and qualifying for it through faith, repentance, and gospel ordinances. Satan also attacks the restored gospel through non-believers and even some believers who have secularized the gospel. This is the "social gospel."
The proponents of the social gospel focus strictly on having an accepting, tolerant attitude toward sin, and certain "holy" works according to their worldview. They insist, because all are sinners, no person has the right to call another to repentance. They insist that the guilt caused by sin is harmful and, instead of reforming one's character, it is only necessary to braise the conscience so as not to feel the guilt. High self-esteem is the goal and blessings come in the form of the praise of men.
Blogger Jana Riess, who frequently inspires me to repair to my keyboard and write, is an advocate of the social gospel, as are many millennials. In her blog today, she takes issue with the recent conference sermon by Elder Dallin H. Oaks titled, "Two Great Commandments." Elder Oaks' remarks speak of the difficult road that the repentant believer must navigate between the Scylla and Charybdis of obedience and tolerance of sin. It is easy to become a gospel "Pharisee" for whom keeping the commandments becomes an obsession. The Savior constantly hammered the Pharisees, priests, and scribes in his parables like the "Good Samaritan." Their determination to keep the rules overshadowed mercy and tolerance. On the other hand, it is easy to become so tolerant and forgiving of sin that we come to regard the Ten Commandments as scriptural clickbait: "Ten Suggestions for a Happier Life."
Riess, a "woke" Latter-day Saint is offended by the idea that God will refuse celestial glory to the unrepentant and disobedient. It is difficult for us to accept sometimes, that people we love and care for will not qualify for the Celestial Kingdom. People who surrender on keeping the Word of Wisdom, give up on paying tithing, or who marry outside the temple to a person who is not of our faith are making choices that have eternal consequences.
We may have loved ones and family members who no longer follow the gospel path, but we don't stop loving them or praying for them to return. However there is a line that can't be crossed. Do you allow a no-longer-following the Word of Wisdom family member to bring alcohol to a family celebration? Do you let your fornicating son bring his loose-morals college girlfriend home to sleep together under your roof? Do you let your kids go on a camping trip with your newly-out queer brother and his lover? Where does the line of tolerance end? Where does love and acceptance of the sin compromise your integrity to your own values? Should they not accept your well-defined values and not ask you go abandon them for their sake? Is that not intolerance on their part? This is really what Elder Oaks' talk examined. That struggle to love others and still remain obedient is a poignant conflict.
I relate to the concern one feels for people we care about who make different choices. However, I don't fault the Lord or his servants for teaching the requirements to enter heaven. I'm not even sure I'll make it myself, being intimately acquainted with my own character flaws. That's what Paul meant about working out our salvation with "fear and trembling." Until the Lord tells you made it, there's a chance of falling from grace.
Elder Oaks didn't just single out LGBTQ-alphabet soup people--he used the conflict they represent to highlight the challenge all true believers face. Love the sinner but reject the sin. When the sinner takes the sin to be his identity, that becomes a serious problem for him and the tolerant believers. He becomes unable to forsake his sin because he has equated it with his very identity. He says rightly that he can't repent of himself. The problem lies in his mentally replacing his true nature (son of God) with a false one (homosexual).
As sinners, we identify with other sinners. We feel compassion and mercy for their struggles because of the empathy we have, borne of our own struggles. Nevertheless, we do not abandon the goal and say, "We are sinners and are therefore irredeemable." We fight to repent and obtain mercy daily. In some measure, those who turn against this path, who celebrate their sinfulness, it is an awful affront to us who struggle on. It feels very much like Satan mocking those who fight to be obedient. We resent being called intolerant by those who decided to leave us in the ring to fight on.
Jana Riess ends her article with a snarky aside, stating that, if the LGBTQ people for whom she cares don't make it into the Celestial Kingdom, she'll ". . . gladly hang out with them in the terrestrial." That, to her, is the gospel, but it is her gospel. It is not the Lord's gospel. It is the liberal, social gospel. This article, like many of Riess' articles, shows the seeds of growing apostasy. Criticism of the Lord's anointed servants and those who strive to follow them is a sure road to bitterness and hell.
Comments