Latter-day Commentary

Benjamin Franklin is widely recognized as a great American patriot and founding father of this nation.  He wielded a powerful influence in the shaping of this country because of his intelligent, reasonable, pragmatic and practical approach to life.  But the real power and vigor of his persuasive abilities came from the ideological principles that he embraced.  Because of his tremendous reach and authoritative influence upon our nation, much has been written about the religious views of Benjamin Franklin.  It is clear that he embraced different beliefs from colonial religiosity that preceded him.  By his own account he was a product of the age of enlightenment and considered himself a Deist.  He believed this world was organized by a divine creator.

Some have said that he was not a Christian and others have claimed that he was an atheist, occultist or mystic.  However, a careful reading of Franklin’s writings leads us to conclude that he simply did not believe that the organized religions of his time fully represented the omnipotent power, majesty or wisdom of the great Creator.  There is no doubt that Franklin was a religious man.  His religion just didn’t conform to the orthodox views of his day.  He did not participate in public worship services but endorsed and promoted the churches around him with his influence.  In many ways, his religion was unique to him, formulated early in his life and refined with age and experience.  His emphasis on seeking moral perfection, developing virtues and in doing good to all men constitute the heart and soul of his very practical religion.  Clearly, based on the results of his life, he had a great understanding of how religion should work for a man.

One of the best sources to help us understand the religious views of Benjamin Franklin is his own autobiography, mostly written when he was 65 and added to some 13 years later.  He wrote that he “never was without some religious principles; I never doubted, for instance, the existence of the Deity, that he made the world, and governed it by his providence; that the most acceptable service of God was the doing good to man; that our souls are immortal; and that all crime will be punished and virtue rewarded either here or hereafter” (McQuade et al 215).  That’s quite the creed.  Just one month before his death in 1790, he wrote to Ezra Stiles, the president of Yale University, and offered a similar creed.  “I believe in one God, Creator of the Universe. That He governs it by his Providence. That he ought to be worshipped. That the most acceptable Service we can render to him, is doing Good to his other Children. That the Soul of Man is immortal, and will be treated with Justice in another Life respecting its Conduct in this” (Franklin Papers v46 p400).

It is obvious that Benjamin Franklin had a strong faith in God as the source of morality and goodness of man.  He constantly acknowledged the hand of God in the affairs of men and gave God credit for his happiness and success in life (McQuade et al 185).  He was a strong advocate of prayer to God, invoking the blessings of heaven upon his efforts to seek moral perfection.  “And conceiving God to be the Fountain of Wisdom, I thought it right and necessary to solicit his Assistance for obtaining it; to this End I form’d the following little Prayer … for daily Use (McQuade et al 219).  He then recited the prayer for us.  In addition, it is well known that Franklin requested that prayer be a part of the proceedings during a critical impasse of the Constitutional Convention in 1787. “I have lived, Sir, a long time and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth – that God governs in the affairs of men.  And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid?” (Franklin Papers v45 p77)  However, his motion for prayer did not carry.

While it is certain that Franklin was no dogmatist, it is just as clear that a driving force in his life was the pursuit of virtue.  He wrote extensively about it in his autobiography.  In a sense, this search for moral perfection was his religion, and one that he readily admitted was elusive. He considered it a “bold and arduous Project” to develop these virtues which he first enumerated when he was still young.  He obviously still felt that it was a worthy enterprise as it wrote about it glowingly in part two of his autobiography, written at age 78.  At one time he had hoped to expand his extensive comments about the “Means and Manner of obtaining virtue” into a book.  He proposed to call it the Art of Virtue, but his intentions were never fulfilled.  However, he left enough thoughts on the subject in his autobiography that many others have used his ideas to better their own lives and some have even written their own books and formulated improvement programs based on his writing.  Almost all of Part Two of his autobiography was dedicated to the explanation of how he pursued virtue, the difficulties he encountered in attempting to dedicate these virtues to habit and his satisfaction of seeing his faults diminish.

As he wrote, “But on the whole, tho’ I never arrived at the Perfection I had been so ambitious of obtaining, but fell short of it, yet I was by the Endevour a better and happier Man than I otherwise should have been, if I had not attempted it …” (McQuade et al 220).  He shared his list of virtues with his son and encouraged him to also follow their pursuit.  The story he relates of how he added the thirteenth virtue of humility to his list has been endearing to readers through the years.  “I cannot boast of much Success in acquiring the Reality of this Virtue; but I had a good deal with regard to the Appearance of it …” (McQuade et al 222).  Although it has been over 200 years since he wrote these words, we get a sense that Franklin was much more humble than he led us to believe.  It was this character trait that allowed him to be so persuasive in uniting others around him to his causes.  He was not a threat to men and wanted only to unite them in the cause of doing good.

At the end of the Constitutional Convention, after the reading of his impassioned speech in which he used his persuasive powers to urge the delegates to sign the document, he watched in disappointment as some delegates still refused to sign.  While the majority was signing it, he watched and commented that it was always difficult for painters to show the difference between the rising sun and the setting sun. He said that during the convention he had often looked at the painted sun on the back of the President’s chair and wondered “…whether it was rising or setting. But now at length I have the happiness to know that it is a rising and not a setting sun” (Madison 763).  A lady, identified as a Mrs. Powel, asked Dr. Franklin, “Well Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” — ‘A republic,’ replied the Doctor, ‘if you can keep it’” (McHenry 618).  Franklin emphasized that the new republic could survive only if the people were virtuous.  He is also reported to have said on that occasion that “only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”

The word virtue to Franklin signified so much more than we may ascribe to it today.  He worked his whole life to acquire virtue, as he defined it for us in his autobiography (McQuade et al 216).  He described his list of virtues in terms that could be applicable to an individual of any religion or no religious beliefs at all.  He did, however, in adding the thirteenth virtue, suggest the path to obtain humility was to imitate Jesus and Socrates.  Much is made in modern times of Franklin’s stated opinion of Jesus.  From this quote most people draw the conclusion that he was not a Christian: “I think the System of Morals and his Religion as he left them to us, the best the World ever saw, or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupting Changes, and I have with most of the present Dissenters in England, some Doubts as to his Divinity” (Franklin Papers v46 p400).  As he wrote this one month before he died, he said that he would soon find out for himself as to the validity of the claims of the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth.

As noted, Franklin considered himself a Deist, although not in the same vein as Thomas Paine who openly mocked Christianity.  Franklin made it clear that he did not believe the true Church of Jesus Christ was to be found on the earth at that time.  He noted the hypocrisy that he found among some who claimed to be religionists as a major reason for his decision to not attend public worship services.  He clearly taught us that true religion means doing good to all men.  Indeed, he retired from his business pursuits at age 42 and devoted the second half of his life to that very purpose.  While he rejected much of the Puritan dogma of salvation and hell, he very much demonstrated the Puritan faith in God as the wellspring of morality and goodness in men.  He believed that part of his purpose in life was to improve himself by hard work, diligence and his own efforts.  In other words, he believed that it was up to him to make something of his own life.  By almost all accounts, he did so admirably.  Benjamin Franklin was by far one of the most admired men at the time of his death as evidenced by the 20,000 people who attended his funeral and all the ministers of the city of Philadelphia who walked arm in arm to his graveside.

By no means should we assume that Franklin perfected his moral character in his mortal life.  It is clear that he was unable to adhere to the list of virtues he espoused by his own efforts.  At one time he advised us to wary of wine, women, food and the cloth (fine clothes), and yet he was known to indulge in all of them.  He drank too much, ate too much (and had gout), flirted and dressed well.  Yet, he gave so much to the founding of this nation and was a statesman extraordinaire.  Without his efforts, this nation might have been a very different place.  He became the powerful and so very influential man that he was not so much by the practice of religious behaviors or religiosity but by the practical application of the virtues that he defined early in his life.  His religion served him well and made him the man that he was.  He was a reasonable man.  He thought things out and let his reasoning powers guide his actions, unhampered by the prevailing religious dogma.

Franklin rejected dogma and much of the religious doctrine of his day.  His was a God of ethics, morality and civic virtue.  Because of his persuasive skills in helping to craft compromise, he was on occasion known as the prophet of tolerance.  His political influence was an extension of his religion, with the intention to do good works and help others to do so.  Later in his life he returned to a belief that organized religion could help to meet those aims of doing good.  His pragmatic view was that without such organized communities, men will not be motivated to do good things on their own (Isaacson 46).  His pragmatic ways also exhibited themselves when he said that he would soon know for himself concerning the divinity of Jesus Christ as he very much believed in an afterlife.  In other words, he expected to be able to ask him directly.  For a man who was not hobbled by the hand-clasping and soul-searching anxiety of some within the Puritan community, it did not seem to me that he rejected Jesus Christ as some have claimed.  He was just waiting for someone to introduce him properly.

It is my view that Franklin’s life was well spent in the service of his fellow man, something that was appreciated during his lifetime and that ensured him a great legacy that lives on today.  He did not worry himself about religious arguments that led to fruitless bickering among those who simply did not know how to live their lives in a manner that Jesus taught – to go about doing good things for others.  I think Franklin was a wise man in his religious views.  He did not offend and encouraged all with his generous contributions to the building of their churches and helping to publish their sermons.  I suspect that Franklin was amply rewarded when he entered the afterlife.  He was certain that God wanted him to be moral and virtuous.  He pursued that life and exhibited it by his actions.  It’s too bad that some today are insistent on proclaiming that our founding fathers were not religious men.  It is obvious to anyone who studies his life that Franklin was very religious, and in a very real way.  We would do well to follow his example and live our religions that way he lived his in service.

Sources:

McQuade, Donald, et al, eds.  The Harper Single Volume American Literature. 3rd ed. New York: Longman, 1999

Franklin Papers.  The Papers of Benjamin Franklin, digital edition, Yale University.
14 April 2010  http://franklinpapers.org/franklin/framedVolumes.jsp

Madison, James. Journal of the Federal Convention, ed. E. H. Scott, p. 763, 1893.  Notes at the closing of the Constitutional Convention, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, September 17, 1787.

McHenry, Dr. James. The American Historical Review, vol. 11. New York: 1906.

Isaacson, Walter.  Benjamin Franklin – An American Life.  New York: Simon & Schuster, 2003.

In 1978, civil war broke out in Nicaragua, just after I left the country. My Mission President went from Costa Rica to Managua to help the missionaries get out of the country.  As he was literally leaving the chapel where he had told the missionaries to gather, the Sandinistas came running in from the other door and stopped them.

Demanding to know what side of the conflict they were on, President Muren responded with the phrase, “tonos de gris,” which means shades of grey.  He did not stop but kept going right out the door and was able to get that group of Elders out of the country.  Gratefully, all the missionaries eventually made it safely out.

Social or Cultural Mormons

Can a person be a member of the LDS faith and not believe some of the doctrine or accept the official story of the history?  Absolutely!  We call them social or cultural Mormons and there are countless numbers of them within the church.  Many of these kinds of members come from multi-generation pioneer LDS families.

If you survey an average congregation in the LDS faith, you will find that there are a surprising number who just don’t care about some of the doctrine and care even less about the history.  They are there because it is their family tradition and they derive satisfaction from the social interaction among good people that they know.

Looking for the middle ground

They feel uncomfortable when they hear statements from their leaders that the LDS church is either the kingdom of God or it is nothing.  When someone says that Joseph Smith was either God’s prophet or he was a great fraud, they feel unfairly pressured to have to put their view of the man in such black and white terms.

Isn’t there some middle ground where good people can participate in the Mormon faith without having to take sides about Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, the idea of angels visiting Joseph and the concept of priesthood keys and authority?  There is so much good in the church.  Why does it have to be classified as true?

The American Mormon culture

There are many members of the LDS church who do not fit the stereotypical image of conservative, orthodox, Republican, white-collar, all-American family.  The church membership is actually quite diverse, especially as one travels outside the confines of the Intermountain West where the church flourished and is the strongest.

Culturally, as a church and a people, we seem to have become stagnated in the mindset of the 19th century view of Mormonism that still conflicts with the outside world.  The church is growing beyond the Mormon corridor but is experiencing a sort of consolidation in the traditional strongholds of the faith – the center of Zion.

The one true church

Many good people who recognize this cultural myopia and parochialism that exists within the LDS faith have expanded their views and horizons beyond the mores and restraints of the traditional, orthodox Mormon worldview.  There are so many good people out there that are doing great things to serve their local communities.

Because these progressive thinking people have expanded their views they have come in contact with different ways of thinking about the religious experience and about their own Mormon upbringing.  The idea of belonging to the one true church has come to be offensive and difficult, if not impossible to defend in their minds.

God’s chosen people

They see and are embarrassed by what appears to be a contest of right and wrong between our zeal as a missionary church and the good people who are not already a part of the elect kingdom of God.  Whereas previously they were uncomfortable with a perceived exclusivist approach, they now are adamant that we are wrong.

We are judgmental, they cry.  Why can’t we accept everybody else just the way they are?  Why are we trying to convert people when they are already happy and doing much good in their own faith?  The idea of rules for membership becomes chafing.  Why does the church have such high standards that drive people crazy?

Pointing out the flaws and faults

A large percentage of the LDS membership either does not know or does not care about some of the troubling issues of our early history and growth as a church.  It is frustrating to progressive thinkers that so many within the faith are not as well versed as they are on these issues and the supposed quandaries that they present.

So they become more vocal and strident in pointing out the flaws and faults of the church and its leaders, both historical and current.  Their frustration increases when their audience either shrugs its collective shoulders or ignores their efforts to educate them on the problems that they see in the church.  How can they not care?

Many faithful members do know

While there are many who don’t know and don’t care, there are just as many who are very knowledgeable in the issues and problems that are troublesome to our liberal minded members.  It’s just that we have found answers within our own hearts and minds many years ago that satisfy the potential cognitive dissonance.

We quietly go about our lives, secure and confident in the knowledge that we have found answers for the most important elements of our faith.  We invite others to taste of the peace that comes from knowing that there are answers and that there are many solid and bedrock truths upon which we can build our lives and our faith.

Raise a warning voice

For some reason, when we try to share our certainty about the truths we have found, we are sometimes misunderstood to be arrogant or presenting our faith as superior or more complete than theirs.  Yes, if you invite someone to share in your happiness then you are presenting what you have found to be of great worth.

This is a difficult task to perform.  We are commanded to raise our voices to let the world know of the events pertaining to the founding of our church.  We have been asked to be bold in declaring that God has called prophets in our day and that he has sent angels to ordain and teach truths that have long been lost from the world.

Some truths are not relative

And thus we arrive at the heart of the conflict between orthodox conservative Mormons and progressive liberal Mormons.  What is truth?  Can one say with any degree of certainty that they have found the best and most complete source of truth without excluding the many other sources of truth that are found in the world?

Truth is reality. Some kinds of truth can only be received through revelation. I have never seen God or Jesus. I was not there when Joseph received the First Vision. So for me to be able to know those facts, they have to be revealed to me by the Holy Ghost.  Some truths are either revealed of God or they remain unknown.

Truths received by revelation

The five pillars of the LDS testimony require revelation: God lives, Jesus is the Christ, the Savior called Joseph as a prophet, the Book of Mormon was brought forth by the gift and power of God and the church that Joseph established is authorized of God to administer the ordinances of salvation that God requires.

Without revelation from the Holy Ghost we can’t say that we know these things. It’s just not logical. I have studied the Book of Mormon and the Church that claims to be God’s only church authorized to administer the ordinances of salvation. With revelation from the Holy Ghost I can say I know they are what they claim to be.

Summary and conclusion

In some things in life, it is wise to take a position characterized by my Mission President’s response to the Sandinistas – shades of grey.  We do not always know all the facts of some situations and should withhold judgment until a later time.  However, in some critical matters, we must take a position and know for ourselves.

It takes work and determination to obtain knowledge about the five pillars of an LDS testimony.  But I, and millions of others over the years, can say with great certainty that God does reveal knowledge about himself and his prophets to those who diligently seek it.  This revealed knowledge does not come in shades of grey.

Last November, LDS Harvard undergrad Rachel Esplin made viral video news with her incredibly articulate and intelligent responses to some very difficult questions about the Mormon faith. She was asked whether she wears sacred undergarments, if Mormonism is a cult, how she views the role of women in her church, and what her relationship is with Jesus. For not having served a mission, this young 20-year old is an amazing missionary for the LDS faith.

The interview is twenty minutes long and something you may enjoy viewing as part of a Family Home Evening or perhaps even burning it to a DVD and sharing it in a Sunday School lesson about how to share the gospel in today’s media savvy world. Rachel was on the debate team in her high school and her mother teaches at BYU Idaho. But still, this young woman did a better job than I ever could at responding to difficult questions with poise and confidence.

You may also be interested in viewing some of the hundreds of comments that accompanied just one typical news piece covering the popularity of the video as it appeared in the Boston Globe.  I think the very first comment is excellent as it helps us to see how the world perceives us as being closed and secretive.  Especially note the tenor of the comments that focus on the claims of exclusivity.  This continues to be a difficult point for many to deal with both within and without the church.

Day of Faith: Personal Quests for a Purpose – 3. Rachel Esplin from Harvard Hillel on Vimeo.

I recently read an article in Newsweek about how others view LDS funerals. I was a little surprised at their surprise of how things usually go in our funerals. Are our funerals so very different? And from an essay found in the LDS Newsroom commenting about funerals after the funeral of President Hinckley, “What is This Thing That Men Call Death?“:

“Mormon funerals are typically marked by an atmosphere of hopefulness and peace. They generally are not burdened by the inconsolable grief and despair so often seen in other funerals. Latter-day Saints who mourn the death of loved ones are lightened by the assurance and understanding that the gospel of Jesus Christ offers.

“In addition, some might be surprised by the lack of formal ritual in these funerals. The commemoration service is conducted by a lay minister and features heartfelt tributes and comforting music. Moreover, the basic format, tone and length of President Hinckley’s funeral are typical of what might be seen in the funerals of regular Church members.

“Regarding the undaunted way in which Latter-day Saints confront death, well-known literary scholar Harold Bloom proclaimed the following in American Religion, page 29:

“What is the essence of religion? … Religion rises inevitably from our apprehension of our own death. To give meaning to meaninglessness is the endless quest of all religion.

“… Of all religions that I know, the one that most vehemently and persuasively defies and denies the reality of death is the original Mormonism of the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator Joseph Smith.”

I like that. It cuts right to the chase, doesn’t it? We are all brought to equal ground when confronted with the question of how we will face death. When all is said and done, how will we feel when we are called to pass through the veil and enter the world of the spirits there?

I concur with the writer’s assessment of Mormon funerals. I prefer them to other types of funerals I have attended. It is true that there are usually no displays of inconsolable grief and despair, or at least among the faithful who understand the doctrine of eternity.

Update: The words to the hymn can be found on the Deseret News website.

A PDF of the sheet music to the hymn is also being shared by the Deseret News.

What do you think? Are LDS funerals really that different from those of other faiths?