Often when we or others fall short of expected measures of performance, there is a tendency to adopt a critical stance. When the one who falls short is close to us we feel compelled to take corrective measures and at times we justify even a harsh approach thinking “a stern reminder will serve to remedy the shortfall or lack of performance”. Under the seemingly reasonable premise that we all need reminders and a clear statement to the offending individual might well serve to correct the lapse in focus and effort and compel the person to reconsider their ways. Though this line of reasoning appears sound on the surface and even justified, it assumes too much and rarely achieves the desired results.
The 121st Section of the Doctrine and Covenants states, “No power or influence ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned, by kindness and pure knowledge..." If the tenets of Christian faith, do not justify anything but a soft approach, then what other justification would allow or permit this form of correction. The only exception is also in the 121st section where it states: “...reproving betimes with sharpness when moved upon by the Holy Ghost." This is an important qualifier. Even when this form of correction is done it also adds: “... then showing forth an increase of love afterward to him thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy.” It further adds in verse 45: "Let thy bowels be full of charity towards all men, and to the household of faith, and let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly." This is referred to as the 'doctrine of the priesthood' and if practiced as stated it will, “... distill upon our souls as the dews from heaven." Further it talks about dominion or power but a power exercised without a 'compulsory' means which again is a tactic often exercised for the sake of expediency.
The frustrations associated with those who willingly abdicate important responsibilities and approach tasks in a lax or haphazard manner is cause for concern. A number of scriptural examples suggest a better way.
Paul the great missionary of the New Testament eventually came to understand this. Before his conversion on the road to Damascus, Paul was a staunch critic of the disciples of Christ, even antagonistic towards them. Although his conversion came quickly, mending his habitual practices took more time. He struggled along the way, experiencing his own measure of hostility and persecution. At the end of his three missions, Paul wrote an epistle to the Philippian saints where he summarized an important lesson he had learned. In Philippians 4: 8 he speaks to the thoughts and attributes he had through painful experience acquired. To quote only a part he said: "...whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report, if there be any virtue, if there be any praise, think on these things.” In the end, why did he adopt this form of thinking --- because he came to understand it was a better way. Not only that, it says Paul acquired another gift: peace of mind. It adds in verse 11 of Chapter 4,:“Not that I speak in respect of want for I have learned, in whatsoever state I am in therewith to be content.” This wonderfully describes the point Paul got to on his journey to truly understand the doctrine of the priesthood.
These principles should certainly be attended to when interacting with our children, a friend or a spouse, but they have equal merit with our own self talk. When we fall victim to mistakes or errors in judgment -- how do we respond? Are we not equally deserving of a clear, yet gentle reminder of what we might do differently the next time? Harsh, condemning words do little to motivate more positive behaviour, rather it denigrates and erodes self esteem. It defies reason and logic to be kind in our communications to others, while at the same time resorting to belittling or overly critical self talk.
Comments