Is it OK to talk/pray to Christ? I know that we pray to God in the name of Christ and that we can thank God for our Savior and His Atonement, but is there anywhere in the scriptures/modern revelation that tells us we shouldn't talk to Christ?
In Alma 36:16-19 it talks about Alma's experience when he "cried out" to Christ. Alma is telling his son Helaman about his experiences while he was "passed out" for three days.
He says, "And now, for three days and for three nights was I racked, even with the pains of a damned soul. And it came to pass as I was thus racked with torment, while I was harrowed up by the memory of my many sins, behold, I remembered also to have heard my father prophesy unto the people concerning the coming of one Jesus Christ, a Son of God, to atone for the sins of the world.
Now, as my mind caught hold upon this thought, I cried within my heart: O Jesus, thou Son of God, have mercy on me, who am in the gall of bitterness, and am encircled about by the everlasting chains of death. And now, behold, when I thought this, I could remember my pains no more; yea, I was harrowed up by the memory of my sins no more."
Alma cried unto Christ within his heart. Alma talked to Christ. And I bet that Alma continued to have some form of communication with Christ for the rest of his life. I'm sure that he wanted to thank Christ for taking his sins away.
My main point is that I'm interested to know what everyone thinks about open communication with Christ. I believe it's a life-long goal to want to have a stronger personal relationship with Christ, and I feel that when I study his life, I'm drawn to want to address him more. I'm not saying that I kneel and pray to Christ, but that I want to speak/address him more frequently.
Thoughts?
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A very interesting question, Ryan. (Sorry for the extreme length of my response, but I love talking about things like this . . .)
ReplyDeleteThe Savior's relationship to us is what it is because of His relationship to the Father. Apart from the Father, the Son would not be who He is to us. He said:
"For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself." (John 5:26)
"And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." (John 17:5)
" Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. (John 5:19)
Our relationship to Jesus and the Father relates to their relationship of oneness to each other. Therefore I don't know if it makes sense to have a relationship with Jesus in a way distinguished from the Father:
"Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me." (John 17:20-23)
"And after this manner shall ye baptize in my name; for behold, verily I say unto you, that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one; and I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and the Father and I are one." (3 Nephi 11:27)
It's interesting to note that when Jesus was physically present with His apostles in Jerusalem, they did have a "separate" relationship with Him in some way: He told them that the Comforter would not come (another member of the Godhead) until He went away:
"Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you." (John 16:7)
Similarly, when Jesus was with His 12 disciples in the New World, they prayed directly to Him, but He said it was because He was physically present with them:
"Father, thou hast given them the Holy Ghost because they believe in me; and thou seest that they believe in me because thou hearest them, and they pray unto me; and they pray unto me because I am with them." (3 Nephi 19:22)
The case with Alma crying out to Jesus is interesting as it relates to these issues. I think it is because he had been taught that Jesus would suffer to bring about the atonement. This scripture is especially interesting because Alma's experience was a type of Christ's atonement, Alma being three days and nights racked with the pains of a damned soul, just as Christ descended and then ascended on the third day.
[The math isn't exactly equal--three days and nights versus the third day--but I think the symbolism holds well enough, just as does the symbolism of Jonah, who was "in the belly of the fish three days and three nights," (Jonah 1:17) and Jonah was definitely a type of Christ: "For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (Matthew 12:40)]
So Alma's case would especially highlight a relationship to Jesus, himself. But the weight of other scriptures lead me to place this in the context of the oneness relationship of the Godhead. So I would be hesitant about having a special relationship with Christ, apart from the Godhead. One might commune with Jesus, but know that it also means communing with the Father, etc. And, of course, we are told to pray to the Father, in the name of Christ, etc. Also, Elder Bruce R. McKonkie once gave a famous talk, discussing this issue: ''The Seven Deadly Heresies'' [and I was there sitting in the audience in the BYU Marriot Center when he gave it].
''The Seven Deadly Heresies'' [and I was there sitting in the audience in the BYU Marriot Center when he gave it].
ReplyDeleteI've heard about this talk. And I have another one on tape that he gave specifically titled "personal relationship with Christ..." he was very against singling out Christ for a personal relationship.
On an interesting sidenote, at this exact time there was a BYU professor who was teaching a popular religion class, which had a big focus on praying for long periods of time, going to places in nature, etc to "develop a personal relationship with Christ." This professor had just written and published a book on the subject, and it was being sold at the BYU bookstore and other church bookstores. AFter this talk by Bruce R McConkie, not only did this professor's book stop selling, but he was released from his calling as Stake President. (From the accounts I've read, he was sitting directly behind Elder McConkie on the stand when McConkie delivered this talk).
My feelings about this are, Bruce R. McConkie or no Bruce R. McConkie, we are supposed to develop a relationship with the entire godhead. We are specifically supposed to develop one with God, and with the Holys Ghost too. We communicate directly through and with both of these entities, and so why would Christ also not figure in? I think that during the repentance process, a relationship with Christ (accepting that his atonement will fill in the things that we cannot do to make things entirely right again, accepting him as the carrier of pain and sorrows that we cannot bear) is very important.
Sorry. Bruce R. McConkie gets my blood stirred up in all sorts of ways. I love a lot of what he said, but that talk pretty much kicked my can the first time I heard it. I listened to it and listened to it, trying to understand why it wasn't clicking with me. I still don't understand, and I'm OK with that... Elder McConkie was a man of many stern and amazing words, and (forgive me if this is a bad thing to say) I'm not sure how many of them are exactly right.
*I'm thinking specifically of the books Mormon Doctrine, which were not canonized by the Church the first time he published them, and then he had to make several changes before they were accepted... I think it was McKay who had them discontniued and Kimball who had him edit and republish them. But of course, I also can't ignore all the things McConkie said about race, which he later stood up and apologized for after the 1978 revelation.
Prophets are such a blessing to have... but they're still people, and we still have to pray about things, I guess, and form our testimonies about the things they have told us, just like we form our testimonies of all scripture.
Sorry, that was a kind of tirade. Like I said, Bruce R. McConkie = me feeling very conflicted.
sorry... didn't mean canonized. Of course only scripture is canonized. I meant, given the stamp of approval by the church leaders, McConkie titled his books "Mormon Doctrine," and I think that was the issue... it had to be doctrine, approved by leaders, to hold that title.
ReplyDeleteNoSurfGirl, Elder McConkie is a subject all in himself, that's for sure. I mentioned him at the end of my remarks for the sake of being complete--he did talk about the issue at hand. I've heard various things about him and reactions, including what you mentioned. Recently I read a biography, which offered some added info which softened some of them a bit.
ReplyDeleteElder Boyd K. Packer made an interesting observation: "It was not granted to Brother Mcconkie to juge beforehand how his discourses would be received and then to alter them accordingly. He could not measure what ought to be said and how it ought to be said by, 'What will people think?' Would his sermons leave any uncomfortable? Would his bold declarations irritate some in the Church? . . . Would his manner of delivery offend? . . . Would he be described as insensitive or overbearing? . . . He and I have talked of this. And when he was tempted to change, the Spirit would withdraw a distance and there would come that deep loneliness known only to those who have enjoyed close association with the Spirit, only to find on occasion that it moves away. . . He would be driven to his knees to beg forgiveness and plead for the renewal of that companionship with the Spirit which the scriptures promise can be constant. . ."
In reading about him, he reminded me in some ways of people I know who are stronger in areas of logic than of reading other people's feelings, etc.
Anyway, the Savior is the one we are to follow, to emulate, whose name we take upon ourselves, who atoned for our sins. There is no way we could justify not focusing on him.
It's good to hear things like that. And as I was reading Ryan's post (and yours, even before the last paragraph) I was thinking about Elder McConkie the whole time. He has said a lot of things on this issue. :) I don't take issue with the fact of your quoting him... like I said, Bruce R McConkie just brings up a lot of conflicting feelings for me.
ReplyDeleteHe was an interesting person, to say the least. And as a prophet, he said a lot of things that were feather-ruffling. Sometimes we need someone like that in leadership. The hard part for me comes into play when you also read about him saying that he regretting saying things without the spirit, and also having to stand up and apologize for some of the doctrine he preached. When I heard all of that and read about it, and when I listened to that talk over and over again, it was difficult for me to figure that whole dilemma out... if a general authority can sometimes say things "without the Spirit," how can we trust that anything they say is true?
What a blasphemous thing to think, that was how I felt when I was wondering. But after a lot of thought I realized that we have to gain a testimony of scripture, we have to gain a testimony of Joseph Smith... perhaps we also have to gain a testimony of what prophets/leaders say? There have been a few instances in my life where I've followed without quite understanding, and understanding came later. This whole issue of McConkie's talk on Christ and a personal relationship is something I've not quite found myself understanding yet, but I'll accept it on faith. Anyhow, I don't think this discussion is about praying to Christ... more how do we develop a relationship with him, and what does that relationship consist of?
Yeah, I have always heard it taught that we are supposed to develop a personal relationship with Christ. And I wondered just how to go about doing that. How do you develop a relationship with someone if you don't talk to them and they don't talk to you?
ReplyDeleteSo maybe when people teach that, what they really mean is that we are supposed to develop a relationship with the Godhead: We talk to Heavenly Father, through Jesus Christ, about Jesus Christ, because of Jesus Christ, and then the Holy Ghost answers us. In that way, we have a relationship with all three of them, each of them having their place in their own way.
So what I've kind of gathered from what everyone has said, is that we develop a relationship with Christ by accepting his atonement in our lives. And that developing a relationship with the Godhead (Either through praying to God the Father through Christ, accepting Christ's atonement, or receiving the Holy Ghost) we develop a personal relationship with each at the same time.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that you don't need to have a direct person to person conversation with Christ in order to develop your relationship with Christ or even communicate with Christ. I have never talked to Christ directly, but I have had some powerful personal experiences that have made me feel as if I am communicating directly with him Him and Him with me.
It seems to me that communication with GOD is communication with Christ. They are so at one, that They are one and the same.
I wonder in the example of Alma praying directly to Christ if the Nephites coming from a Jewish background (people who prayed to Jehovah) was praying in a similar manner.
Even at the beginning of the restoration there was often no differentiating between God the Father and God the Son in the prayers that were given. I don't know why our prayers have evolved, but I think it has something to do with recognizing the role of each member in the Godhead.
I think another way we communicate with Christ is through service. We read about Him and His life and we start to feel like we know him better when we start using the patterns he created. So we become more like Him in our small ways, and if we feel good about what we are trying to do, we become more grateful to Him and therefore closer.
ReplyDeleteA little more of my take on this issue:
ReplyDeleteGoing along with what Josh said, there is the idea of divine investiture of authority--so you might have a prophet speaking in the voice of the Savior who is speaking in the voice of the Father. You also have the issue of names as titles. Also, you have Christ doing things as directed by the Father--who created the world, was it the Father or the Son? So it might not always be easy to tack everything down.
Another general point which goes along with what Ryan originally said is that there is certainly reason for us to identify with Jesus, himself--He condescended to this earth and became like man so that we could become like Him. How could one not focus on Him when this is what He did? We have the New Testament record of what He did, what He was like, who He talked to, etc. As Camilla said, when we serve others we think of our bond to Him in being Christlike.
I think the issue of our relationship to God is a comprehensive one, which is why it is so powerful. As Adele said, every member of the Godhead has their place and role.
Going along with what Camilla said, when we serve we stand in the place of Christ. For example, when Priesthood holders pass the sacrament, they are doing it in the place of Christ. When a Priesthood holder baptizes someone, they're baptizing them in the place of Christ. I know that I feel a special connection to Christ when I serve in the Church, whether I'm performing a Priesthood ordinance or not. It's at times like these that I feel a certain communion with Christ.
ReplyDeleteThe concepts mentioned by Camilla are exactly what I was thinking. The more we serve someone, the more we feel love for them. Jesus showed us how to serve each other. So by following his example of service we draw closer to the person we are serving as well as our dear Redeemer, Jesus Christ.
ReplyDelete