Samuel An essay about prophecies in our present time and regarding our near future by Menno Feenstra

a book report by Robert Poort (1952) - editor of the independent web site for The Netherlands and Belgium: MVG - Mormonen voor Vrede en Gerechtigheid

Samuel - and inconvenient truths ...

Can you picture yourself standing on a high city wall like Samuel the Lamanite, while fiery darts are flying all around you?
Neither can I, but then there is someone who foresees the reoccurrence of him ... Menno Feenstra. I've known the author of "Samuel" for many years as a member of the Arnhem Ward in the Apeldoorn - The Netherlands Stake. In a lengthy article, Menno Feenstra (born in Arnhem, The Netherlands in 1962), not a respecter of persons at all, describes the need for a modern day Samuel by asking substantial questions and expecting substantial answers.

I've seen him in (gospel) action in many ways; as a home teacher to my (then) young family, as a missionary to the British Isles (hence his fluent non-American usage of the English language) and in many other capacities in the Arnhem Ward where he backs up his strong opinions with a dedication to those around him, especially for his Bolivian wife - who formerly worked for the Administrative Offices of the Church in La Paz, and who in that capacity encountered many Church leaders, including many General Authorities - and their three young children. Menno Feenstra works as a curriculum developer at a private university for applied technical sciences in the Dutch city of Arnhem.

When inconvenient truths need to be spoken by a faithful and long term member of the church who is not easily intimidated or distracted, then Menno Feenstra is the man you're looking for. It thus comes as no surprise that he was able to write this critical but faithful lengthy online essay (61 pages) - actually an E-book - with many scriptural references, the twelve chapters nicely divided into numeric subsections for easy reference. From the very beginning the author is clear about his intentions and writes in his introduction: "sincerity in a quest for light and truth requires frankness, being straightforward and critical", and in a later section: "substantial questions and substantial answers" of which "the avoidance is reminiscent of the Dark Ages", an era so often contrasted with the Restoration in LDS literature and he makes it a point to bring it to our attention.

President Gordon B. Hinckley in his address "War and Peace" stated that "In a democracy we can renounce war and proclaim peace. There is opportunity for dissent." The question arises if within the church we are able to honor that same noble principle, to which the answer must be a resounding yes, because if there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things. In his essay Menno Feenstra takes very seriously the admonition in the Doctrine and Covenants to reject war and proclaim peace, an outrageous observation really, because shouldn't every member of the church be anxiously engaged in these very things? We definitely proclaim peace; our tens of thousands of missionaries proclaim the peace of Jesus Christ in many nations and in many languages. Rejecting war however is not commonly associated with Mormonism; we definitely know about being persecuted but surprisingly little about rejecting war. Menno Feenstra's essay no doubt echoes the feelings of many Latter-day Saints living outside the United States of America who are bewildered by the unilateral decision of the US to march to war in Iraq. Regardless of the political pressure that was applied on their respective governments, as Latter-day Saints they are not eager to be part of the coalition of those willing to discard of D&C 98:16.

This essay is a product of a member of the church in the Netherlands, a nation often scolded for its "liberal" policies. However, unlike the United States where the word liberal has been scandalized, in Western Europe "liberal" is still associated with liberty, where questioning authority is seen as a virtue by members and non-members alike, a healthy and necessary prerequisite for matters of state and the institutional church, a truth echoed by Hugh B. Brown, counselor in the Church's First Presidency from 1961-70: "There are alltogether too many people in the world who are willing to accept as true whatever is printed in a book or delivered from a pulpit ... we should be unafraid to dissent - if we are informed ... neither fear of consequence nor any kind of coercion should ever be used to secure uniformity of thought in the church. People should express their problems and opinions and be unafraid to think." (from: "An Abundant Life: The Memoirs of Hugh B. Brown, edited by Edwin B. Firmage - Salt Lake City - Signature Books, 1999, 135-138)
To the opiniated Dutch this is a given, sometimes to their own chagrin as talks and testimonies in church meetings sometimes reflect that sentiment and where much tolerance and charity is needed to maintain unity in diversity - E pluribus unum - or as the Dutch would say: Zoveel hoofden, zoveel zinnen - many faces, many opinions. It was in those same Netherlands where the Pilgrim Fathers found refuge and set sail for the New World, and where in 1911 the Dutch government was not about to join the hypocritical condemnation of polygamy in Utah of the time. Our Twelfth Article of Faith: We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. However most certainly this article doesn't mean to promote blind obedience, but rather active participation in a democratic process if at all possible. If our conscience dictates otherwise, civil disobedience becomes an alternative like for example during the American Revolutionary War where the proud forefathers of many American church members decisively got rid of the kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates of England!

Menno Feenstra points out in his essay that questioning authority, be it politically or ecclesiastically, has always been and still is a virtue. Not to do so is giving in to the very human - and tragic - tendency to let others do the thinking for us. To assert that our Latter-day prophets do not welcome constructive criticism goes along those same lines; surrendering our free agency to someone who knows best is not exactly a Latter-day value. Our fears and our insecurities frequently put them on a pedestal they never seek. Mostly with the best intentions as disciples we make statements like: "I never told you it would be easy, but that it would be worthwhile" or "When the prophet has spoken the discussion is over", sayings that are neither scriptural nor accurate. I have never heard of a prophet who doesn't welcome thoughtful reflection, or even heated discussion of the things that need to be brought to our attention as a people. Prophets want to touch our hearts and minds and seek our active participation; disciples have a tendency to shield and protect instead. So when the prophets have spoken the discussion only begins!

Menno Feenstra demonstrates that asking questions to and about a prophet - going directly to the source - is a virtue of faith and affirmation. Not to worry about the Master, or his prophets for that matter, they can stand their own ground!
Prophets and leaders in general will tell you about their frustration when followers will take them for their word without critical thinking. Better even, prophets know as no other that in each of us resides a potential prophet that needs to speak up, speak out and spread the word! Only then the gospel comes alive and the messenger rests assured that the prophetic call has been answered and furthered.

"Samuel" is a lengthy essay but easily keeps our attention because of the contemporary issues that are discussed. While not everything in Menno Feenstra's essay may be equally appealing to each and every reader, I found a lot of interesting topics touched upon by the author that caught my attention:

on morality
Menno Feenstra writes that he has "taken the freedom to bring up some moral issues". In that regard I immediately thought of a recent address by Ashley Sanders - graduate student English literature Middlebury College:
"One of the primary roles of religion is to address moral issues and ameliorate social problems. But in a politically and economically globalized world, religion must revisit what counts as moral and expand the scope of its obligations to address contemporary problems. In many ways, Mormonism has restricted its moral canon to include traditional values, while dismissing contemporary moral issues as "political". In this panel, young Mormons will present a case for five moral issues frequently politicized by the contemporary Church - war, torture, environmentalism, capitalism, and dissent - arguing for their inclusion in the moral canon and discussing ways in which leaders can inspire positive change in the membership."

on politics
"As an observation to those readers who hold the view that “we should not discuss politics”, especially not from a religious perspective, I wish to point out that very many and large parts of the Scriptures deal with political issues as well."
(In one of the one hundred footnotes of this article, this is illustrated by examples of nine categories of political issues dealt with in the Scriptures.)

on civil disobedience
Menno Feenstra gives some clear examples how civil disobedience can be an alternative, or even a necessity. He mentions for example:
"Should we still consider resistance fighters during the German occupation of Europe, such as Hannie Schaft, as “disobedient citizens”?
Easy question it seems, and the author answers it with: "Of course not!"
But what to think of Helmuth Hübener, the young and courageous German who dared challenge the Nazi's? Only lately we hear some ambiguous comments at best from within the church, of which in the past Alan Keele en Douglas Tobler wrote:
"Earlier Latter-day Saints faced anarchic violence unchecked by civil authorities, but how to respond to a totalitarian government's demands for total allegiance?" Apparently we still don't know.

on personal feelings
President Hinckley: "In a democracy we can renounce war and proclaim peace. There is opportunity for dissent. Many have been speaking out and doing so emphatically. That is their privilege. That is their right, so long as they do so legally. However, we all must also be mindful of another overriding responsibility, which I may add, governs my personal feelings and dictates my personal loyalties in the present situation." Did President Hinckley speak here as president of a worldwide church or did he simply express his personal feelings as an American citizen living in the Intermountain West, in Utah, one of the most "reddest" Republican states?
And: how do we know the difference?

on "no position"
Menno Feenstra: "The statement that “the church has no position on the war in Iraq”, (was) strangely enough not even voiced by President Hinckley himself but by an “LDS spokesman”. To many members of the international church this kind of silence can easily be mistaken for support for the war in Iraq, especially given the "personal" feelings of many of our leaders. For remember ... the maxim is "Qui tacet consentiret - Silence gives consent". Of course those who reject the war in Iraq should respect the opinion of those who think otherwise, but a dialogue would be helpful in an international church.

on Alma 45:16
And he said: Thus saith the Lord God:
- Cursed shall be the land, yea, this land, unto every nation, kindred, tongue ...
So was the Reverend Jeremiah Wright right after all?
I was reminded of this by the writings of Menno Feenstra as well as by the words of Ashley Sanders of Provo, Utah, a young Latter-day Saint who in a recent address actually strongly defended the words of Jeremiah Wright and admired his courage to speak truth to our minds. Has the playbook of the Republican Party replaced ... that other book? Members of the church abroad can easily get the impression that the GOP is the new Iron Rod ...
("Grand Old Party" is a traditional nickname for the Republican Party)

I enjoyed reading "Samuel" very much. Despite, and because of, its critical approach, at many instances this essay also gave me a renewed appreciation for many marvelous characteristics of the Restoration as referenced by Menno Feenstra who knows his scriptures well. Not everyone is a "Samuel" or a Menno Feenstra for that matter, willing to climb the wall and bring us some inconvenient truths and so I admire his sincerity and integrity. As editor of MVG-Mormonen voor Vrede en Gerechtigheid - Mormons for Peace and Justice - I welcome the discussion keeping an observation of Hugh Nibley in mind:

"The Book of Mormon reinforces the crucial understanding that conflict, including war, occurs only when both sides have sinned. When either side is willing to obey Christ's commands, to lay down their weapons or angry words and stop fighting or competing, even when they thus sacrifice their lives, as Christ did, they stop the violence. And they sometimes even convert their enemies, as the great pacifist martyrs, the People of Ammon did (Alma 24:17-26).
( Making Peace - Personal Essays by Eugene England -Signature Books, Salt Lake City, 1995, 8-9)

Click here to read an Introduction and Summary by Menno Feenstra

Click here to read the entire essay online

Click here to open or save this essay (61 pages) in MS-Word format