dsnell

Goodness I'm a bit late to the party here. I wouldn't even have seen the year-old thread if I hadn't stumbled upon it while searching for an article. Vort, your analysis of myself and my approach in this article is probably the most scathing missive I've seen in a long while. Your criticism is duly noted. I also appreciate the feedback of the others in this thread.
I meant no harm to President Young. In fact, the purpose of the article was meant to highlight some of his positive teachings. The link to the video was just meant as an example of the extent to which President Young has been criticized over the years (i.e. "People have literally made movies criticizing him"). I stand by my statement that I agree with some of the criticisms that have been raised about him over the centuries. I think it's no secret that the man had his faults and I have no problem acknowledging them (the Church itself acknowledges some of his faults)--though I had/have no intention of acknowledging them in a demeaning way. This was not an attempt to attack President Young. I simply pointed out that while the man had his faults, there are also plenty of good things we can and should focus on. But I apologize if my approach rubbed many of you the wrong way. It was not my intention. I continue to learn and grow as a writer, and I hope you all can be patient with me as I struggle to be an advocate for our shared faith.

Goodness I'm a bit late to the party here. I wouldn't even have seen the year-old thread if I hadn't stumbled upon it while searching for an article. Vort, your analysis of myself and my approach in this article is probably the most scathing missive I've seen in a long while. Your criticism is duly noted. I also appreciate the feedback of the others in this thread.
I meant no harm to President Young. In fact, the purpose of the article was meant to highlight some of his positive teachings. The link to the video was just meant as an example of the extent to which President Young has been criticized over the years (i.e. "People have literally made movies criticizing him"). I stand by my statement that I agree with some of the criticisms that have been raised about him over the centuries. I think it's no secret that the man had his faults and I have no problem acknowledging them (the Church itself acknowledges some of his faults)--though I had/have no intention of acknowledging them in a demeaning way. This was not an attempt to attack President Young. I simply pointed out that while the man had his faults, there are also plenty of good things we can and should focus on. But I apologize if my approach rubbed many of you the wrong way. It was not my intention. I continue to learn and grow as a writer, and I hope you all can be patient with me as I struggle to be an advocate for our shared faith.

https://thirdhour.org/blog/faith/ces-letter/
Thanks @dsnell. This was a good read.

This is great! I'm David Snell (the guy whose face you were looking at in that Saints Unscripted video about ghosts). So glad that video was there for you when you needed it!

This is great! I'm David Snell (the guy whose face you were looking at in that Saints Unscripted video about ghosts). So glad that video was there for you when you needed it!

I love this.  Thank you for sharing.

I agree with you 1000%
Once upon a time, I noticed someone a few rows ahead of me pass the tray down the row without reaching in.  As mentioned in the article, I wondered for a flash what his reason might have been since he had always seemed to be a little bit of a "Peter priesthood."  I decided that since I didn't know why he was passing it up, I would pray for him, that he might have strength and courage to overcome whatever he was up against.  I did that every week for probably about a month, and the joy that I felt when my brother in Christ finally took the sacrament surprised me a little bit.  I think it gave me just the slightest idea of how Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ feel when we repent and fully turn our lives toward the straight and narrow.

But what if the other side of the page has his favorite hymn?

Even if Joseph Smith comes in 2nd place, it’s not as if Joseph Smith is just a few steps behind the Savior. A very wide divide would still exist between any man and the Savior. You understand how the the Atonement dwarfs any accomplishments anyone else has ever done in this life, right? Giving someone the 2nd place award is one thing, but saying they’re not far behind the Savior is another. 

It's not the word "praise" that necessarily bothers me. It's a combination of a bunch of factors (some of which I've mentioned in earlier comments). As Latter-day Saints we're all well aware that we don't worship Joseph Smith and this hymn isn't meant to be worshiping him. But whether or not that is our intention, perception is everything. And I think this hymn, while awesome, could give newcomers the wrong idea in the same way that early church artwork gave people (and still gives people) the wrong idea about some things. I could totally get behind keeping the hymn and changing a couple of the lyrics, though, as has been done to it in the past.
When I hear "Mingling with Gods" I see Joseph Smith hanging out with a bunch of toga'd gods on a cloud sipping mimosas haha. When I hear "Crowned in the midst of the prophets of old," I see biblical prophets kneeling on either side of Joseph as he "enters his kingdom" for some kind of celestial coronation ceremony. Idk. Obviously these are just my subjective impressions and opinions, I just thing the song goes a little too far. 
As I've always understood this song to be a eulogy for Joseph, I've never understood "mingling with Gods" to be referring to the First Vision. Also the following line, "death cannot conquer the hero again," indicates to me (IMO) that the mingling is taking place after his death. Could he actually be mingling with the Godhead? I guess so, but that's a pretty big speculation to make based on one line of hymn text. I simply think it's doctrinally sketchy.
But again, feel free to shut that down haha. Just my opinion. Still love the song.

I'm sure @dsnell is well aware of what spiritual death is.

Wrong!

Yes, people are known to be quite opinionated here

I agree, we need to drop some of the overly solemn hymns. When it comes to Praise to the Man, I just think that if I were visiting a Latter-day Saint congregation for the first time I would have a lot of questions after listening to that hymn.
What Gods is Joseph mingling with? (this is a huge one)
I thought Latter-day Saints believed in one God? Why are they singing about multiple Gods (big "G")?  (another important one)
Why is Joseph entering his own kingdom and not the Kingdom of God? (makes sense to us, but might seem weird to others)
Why is he being crowned? Is he the king of the prophets? If so, why?
Anyway, I'm probably overthinking it (though from personal experience, investigators have gotten hung up over the "Mingling with Gods" line). I guess I just think that if it were removed it would cause more good than harm. Don't get me wrong, I'm Team Joseph through and through, I just think this hymn can be misleading. Though it would be painful to sacrifice one of the more upbeat hymns.

It would not surprise me one bit if Joseph Smith were already resurrected (no, I don't think the world needs to know about it or see his grave disturbed, nor do I think it absolutely must wait until the Second Coming), nor if he were mingling with the three Gods of the Godhead, and others who have already received their exaltation - such as Abraham and Moses, regardless of whether he's resurrected or not.
I respect your right to be surprised if any of that is actually the case.

You are not the first person to ever have had this concern. I've thought it myself on occasion. I can easily see criticisms about worshiping Joseph Smith stemming from this song if a visitor doesn't then go on to ask follow up questions and misses a missionary moment.
An outsider's surface view of "Praise to the Man" might not be too far off from their understanding of what "Praise the Lord" means. The misconception that members worship Joseph Smith doesn't necessarily come out of thin air.
P.S. Keep the song.
 

I agree, we need to drop some of the overly solemn hymns. When it comes to Praise to the Man, I just think that if I were visiting a Latter-day Saint congregation for the first time I would have a lot of questions after listening to that hymn.
What Gods is Joseph mingling with? (this is a huge one)
I thought Latter-day Saints believed in one God? Why are they singing about multiple Gods (big "G")?  (another important one)
Why is Joseph entering his own kingdom and not the Kingdom of God? (makes sense to us, but might seem weird to others)
Why is he being crowned? Is he the king of the prophets? If so, why?
Anyway, I'm probably overthinking it (though from personal experience, investigators have gotten hung up over the "Mingling with Gods" line). I guess I just think that if it were removed it would cause more good than harm. Don't get me wrong, I'm Team Joseph through and through, I just think this hymn can be misleading. Though it would be painful to sacrifice one of the more upbeat hymns.

I think it's safe to say that "Praise to the Man" is one of the faster, catchier hymns in the hymnal, but considering it's lyrics, do you think it should remain in the new iteration of the hymnal coming out sometime in the future? I write for ThirdHour.org and was thinking about doing an article about people's opinions on this. What are your thoughts? I personally think it's a fantastic hymn, I love it, but I think it weirds people out that are new or unfamiliar with the Church. I feel like it borderline deifies Joseph Smith, misrepresents his role in our religion, and slightly deviates our focus from Christ to Joseph during sacrament meetings. But maybe I'm overthinking it and it's actually just a great song honoring a prophet. What are your thoughts? Here are the lyrics for reference:
1. Praise to the man who communed with Jehovah!
Jesus anointed that Prophet and Seer.
Blessed to open the last dispensation,
Kings shall extol him, and nations revere.
(Chorus]
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.
2. Praise to his mem'ry, he died as a martyr;
Honored and blest be his ever great name!
Long shall his blood, which was shed by assassins,
Plead unto heav'n while the earth lauds his fame.
3. Great is his glory and endless his priesthood.
Ever and ever the keys he will hold.
Faithful and true, he will enter his kingdom,
Crowned in the midst of the prophets of old.
4. Sacrifice brings forth the blessings of heaven;
Earth must atone for the blood of that man.
Wake up the world for the conflict of justice.
Millions shall know "Brother Joseph" again.

I never thought I'd love a Prophet more than President Monson. It seems I'll probably love the next one more and then after that more. I can't wait to regain membership in the church

Very reasonable article (and by Snell -- bonus). While we have been asked to avoid using "LDS" and "Mormon" when referring to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as well as its members , the injunction to avoid the term "Latter-day Saints" alone applies only to references to the Church, not to its members. The people, members of the Church of Jesus Christ, are indeed called "Latter-day Saints", and using "LDS" (as a common abbreviation for "Latter-day Saint") to refer to them seems appropriate. Thus, I would think that LDSSingles is perfectly okay, at least as far as its name goes. (Whether using a reference to the Church or gospel is appropriate in a business context is another matter.)

And the humbling continues haha. Had no idea the proper word was "poring." I've corrected it in the article. Thanks for the silver!

Sorry, but 'regular dudes' don't use the word exegetically, ever. 
Nice try though.

Living proof! Congratulations on your upcoming anniversary.

Living proof! Congratulations on your upcoming anniversary.

@Vort, I'm happy to engage in a respectful level of discourse with you, but as respect is something I have yet to feel from your comments in this discussion, I feel continuing it would only escalate tempers and cause more harm than good. It isn't a matter of you "personally insulting me" it's a matter of picking my battles. We can disagree without being disagreeable, but I feel like that's not the way things have gone thus far.
I do agree with @The Folk Prophet when he says that it's never appropriate to make fun of another person, for which I accept full responsibility as far as this article is concerned. That was unwise.
I understand that you're deeply offended, but believe me when I say that this was never intended to be a social commentary on virtue-shaming, and if that is what it has become then I sincerely apologize. As @TheFolkProphet said, it was meant to be a fluff article about a socially awkward bingo sheet, nothing more. Thank you, though, for bringing a wider perspective to my attention so that I can be more careful in the future.