Agency: More Info Please!


Webster
 Share

Recommended Posts

There is about 1040 hits on the word AGENCY on the LDS.ORG. Below is only smidgen of what is listed.

Agency: The Gift of Choices

in Spencer J. Condie, Ensign, 1995, Sept.

LDS.org - Ensign Article - Agency: The Gift of Choices Skip to Content Skip...us of the price of unwisely using our agency: “The wages of sin is death”

To Act for Ourselves: The Gift and Blessings of Agency

in Robert D. Hales, Ensign, 2006, May

... Article - To Act for Ourselves: The Gift and Blessings of Agency Skip to Content Skip to Navigation Search All Church Content

Using Our Free Agency

in Delbert L. Stapley, Ensign, 1975, May

...Article - Using Our Free Agency Skip to Content Skip to Navigation Search...act without compulsion or restraint. Free agency doesn’t suggest we do...

Our Moral Agency

in L. Lionel Kendrick, Ensign, 1996, Mar.

...Ensign Article - Our Moral Agency Skip to Content Skip to Navigation Search...We continued to have our moral agency following our spiritual birth. Our...

Teaching Children to Use Agency Wisely

in , Ensign, 1988, Oct.

... Article - Teaching Children to Use Agency Wisely Skip to Content Skip to Navigation...Marion G. Romney said, “Free agency means the freedom and power to choose..

The Fulness of the Gospel: Agency

in , Ensign, 2006, Mar.

LDS.org - Ensign Article - The Fulness of the Gospel: Agency Skip to Content Skip to Navigation Search All Church Content Gospel ...

Agency and Accountability

in Elaine Cannon, Ensign, 1983, Nov.

LDS.org - Ensign Article - Agency and Accountability Skip to Content Skip...LDS.org - Ensign Article - Agency and Accountability" + "";

Atonement, Agency, Accountability

in Boyd K. Packer, Ensign, 1988, May

... - Ensign Article - Atonement, Agency, Accountability Skip to Content Skip to Navigation... of Eden, gave I unto man his agency” ( Moses 7:32 ). Whatever ...

The Gift of Agency

in Wolfgang H. Paul, Ensign, 2006, May

LDS.org - Ensign Article - The Gift of Agency Skip to Content Skip to Navigation Search All Church Content Gospel Library

Agency and Love

in Marion D. Hanks, Ensign, 1983, Nov.

LDS.org - Ensign Article - Agency and Love Skip to Content Skip ... E-mail Marion D. Hanks, “Agency and Love,”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Remember, an important thing to teach with agency is that we have the ability to choose our actions, but cannot choose the consequences.

almost.

we get to choose ONE of the two, an action or a consequence (or outcome).

if we choose the action, the consequence is dictated to us.

if we choose the outcome, the course of action is dictated.

its an important distinction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hemi:

I think there is more to agency than meets the eye. Did Joseph Smith ever define Agency as the freedom to choose, or in a similar manner? The scriptures use the word without defining it as so many of our modern speakers feel a need to do. I think Agency probably meant exactly what the dictionary says. The dictionary does not define Agency in terms of freedom or choice. Ditto for thesauruses.

Free will is definitely a related concept, but Agency as defined in the dictionary, has more to do with acting and actions, or the acting in behalf of/representing of another.

That's why I've been asking if anyone out there has a view of Agency which is different from the common, traditional view of freedom of choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More than a handful:^_^

Agency

1 We deem it a just principle, and it is one the force of which we believe ought to be duly considered by every individual, that all men are created equal, and that all have the privilege of thinking for themselves upon all matters relative to conscience. Consequently, then, we are not disposed, had we the power, to deprive any one of exercising that free independence of mind which heaven has so graciously bestowed upon the human family as one of its choicest gifts. (Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 vols. 2:6-7)

2 Report of Mathew L. Davis: "I believe," said [Joseph], "that a man is a moral, responsible, free agent; that although it was foreordained he should fall, and be redeemed, yet after the redemption it was not foreordained that he should again sin. In the Bible a rule of conduct is laid down for him; in the Old and New Testaments the law by which he is to be governed, may be found. If he violates that law, he is to be punished for the deeds done in the body." (Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 vols. 4:78-79)

3 Report of Don Carlos Smith: [President Joseph Smith] then observed that Satan was generally blamed for the evils which we did, but if he was the cause of all our wickedness, men could not be condemned. The devil could not compel mankind to do evil; all was voluntary. Those who resisted the Spirit of God, would be liable to be led into temptation, and then the association of heaven would be withdrawn from those who refused to be made partakers of such great glory. God would not exert any compulsory means, and the devil could not; and such ideas as were entertained {on these subjects} by many were absurd. (Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 vols. 4:358)

4 After this instruction, you will be responsible for your own sins; it is a desirable honor that you should so walk before our heavenly Father as to save yourselves; we are all responsible to God for the manner we improve the light and wisdom given by our Lord to enable us to save ourselves. (Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 vols. 4:606)

5 It is one of the first principles of my life, and one that I have cultivated from my childhood, having been taught it by my father, to allow every one the liberty of conscience. (Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 vols. 6:56)

6 I have intended my remarks for all, both rich and poor, bond and free, great and small. I have no enmity against any man. I love you all; but I hate some of your deeds. I am your best friend, and if persons miss their mark it is their own fault. (Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 vols. 6:317)

7 Words of John Taylor: Concerning government: Some years ago, in Nauvoo, a gentleman in my hearing, a member of the Legislature, asked Joseph Smith how it was that he was enabled to govern so many people, and to preserve such perfect order; remarking at the same time that it was impossible for them to do it anywhere else. Mr. Smith remarked that it was very easy to do that. "How?" responded the gentleman; "to us it is very difficult." Mr. Smith replied, "I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves." (Latter-day Saints' Millennial Star 13:339)

Footnotes

94. Letter to the brethren scattered from Zion, Kirtland, 22 January 1834.

95. A letter of Mathew L. Davis to his wife describing the Prophet's discourse in Washington, D.C., 6 February 1840.

96. Sabbath address, Nauvoo, 16 May 1841.

97. Remarks to the Relief Society, Nauvoo, 28 April 1842.

98. Sabbath address, Nauvoo, 15 October 1843.

99. King Follett Discourse, Nauvoo, 7 April 1844.

100. Article on Church organization by John Taylor, published in the Millennial Star, 15 November 1851. The incident described apparently took place in Nauvoo, though the exact date is unknown. Howard Coray identified the man with whom the Prophet spoke as Judge Stephen A. Douglas (see Coray Family Papers, Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, Special Collections).

Reference: Encyclopedia of Joseph Smith's Teachings (L. Dahl)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hemi:

I think there is more to agency than meets the eye. Did Joseph Smith ever define Agency as the freedom to choose, or in a similar manner? The scriptures use the word without defining it as so many of our modern speakers feel a need to do. I think Agency probably meant exactly what the dictionary says. The dictionary does not define Agency in terms of freedom or choice. Ditto for thesauruses.

Free will is definitely a related concept, but Agency as defined in the dictionary, has more to do with acting and actions, or the acting in behalf of/representing of another.

That's why I've been asking if anyone out there has a view of Agency which is different from the common, traditional view of freedom of choice.

The word freedom or free was removed when President Hinckley became prophet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hemi:

2 Report of Mathew L. Davis: "I believe," said [Joseph], "that a man is a moral, responsible, free agent; that although it was foreordained he should fall, and be redeemed, yet after the redemption it was not foreordained that he should again sin. In the Bible a rule of conduct is laid down for him; in the Old and New Testaments the law by which he is to be governed, may be found. If he violates that law, he is to be punished for the deeds done in the body." (Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 vols. 4:78-79)

This is the only quote you provided which is even worth discussing. None of the others even contain the word Agent or Agency. As I have said, I understand that Free Will is a correct principle, but I disagree that the words Agent and Agency in the scriptures is the same thing.

In the above quote, Joseph Smith used the term "free agent" which is a specific type of agent. As you know, the scriptures never say Free Agent or Free Agency. And if you read the quote, you'll find that no where does it even equate Free Agent with freedom or choice like I said.

Here's a better quote you should have used:

. . . he [Joseph Smith] says satan Cannot Seduce us by his Enticements unles we in our harts Consent & yeald—our organization such that we can Resest the Devil If we were Not organized so we would Not be free agents.

— William P. McIntire Minute Book, March 16, 1841, The Words of Joseph Smith: The Contemporary Accounts of the Nauvoo Discourses of the Prophet Joseph, compiled and edited by Andrew F. Ehat and Lyndon W. Cook [Provo: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1980], p. 65.

Joseph still uses the term Free Agent (not in the scriptures), and he uses it correctly. A Free Agent at that time meant an Agent who can act freely, so it doesn't define what Agent means, it only talks about a specific type of Agent (i.e., one who acts freely).

So I still issue the following invitations:

Did Joseph Smith ever define Agency as the freedom to choose, or in a similar manner? The scriptures use the word without defining it as so many of our modern speakers feel a need to do. I think Agency probably meant exactly what the dictionary says. The dictionary does not define Agency in terms of freedom or choice. Ditto for thesauruses.

Free will is definitely a related concept, but Agency as defined in the dictionary, has more to do with acting and actions, or the acting in behalf of/representing of another.

For any just joining in, the main idea of this thread is "Do you have, or have you heard of, a 'non-traditional' idea or definition of Agency?" (Please review comment #1 for the full question and idea. Also there is a link to some polls if you're interested.)

Did you know that the traditional 'Mormon' definition of Agency [freedom to choose] is NOT in standard dictionary definitions? (By the way, if anyone can find a mainstream dictionary or thesarus that ties Agency or Agents to either the ideas of Freedom or Choice, please show me. I'd love to see it!)

I do believe in free will and the freedom to choose. The principles that are commonly talked about when discussing Agency are correct. But I am also interested in those points of view that see Agency in a slightly different, or non-traditional manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hidden

For any just joining in, the main idea of this thread is "Do you have, or have you heard of, a 'non-traditional' idea or definition of Agency?" (Please review comment #1 for the full question and idea. Also there is a link to some polls if you're interested.)

'Agency' is a red apple before it's fallen off of a tree. After it's fallen, it becomes known as a 'bankrupt' (unless it falls into a mud puddle, at which point it becomes a 'duck').

While gratuitously facetious, my comment represents my loss at what suggestion to provide, Webster. I think you might have to pull some non-religious people in here to get discussion on those 'other' definitions of agency you're looking for. Maybe not, however, if you can reference which (dictionary) definitions you think the LDS stance (dis)agrees with and give us a springboard and a direction to move in the discussion. Otherwise, I think you're going to hear the same basic concept over and over, as said concept is the near-universal understanding of 'Agency' among the LDS.

Link to comment

almost.

we get to choose ONE of the two, an action or a consequence (or outcome).

if we choose the action, the consequence is dictated to us.

if we choose the outcome, the course of action is dictated.

its an important distinction.

While that's a good way to teach commitment and conversion, it is a bending of truth to make a point.

I get your point, and it was well made.

However, even if you choose an outcome, you still have to travel a path that includes choices (which you are free to make) everyday.

I choose to have a corn farm and I choose to plant 3 acres. Well, it will not spring up and grow based on my decision. I still have to do the work everyday to make it happen.

The doctrine of once saved always saved is a doctrine of man, and it not true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you know that the traditional 'Mormon' definition of Agency [freedom to choose] is NOT in standard dictionary definitions? (By the way, if anyone can find a mainstream dictionary or thesarus that ties Agency or Agents to either the ideas of Freedom or Choice, please show me. I'd love to see it!)

Perhaps not, but I think Black's Law Dictionary comes pretty close:

agency. 1. A fiduciary relationship created by express or implied contract or by law, in which one party (the agent) may act on behalf of another party (the principal) and bind that other party by words or actions.

Remember, the scripture teaches that men are agents "unto themselves" (D&C 58:28). So, in the legal sense, we are both agents--enjoying the capacity to act--and principals--accountable for those actions.

I once read an interesting piece (drawing heavily on 2 Nephi 2, IIRC) suggesting that without opposition there is no real agency, and without law there is no real opposition. By this theory, Satan's plan to deprive us of agency was actually a plan whereby we would be sent to earth, but without any law to govern us (and, incidentally, without any need for a "savior" who would actually suffer for the sins of mankind, since there could be no sin in the first place. No wonder he was so willing to volunteer for the job!). I'm particularly fond of this idea because it turns the common liberal meme of "you're trying to control me! That's Satan's plan!!!" on its head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just_A_Guy:

I would say that Black's Law Dictionary does not follow the common "freedom to choose" definition, but rather teaches Agency the way it should be taught, using a real definition. God speaks to us in our own language, therefore Agency should not be something different in LDS thought, and definitely should not be a term borrowed from philosophy (i.e., free agency).

Having said that, you are absolutely right. You are using an actual dictionary definition, and not the traditional Free Agency idea which I believe came into the church through philosophy's influence. You are saying something very much like I've seen in a few other places on the internet. I've alluded to these other ideas without divulging them, hoping that others might have heard them or bring in these ideas without my prodding. I may refer to them in the future, but the one I like the best is very much in line with what you've said.

Have you taken my polls yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you taken my polls yet?

Just did; but I'm a little slow on the uptake and so voted all four of them (I think a couple of the answers aren't necessarily mutually exclusive).

I would say that Black's Law Dictionary does not follow the common "freedom to choose" definition . . .

Well, the legal/scriptural definition seems to be a conjunction of choice and accountability.

If you're saying that Mormons tend to associate "agency" primarily with the "choice" element, I'd agree with you.

If you're raising concerns that Mormons--collectively or individually, to any serious degree--are improperly marginalizing the notion of accountability, I think I'd have to disagree at present (based solely on my own anecdotal experience). We might not contextualize the concept as well as we ought, but we certainly still teach it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think the phrase "freedom of choice" would be more understandable than agency?

I think we should better understand the definition of the word from the original revelations (Agency), and not continue to use the definition ("freedom of choice") which comes from the philosophical concept of Free Agency. The Lord chould have used the term Free Agency if he wanted to, but He didn't. (By the way, don't get me wrong. I do believe in Free Will, and the Lord actually used that term in the scriptures.)

I think we miss out on greater insights when we focus on a particular type of Agency. It's like defining Faith as nothing more than Belief. Or talking about all Ice Cream as only Vanilla.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just_A_Guy:

I agree that we teach the pieces, but they're not tied as tightly together. How many of our Youth get the freedom side and fail to grasp the accountability. Also, how many non-members don't understand us when we talk about Agency. If we used "Free Will" (a scriptural term) to describe freedom to choose, we would be understood immediately.

Edited by Webster
Fixed typo.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many of our Youth get the freedom side and fail to grasp the accountability.

Well, they'll use the idea of agency as a rhetorical device to try to get what they want from their parents or other authority figures. But I don't think many of them honestly believe that God doesn't mind when they break His commandments. More often, what's really going on there is a lack of testimony of either God's existence generally or the particular commandment they wish to disobey.

Also, how many non-members don't understand us when we talk about Agency.

Touché. But I'm not convinced that "free will" really encompasses the dual nature of agency either--at least, not to the layman. We use lots of terms that are unique to Mormondom, and to some degree investigators and converts are just going to have to learn the lingo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...I'm not convinced that "free will" really encompasses the dual nature of agency either--at least, not to the layman.

I think you misunderstood my point. We should not use Agency (or even Free Agency) to describe "freedom to choose". That is not what Agency means to the rest of the world, and I don't think it meant that originally in our scriptures. We should use the scriptural term "Free Will" to describe the idea of "freedom to choose", and Agency should be something along the lines of what you have suggested.

McConkie in Mormon Doctrine gave four principles which were necessary for there to be Agency. #4 is an unfettered power of choice must prevail. If an unfettered power of choice is needed to have Agency, then Agency should not be equated with "free choice", since that's only one of four ingredients.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can quote a Book of Mormon scripture with the word Agency in it, I would be very interested (Since it does not appear in the actual Book of Mormon text).

If you quote a Book of Mormon scripture which speaks of Acting for themselves, like the D&C and Book of Moses talk about Agents unto themselves, then I'll fully agree, since Agent and Acting are related terms and the structure of the two phrases is very similar. That's one reason I really liked what Just_A_Guy had to say.

Any other Book of Mormon scriptures may contain ideas that are related to the concept of Agency, but may not actually be a definition of the word which I keep saying I am looking for. For instance, you can say that Repentence is the way to implement the atonement in your life, but that does not make, "the way to implement the atonement in your life" the definition of Repentence. It's an implication of the word, but not it's definition. "Freedom to choose" is an implication of Agency, but I don't think it is the definition of the word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Webster,

I believe what I said before that Agency means we have an obligation to choose. And for "moral agency" it means we have an obligation to choose righteously.

We need to be careful when we use modern dictionaries to define words or concepts. Modern dictionaries are constantly being changed to represent modern culture. (I remember when "ain't" was added to the dictionary) What a modern dictionary says a word means one year doesn't mean that it will define the word the same way the next year.

Example:

1978 Funk and Wagnalls Standard Dictionary: 1. Active power or operation; activity.

1948 The Encyclopedia Americana: Agency, is its widest sense includes every relation in which one person acts for or represents another by his authority. . . . It is also a fiduciary relation which is one of trust and confidence.

Black's Law Dictionary's definition is a good one. It hasn't been changed and morphed by societies changing ideas and ideals.

I have another old dictionary which uses the words "obligaton to act." (One of my kids has borrowed it so I can't give you the year or publisher.)

I have to ask why you asking for a definition of agency in only the Book of Mormon? Isn't the D&C scripture too?

I believe concepts in the Bible are more clearly defined in the Book of Mormon; and, concepts in the Book of Mormon are more clearly defined in the D&C. Its another example of line upon line, precept on precept.

If you apply the Black's Law definition to agency and our relationship with our Heavenly Father, you can come up with the following: Heavenly Father, as the principal, has given us, as the agent, the fiduciary responsibility to act for Him on our behalf. He has trust and confidence in us. He will not allow our agency to be infringed upon.

applepansy

P.S. I would like to offer the following article. When DNA is Not Destiny | Newsweek Voices - Sharon Begley | Newsweek.com Science has proven that the spiritual has control of the physical. (IMO, its about time they caught up.) I think this applies even when outside influences infringe on us (trauma, addiction). Therefore, even outside influences do not change our God-given right to choose.

Edited by applepansy
typos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you misunderstood my point. We should not use Agency (or even Free Agency) to describe "freedom to choose". That is not what Agency means to the rest of the world, and I don't think it meant that originally in our scriptures. We should use the scriptural term "Free Will" to describe the idea of "freedom to choose", and Agency should be something along the lines of what you have suggested.

If you look at "agency" in the topical guide and then follow the BOM definitions, it seems that the references to choosing are usually placed in context with some reference to accountability (though, yes, the word "agency" doesn't seem to appear in the BoM).

Maybe I'm just not getting it, but it almost seems like you're advocating teaching "free will" in and of itself, without the corresponding element of accountability. If so, I must beg to differ; I just don't think that's necessary.

EDIT for clarity: In other words, why teach the incomplete doctrine of "free will" when we have the complete doctrine of "agency" at our disposal?

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe what I said before that Agency means we have an obligation to choose. And for "moral agency" it means we have an obligation to choose righteously.

The above is a good example of what I'm asking for in this forum: Ideas about Agency that go beyond the normal, "freedom to choose," explanation. They may be more in depth than the general idea, alternate ideas, or completely off-the-wall. I'm just collecting different points of view, while not denying that free will is a related and true principle.

We need to be careful when we use modern dictionaries to define words or concepts. Modern dictionaries are constantly being changed to represent modern culture. (I remember when "ain't" was added to the dictionary) What a modern dictionary says a word means one year doesn't mean that it will define the word the same way the next year.

I understand your point. I have a reprint of an 1828 dictionary. The words Agent and Agency have two main meanings in it: basically Acting, and Acting for another. Modern dictionaries have more meanings today, but as far as I can tell, they (including the examples you provided) are all based on these two main ideas that were the definition at the time of Joseph Smith. Those two ideas I think are valid as possible ideas to take into account when trying to learn about Agency. At least it is another point of view which seems to have some validity or possibilities.

That 1828 dictionary actually has the word a'nt (with a line over the 'a' to make it long). So ain't was in at least that dictionary 180 years ago. (Just an interesting note)

I have another old dictionary which uses the words "obligaton to act." (One of my kids has borrowed it so I can't give you the year or publisher.)

I would be interested to find out more about this. Thank you.

I have to ask why you asking for a definition of agency in only the Book of Mormon? Isn't the D&C scripture too?

I never said that. You'll have to read my comments and the context of the discussion which was going on at the time.

If you apply the Black's Law definition to agency and our relationship with our Heavenly Father, you can come up with the following: Heavenly Father, as the principal, has given us, as the agent, the fiduciary responsibility to act for Him on our behalf. He has trust and confidence in us. He will not allow our agency to be infringed upon.

Thank you again. This is another point of view I have heard which I find interesting.

Therefore, even outside influences do not change our God-given right to choose.

I agree. Again, thanks for some more interesting info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just_A_Guy:

Okay, I think I see the problem. You don't want me to miss the fact that "free will" is a part of Agency. I agree. You've also shown by the Law dictionary that "accountability" is also part of Agency. I agree. I think using the Law dictionary definition would be a better way to teach Agency, since both sides of the issue ("free will" and "accountability") are equally represented, mutually dependent, and inextricably linked.

I don't like Agency being used as a synonym for freedom of choice because it separates those two principles by focusing on only one side. If we only want to discuss the freedom to choose, we should use "free will" instead of Agency so as not to confound the meanings.

For instance, the word Atonement should not be used as a synonym for forgiveness; forgiveness is its own related issue, and while the Atonement is related to the principle of forgiveness, there is so much more. Likewise, Faith should not be used as a synonym for belief. Again we lose the full meaning of the word by focusing in on just a part.

I hope that helps out.

Edited by Webster
clarified a few thoughts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like Agency being used as a synonym for freedom of choice because it separates those two principles by focusing on only one side. If we only want to discuss the freedom to choose, we should use "free will" instead of Agency so as not to confound the meanings.

IMO, using the word Agency as a synonym does just the opposite. It connects free will and accountability. I agree with Just-a-guy's question "why teach the incomplete doctrine of "free will" when we have the complete doctrine of "agency" at our disposal?"

applepansy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share