A Firm Foundation in a Shaky World

I am including a link to the June Ensign article "A Firm Foundation in a Shaky World", as it might be classified as part of the 'New Openness' referenced in my previous post. The article is by Adam C. Olson but contains a good number of quotations from Apostle Henry B. Eyring, as well as Portages Saints, and uses the story of the 1755 Lisbon earthquake as a metaphor for crises of faith. The article references existential crises that can result in the minds of Church members when confronted with seemingly critical information with which the know not what to do (ala Book of Abraham post). That this is recognized and acknowledged is good, the way in which it is responded too is however less good.

First off the 'shaken' person is described as of 'weak' testimony. This is more then just a little bit marginalizing of sincere people troubled by information they are unprepared for. However I can understand the temptation to use the label 'weak' on the part of the 'spiritually strong', though it is not a particularly noble one, I'm sure that I've used it (or something like it) in my past.

The article does not provide any real good advice on how to respond when a troubling question is raised by others, rather it points to the 'tried and true' 'Sunday school answers'. The Sunday School answers may be fine, but there are many among us who enjoy some more immediate and pragmatic advice to go along with it. What exactly that would be, I'm not really sure, perhaps just resources, like perhaps a Church website devoted to difficult questions would be nice, or a more advanced Sunday School class even.

Of course in all such articles the old Saturdays Warrior dictum of "line upon line, precept on precept" is advanced (yes I am aware that that is originally from the D&C, as cited in the article). I suppose that's a good fall back for ones personal ease of mind when no obvious answers present themselves. I have survived spiritually for many years on the dictum that 'I get just enough answers to just enough questions to keep me going'. However as something of an intellectual, and perhaps out of pride, I've never been greatly happy with that solution, at least in the current proportion to which I have had to relie upon it.

Anyway mentioning this problem deserves some kudos, though the way it was answered might use some work.