From Bruce C. and Marie K. Hafen and their book “Faith is not Blind”:
. . . .God has given us correct principles by which we may govern ourselves, but these very principles may, at times seem to be in conflict. Choosing between two principled alternatives (two “goods”) is more difficult than when we see an obvious contrast between good and evil. But learning to make such choices is essential to our spiritual maturity. .
Moreover, today’s society is filled with increasing dissonance and conflict on a host of political, cultural and social issues. People on the extreme side of these questions seem very certain about the right answer. But some people would rather be certain than be right.
So Life is full of ambiguity, and learning to manage the gap between the ideal and the real is one purpose of the mortal plan. By divine design, we all face “opposition in all things” (2 Nephi 2:11). As Lehi’s dream teaches us, some parts of mortality are certain and clear as symbolized by the iron rod that marks the path to eternal life, while other parts of mortality are unclear, as symbolized by the mists of darkness. But the distance between were we are on the path and where we want to be at the tree of life remains. This distance can be filled with misty clouds, and those holding to the iron rod can’t always see ahead of themselves.
Let’s talk about how to deal with that uncertainty. We’d like to suggest a three-stage model that builds on a perspective offered by distinguished American judge Oliver Wendell Holmes: “I would not give a fig for the simplicity on this side of complexity. But I would give my life for simplicity on the other side of complexity.”5 Stage One of our models is simplicity on this side of complexity, innocent and untested. Stage Two is complexity, the gap between the real and the ideal, where we struggle with conflicts and uncertainty. Stage Three is simplicity beyond complexity, a settled and informed perspective that has been tempered and tested by time and experience..
For example, we recently attended a Latter-day Saint testimony meeting for some of the women inmates in the Utah State Prison—women separated from their families and from society by serious crimes and serious struggles. In bearing her testimony one of the inmates said, “When I was a little girl, I often bore my testimony in church. In my innocent little singsong voice I would say, “I love my mom and dad. I know the Church is true. My Heavenly Father loves me. Jesus suffered for my sins.” But today, behind these bars, I am saying those words with new eyes and a new heart. Now I understand what the words really mean—I know the Church is true. My Heavenly Father loves me. Jesus suffered for my sins.
She was discovering the simplicity on the other side of complexity.
The challenge with those who remain fixed in innocent, idealistic simplicity is that their perspective may not have grappled with the realities of what Holmes calls “complexity.” That’s why he wouldn’t give a fig for the untested idealism of naïve simplicity.
Some people in the early simplicity of Stage One don’t see a gap. They somehow filter out any perception of differences between the real and the ideal. For them, the gospel at its best is firm handshake, a high five and a smiley face. Their mission was the best, their ward is the best and every day will probably be the best day they ever had. These cheerful ones are optimistic and relaxed. They can weather many storms that seem formidable to those of a less sunny disposition.
Others in this stage may see the gap, but they choose—whether consciously or not—to ignore the terra firma of reality, thereby pretending they have eliminated the gap, with all its frustrations. They cling to the ideal so single-mindedly that they just don’t feel the discomfort that comes from facing the real facts about themselves, about others, or about the world around them. For them, perhaps the gap asks questions that are too raw, pushing them into a sense of denial that forces out painful realities.
When we don’t feel the gap or we focus only on the ideal while blocking out the real, our perspective lacks depth. If this is our paradigm, faith can be both blind and shallow, because it lacks awareness and careful thought. These limitations can keep us from extending our roots into the soil of real experience deeply enough to form the solid foundation needed to withstand the strong winds of adversity (see Alma 32:37-38). Growing deep roots requires that we learn to work through uncomfortable realities. ~~Bruce C. & Marie K. Hafen, Faith is Not Blind (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2018) p.10-12, continued . . Faith is Not Blind.II
. . . . continued