Roy Rants

Philadelphia Temple

2011-12-10T09:08:00.001-07:00

I love the temple. I don't want anyone to think otherwise. Some of my most profound and spiritual experiences have been in the halls of the House of the Lord. That said, I don't always like the uniform designs that are used. I know the costs are great, but I wish that each temple had a unique architectural style. One that fit the local environment and tradition.

Because of this, I was ecstatic when I saw the design of the Philadelphia Temple. Ultimately, this temple design may not be unique to Philly, but it is very befitting the city. I hope that the Church will do something similar for the upcoming Rome and Paris temples.

NPR, APM, PRI...These are some of my favorite things

2011-11-09T20:35:00.000-07:00

Krista Tippet hosted a show called "Speaking of Faith" on American Public Media. She now hosts "Being"; I think the old name was better. Either way the show is how I imagine religious discourse should be: it's honest, non-judgmental, and often compelling.

Her recent show with feminist-Mormon scholar Joanna Brooks is fantastic. In it, Brooks describes the difficulty of being a heterodox believer in a tradition that puts a premium on orthodoxy. Take a listen when you get a chance. I think it exemplifies the individual relationship with deity that we all must forge.

A Church within a Church

2011-10-24T10:00:00.000-06:00

So our Sunday School teacher did something fantastic about a year ago. He dared to suggest that the gospel carries with it contradictions. Quite the day for the stake Sunday School president to attend. Our teacher followed this bold statement by saying that there are things within the church with which we neither understand nor agree that can challenge our faith if we're not rooted in the spirit. He mentioned political issues, abortion, and gay rights specifically. I'll give him credit for sheer chutzpah. I certainly wouldn't have dared to say anything of the sort, mostly because I don't like when other people disagree with the obvious rightness of my arguments. In thinking about this incident recently I began to wonder, are we approaching a point where we have a church within a church?

I do not mean that we will have a schismatic event resulting in separate organizations or separate dogmas. Rather, I wonder if the conflict between those who read the scriptures with a literal approach, and those who do not, can co-exist. Is this a sign of maturity in the Church, or is it merely an attempt to divide us by the adversary? Another way to frame this question is this, how much dissent is allowed in Zion?

I think the answer is that there is not only a church within the Church, but that there are multitudes of churches within the Church. This is not a bad thing, nor should it undermine anyone's faith. Every person carries an individual experience to the altar of Christ. Each of these burdens is atoned for uniquely and completely. As such, the atonement is infinitely variable in what it atones for. It only makes sense then that how we approach that atonement is also infinitely variable. I do not intend to say that the priesthood or ordinances are unnecessary, quite the contrary.

I do see us at a cross-roads as a Church regarding how we teach the Gospel. On the one hand, we have Preach my Gospel and all the implications that go therewith. This singular manual turns us from generations of rote learning, indoctrination, and inculcation toward an approach that is individual and Spirit-based. On the other hand, we have our Sunday School and institute manuals that embody a rigid formulaic teaching. Personally, I think that both approaches have their benefits. But if we are truly to achieve our prophesied potential, then we must tend toward the idea that one-size no longer fits all.

On Family Home Evening

2011-08-04T13:31:00.003-06:00

This past Sunday I had the chance to teach a combined Priesthood/Relief Society lesson, along with the other counselor in the bishopric and some ward members we recruited to participate. The topic we decided to pursue came from stake conference in June, when we were asked to put greater emphasis on the messages from General Conference, in particular by making them a central part of Family Home Evening. Our goal then was to share best practices for FHE, with examples representing single adults, young married couples, parents of small children, and parents of teenagers.

We began by reading from Handbook 2: "Latter-day prophets have counseled parents to hold a weekly family home evening to teach their children the gospel, bear testimony of its truthfulness, and strengthen family unity.Family home evening may include family prayer, gospel instruction, testimony sharing, hymns and Primary songs, and wholesome recreational activities. Family home evening is sacred, private family time under the direction of the parents. Priesthood leaders should not give directions as to what families should do during this time."

I then shared my recent experience with FHE for one; Summer and the kids were out of town for two consecutive Mondays, and both times I decided to hold FHE by myself. I chose a General Conference address, listening to the audio while reading along in the Ensign and looking up scriptures referenced by the speaker. In both cases I had a great experience, and from that I learned two things:

First, we are blessed when we hold FHE, regardless of the circumstances. It's not the number of people involved or the elaborateness of the event; it's the act of doing it that matters. And secondly, the words of living prophets will always inspire you if you're listening carefully. The first week I listened to Elder Perry's talk, and the second week it was Elder Holland's. Both touched on different things I needed to hear and specific things I need to do differently in my life.

I then shared with the ward members some thoughts from Elder Holland's address, defining General Conference and explaining what we can get from it. I bore testimony of the great blessing it is to be led by prophets, and how a continual and thorough study of their words can bless our lives.

After I sat down, we heard from our four participants, whose messages covered the important facets of consistency, simplicity, flexibility, and adaptability. The message was pretty basic: try your hardest, hold FHE weekly, involve your children at their level, and adapt to the circumstances of your family. And I think everyone heard something they needed to hear.

D&C 59

2011-07-23T16:43:00.002-06:00

Recently, I was reading the April 2011 General Conference address by L Tom Perry, in which he discusses the importance of Sunday worship and partaking of the sacrament, in his talk, Elder Perry refers to D&C 59, so I spent some time in that section this morning and found some interesting ideas and themes about the sabbath and God's commandments.

First is the audience for this section is very clearly the members of the Church (as opposed to other sections directed to the world as a whole): “blessed are they whose feet stand upon the land of Zion, who have obeyed my gospel” (verse 3). And immediately they are given the promise that they shall receive “the good things of the earth.” The tone for the beginning of the section is a positive one of encouragement for righteous living.

These blessings are continued in verse 4, with a very peculiar promise: “And they shall also be crowned with blessings from above, yea, and with commandments not a few.” The idea of commandments being a blessing is rather contrary to the typical view of commandments as a list of verboten acts, the “thou shalt not”-type commandments. But clearly the Lord is recasting the idea of what a commandment is—a means whereby His children can receive the eternal blessings He has in store for them.

Starting in verse 5 we get some of the specific commandments being emphasized. First, love God with all your being. Next, love your fellow men, which includes not harming them through theft, adultery, murder, or “anything like unto it.” It is this last phrase, which has been interpreted in some very fundamentalist ways that interests me here. Obviously, things like stealing include lying, cheating, and committing fraud, areas where we can easily justify ourselves if we let self-interest win out over our love for others.

But I see in the idea of things like adultery and murder a clear injunction about the kinds of entertainment we seek. Pornography is the easy one here, as adultery is made virtual through the vicarious participation in sexuality. But even more benign depictions of sex—even things that might have been permissible a generation ago (I'm thinking specifically of the innuendo of sitcoms I watched regularly as a teenager)—place us in a position of fantasizing, objectifying, and escaping the realities of life and our relationships with other people.

I see a lot of my students whose ability to interact with other people in positive and meaningful ways has been stunted by warped and selfish portrayals of human sexuality. The men objectify the women, and the women strive to find self-worth through physical appearance alone. It can result in a very shallow existence.

The same is true of violence, especially in gaming situations where the first-person player has to fight off enemies. Even if it doesn't lead to real-world violence, it makes us insensitive to real human suffering, making war more palatable and violence in our own relationships more common.

The next two commandments we receive have to do with acknowledging the Lord's hand in our lives. In verse 7 we are commanded to thank the Lord in all things, and in verse 8 to sacrifice, the sacrifice we are asked to make being humility. Knowing from whence come the good things in our lives leads us then to the humility needed to become more worthy of those blessings.

And finally, as we come to love and serve God and other people and humble ourselves in gratitude, we are to keep ourselves clean by partaking of the sacrament. A clear continuation of the command to be humble, sabbath worship requires us to recognize that however good we may be, we will inevitably fall into selfishness and sinfulness if we do not constantly renew our connection with God through the sacrament.

I find this pattern to be both inspiring and challenging. I know I can do this because I can start where I am and work on the next step. But I also know that I cannot afford to stagnate, to backslide, to let up. And if I find that more is asked of me, then I know that I'm at least moving in the right direction and receiving the blessing of commandments not a few.”

Alma 58

2011-06-23T17:02:00.002-06:00

Last Sunday we sang "When Faith Endures" in sacrament meeting, and while the hymn itself didn't resonate much (I think it's kind of a mediocre hymn, to be honest), but in scanning over the scriptures referenced at the bottom of the page, Icam across two verses that have, over the past few days, come to mean a lot to me.

In Alma 58:10-11, we read of how the people of Nephi responded to a serious threat form their enemies: "we did pour out our souls in prayer to God, that he would strengthen us and deliver us."

We then learn what happened because of their faith: "the Lord our God did visit us with assurances that he would deliver us; yea, insomuch that he did speak peace to our souls, and did grant unto us great faith, and did cause us that we should hope for our deliverance in him."

I'm impressed here with two things. First, the response to difficult experiences was based on hope, not despair. The people had learned to trust in God, and so they turned to Him.

And secondly, their hope came before their deliverance. their prayers were not answered with an immediate and miraculous event, but with the gift of increased faith.

As is often the case in our lives, the best response to challenges is to increase our faith, but that increased faith does not guarantee the end of the trial. but if our faith is sincere, we can find greater hope and assurance.

On Affliction

2011-06-02T08:44:00.000-06:00

This past Sunday we had two speakers who focused on talks from this past General Conference that focused on the role of affliction and chastening in our lives. Both talks forced my thoughts to the story of Alma and his people in bondage after their conversion and the establishment of the church in the wilderness.

This account has always impressed me, in part because it is the most powerful realization of the promise given in 1 Nephi 1:20. Here we have a people chosen by their faith and ultimately delivered by God's mercy.

But today I was struck by the pattern in verse 14-16. First, the people are told that they will be strengthened, and why this is happening--so that they will know that God is there for them in the midst of their afflictions.

The promise is then fulfilled in verse 15, as the burdens are made light and the people are made strong. In all of this they demonstrate their faith and patience, which is precisely the thing that makes us able to bear our burdens. The trials are not removed immediately, but we grow and can handle them more capably.

And then we find the fulfillment of the promise as the Lord delivers the people. As is repeated 120 years later, in 3 Nephi 1:13, the Lord tells the prophet to be of good cheer, that their patience and faith are rewarded and they are freed from their bondage.

The same process works for each of us, as we are in bondage to any number of weaknesses, addictions, sins, and fears. To be delivered, we must be patient, humble, and faithful, and in all of this we find strength, comfort, and ultimate freedom through the atonement of Christ.

Elder Oaks, U2, and D&C 4

2011-05-10T12:13:00.001-06:00

I appreciated Elder Oaks' talk in this past conference ("Desire"), not least of all because I like old-school U2, and I had that song running through my mind from the moment--about 15 seconds into the talk--when he announced the topic of his remarks.

(As a side note, Elder Oaks is a funny man. He seems so formal in General Conference, but when he visited our stake a few years ago, he was making jokes and having a grand old time. It was kind of surreal, to be honest.)

Back to my topic. The talk was good, and the idea that our challenge in life is to align our desires with God's to train ourselves to want what is truly important and significant impressed me greatly.

Yesterday I noticed something interesting during High Priest group meeting. We were discussing missionary work, and as part of the lesson, we looked closely at D&C 4. One of the things that was emphasized was verse 3: "If ye have desires to serve God, ye are called to the work."

It's not our ability or talent that qualify us to serve; it's our desire. And, to paraphrase Neal Maxwell, once we prove our willingness to serve, showing the depth of our desire, we are magnified to become what God wants of us. We grow to meet the demands of the thing we desire to do.

In relationship to Elder Oaks' talk then, I am beginning to see how if we want to serve God, He lets us because He knows that this will allow us to overcome our natural desires, learn to sacrifice, and, in time, desire what is best for ourselves and others.

Bonus reading--Alma 30:9

D&C 58

2011-05-06T18:22:00.000-06:00

Recently I have been thinking a lot about the idea of obedience. Those of you who know me well will not be surprised to hear that this has never been one of my strong points. My tendency to be rebellious and independent has historically counteracted my efforts to obey with exactness. But over the past few weeks this idea has been on my mind a lot.

I've noticed it the last few times I've been to the temple; this may be the area I am in the most need to improve. And now I am finding this theme in my scripture study.

In reading D&C 58, I was struck by not just the theme of obedience, but the context. The main thrust here comes in verse 6: "For this cause I have sent you--that you might be obedient, and that your hearts might be prepared to bear testimony of the things which are to come."

The context then comes in to plays in examining the verses leading up to this one. Here, then, are some thoughts from throughout these opening verses.

1) Here the Lord tells us to "learn of me what I will concerning you," to be open to being taught.

2) The first of several promises: "Blessed is he that keepeth my commandments." This promise is explained in more detailed later on. This is also where we find the first of several references to being tried and tested.

3) Building on both of these ideas, the Lord refers here to "the glory which shall follow after much tribulation." As an aside, I have also been focusing on this idea a lot recently, and the term "much tribultion" stands out to me. My life has been pretty smooth, and recent trials have opened my eyes to the reality that God will test us, often in our weakest areas. Knowing that there will be a lot of this kind of thing is pretty sobering.

4) Continuing with the theme, and getting more specific in terms of the blessings, here the Lord tells us that "after much tribulation come the blessings." One of the most powerful and profound statements in scripture.

5) "Remember this...that you may...receive that which is to follow." As it is so easy to forget what God has promised--especially when we find ourselves in the midst of the trial--we need to remember--remember to pray fervently, remember to trust in those promises, remember to be obedient to the commandments associated with the blessings we seek.

More Moroni 10

2011-05-04T14:34:00.001-06:00

After posting my thoughts on Moroni chapter 10 the other day--and in particular, reading Stew's comment about verse 32—I would like today to delve a bit deeper into the end of the chapter, starting with verse 30 and Moroni's final exhortation: "come unto Christ."

This isn't actually the entire statement, as, grammatically speaking, what we have here is a compound predicate, stretching into verse 31: "come unto Christ, and lay hold upon every good gift, and touch not the evil gift...and awake, and arise from the dust...and put on thy beautiful garments...and strengthen thy stakes, and enlarge thy borders forever."

This command comes with a wonderful promise, that if we do this, "the covenants of the Eternal Father, which he hath made...may be fulfilled." I see in all of this echos of the covenants of the temple, with the emphasis on the covenants God has made with His children throughout history, the need to shun evil and cling to virtue, and the overarching theme of coming to the Lord.

This same pattern recurs in verses 32-33: "come unto Christ, and be perfected in him, and deny yourselves of all ungodliness...and love God with all your might, mind, and strength...that by his grace ye may be perfect in Christ...[and] then are ye sanctified..that ye become holy."

We often speak of Moroni 10:3-5 as the promise of the Book of Mormon, but, if you ask me, this is the real promise, that through the grace of Christ and His atonement, we can become better, ultimately becoming as our Savior is.

Moroni 10 Reexamined

2011-05-01T22:44:00.003-06:00

I've blogged before about chapter 10 of Moroni--and, I've spoken about it in sacrament meeting and put it to the test a dozen times. I feel very strongly about the closing chapter of the Book of Mormon. But this past week I decided to do something new; I decided to trace out some themes I had been thinking about. Here's part of what I have found.

First, I noticed that Moroni seems to have gotten hooked on the word "exhort," because he uses it seven times in this chapter, in verses 3, 4, 8, 18, 19, 27, and 30. And I am drawn to the verb that follows each instance of this term, the things Moroni is asking us to do. They are remember (four times), ask, deny not, and come unto Christ.

As I look more closely, I see a pattern here. The first two references to being exhorted to do something deal with the past--remembering what God has done for His children throughout history (verse 3), and asking if the account of the descendants of Lehi found in the Book of Mormon is not true( verse 4). These injunctions deal with understanding and appreciating the ways in which God has interacted with people in the past, which provides a basis for our faith.

The next two exhortations deal with understanding that this same pattern of divine intervention in our lives operates today. In verse 8 we are commanded to recognize the operation of the gifts of God in our lives, followed by a list of those gifts. Then, in verse 18, we are taught the source of these gifts.

From this point we are ready to look to the future, which is what verses 19 and 27 do, as we project this pattern of God's involvement in the lives of men and women in all ages into the future, looking forward ultimately to the moment when we will be called on to account for our acceptance or rejection of Moroni's testimony.

This future tense culminates in verse 30, where we are invited to apply this personally and individually come unto Christ. I'd like to go into more depth on this part of the chapter later, but for now I am impressed with and inspired by how Moroni is teaching us here and what he is telling us about the Lord's involvement in our lives.

Enos 1:18

2011-04-25T21:01:00.003-06:00

I decided to read the book of Enos this morning, but I only got to verse 12, where I lingered a while:

"And it came to pass that after I had prayed and labored with all diligence, the Lord said unto me: I will grant unto thee according to thy desires, because of thy faith."

This reminded of the address Elder Oaks gave at the most recent General Conference, as well as the thesis statement of the Book of Mormon. But there are several key components to this verse. The combination of prayer and work strikes me as being crucial. Likewise, the blending of desire and faith marks an important synergy. We have to want something, have faith in God's promises, and then act on that desire.

General Conference Notes

2011-04-04T11:35:00.002-06:00

I probably say this every six months, but I really enjoyed and benefited from this General Conference. We're doing a lot of praying for very specific blessings these days, and it seemed that many of the messages applied very directly to our family and what we need to do as we seek for these things.

It was also a good conference in terms of our engagement. We went to a nearby chapel for one session each day, and we listened to the other general sessions online. And I found myself taking notes, something I haven't done with General Conference in a long time. It was very helpful in terms of focusing on specific things to do and study.

And in that spirit I wanted to share the typed version of my notes. In transferring my handwriting to the computer I left out some things that seemed unnecessary or redundant, and I added a few things that seemed to stand out after the fact. But most of these notes reflect what I was thinking and writing throughout the different sessions of conference.

Pioneer Trek

2011-02-14T07:40:00.002-07:00

Yesterday I had the chance to speak in sacrament meeting and introduce the stake pioneer trek to the ward. I feel that my thoughts were a bit unorganized, so I thought it would be worthwhile to try to express them again here in writing.

My main idea is that there are four defining actions of pioneers both historical and contemporary, and that these four actions align with the purpose of the trek. these are conversion, sacrifice, consecration, and gathering.

As the first principle of the gospel is faith, it is here, by hearing and acting on the word of God, that the process begins. As we give place in our hearts for the gospel and find that it bears fruit, we gain a testimony. And as we act on that testimony, entering into a covenant, we begin the process of conversion.

This conversion requires sacrifices, whether through obvious things like crossing the plains or quitting a habit that violates the Word of Wisdom, or through smaller things like attending three hours of church every week or choosing to not watch certain movies or listen to certain songs. We give up some things to continue and deepen our conversion, and through sacrifice we are brought closer to God.

As we find ourselves coming to know the Lord, we desire to be more like Him, consecrating our lives to Him. For Latter-day Saints, an important part of this process is the building of and worship in holy temples. The temple ordinances bestow on us God's greatest blessings and a sense of our potential.

And by learning who we are as God's children and who we may become as His heirs, we desire to share that message. Early Saints would leave their homes and travel to distant and often unfriendly places to preach the gospel. Today we send our young men--barely out of high school--across the globe as official representatives of the Church, to share what they know to be true. In so doing, they gather Israel into wards and stakes.

The trek then is meant to replicate this process for our youth, to help them become more fully converted to the gospel, to give them the opportunity to sacrifice and find joy in that sacrifice, to consecrate themselves and thereby prepare for the blessings of the temple, and to gather together in preparation for full-time missionary work.

Humility and Other Stuff

2011-02-07T20:27:00.001-07:00

I've blogged before about what I consider to be the main theme of the Book of Mormon, and it seems that every few pages there is something that hearkens back to the theme of deliverance as a result of faith. Two such passages caught my attention today.

The first came as I was looking over Alma 5, that opus of a chapter in which we learn of the conditions of salvation and conversion. In verses 10-13 Alma explains that the people who were baptized after hearing his father's preaching embodied this process, that their faith led to a change of heart, from which came humility. And due to this humility they were delivered. It's a tidy encapsulation of the process by which we can be freed of that which holds us in bondage.

A second reference came from our family scripture reading tonight. We were finishing Mosiah, and the discussion of installing judges to govern the people of Nephi. Here, in reference to the people under King Noah, Mosiah explains that they had fallen into iniquity and ultimately captivity.

Then in Mosiah 29:20 we read these words: "He did deliver them because they did humble themselves before him; and because they cried mightily unto him he did deliver them out of bondage; and thus doth the Lord work with his power in all cases among the children of men, extending the arm of mercy towards them that put their trust in him."

Again we find the same steps--faith leads to repentance, which leads to humility and then deliverance. I had not seen this third step before, and I am intrigued by the role humility plays in this process. The broken heart must preceed the freedom, the sorrow must anticipate the joy, much like Alma says to his sons later in his ministry, in speaking of his own deliverance from a life of rebelliousness and sin.

Thoughts on Reactivation and Baptism

2011-01-29T13:11:00.003-07:00

Roy recently wrote a great blog post about reactivation. I intended this to be a comment on that post but realized how asinine it was to write such a long comment when it could be a post in and of itself. So here we go.

I wonder, and I've expressed this before, whether or not the people the missionaries baptized into the church are people who can stay active. We're as a rule a highly articulate and educated church. We have our own jargon, derived from traditional Christianity, but with very unique meanings. We place a high value on academic achievement. Our leaders tend to be highly successful in their fields.

This does not describe--I'm speaking in general terms here--the type of people that the missionaries have access to. Now that's not to say that missionaries don't baptize people who become stalwarts in the faith. They do we've all seen it. But of their many baptisms what percent stays active? I think church wide our activity rate is somewhere in the 30%-50% range. I don't think this is all because of disaffection with dogma, I think a lot of inactivity starts with a failure to find a niche in a ward or branch and subsequent failure to learn our liturgical language.

This is why I see reactivation and missionary work as a highly cultural part of our church existence. With new converts we need to befriend them and acculturate them. We cannot simply assign a home teacher and call it a day. Conversion requires new members to become fluent in a new language and to learn a new standard of expectations.

Now the language part is hard for many Mormons because by and large we are not bilingual. I mean to say we don't speak Catholic, Muslim, or Evangelical very well. We struggle to realize that "sacrament" to us is "communion" to others and their "sacraments" are our "ordinances". We forget that the term Grace as it is used in much of the Christian world is what we think of as mercy (rough translation, there are nuances that don't come through). Perhaps most important in the conversion and conversation with new members (and non-members) is that what we mean by "works" is really nothing more than the idea that the power of the Grace of Christ changes the hearts of men to do good continually.

Without starting this process of linguistic acculturation at the beginning of a conversion we are fighting an uphill battle when we reactivate.

I believe that this is why Prez. Hinckley was so adamant about not only having a calling for new converts, but also teaching them the gospel and befriending them. Without friendship and the ability to openly dialogue about doctrine, those we baptize are at a disadvantage at "becoming Mormon" and all of the cultural baggage that this entails.

Additionally without the ability to actually discuss the gospel beyond the superficial "seminary" analysis of Sunday School, I think we fail to realize the potential of living in a community of Christ. The insights that can be gleaned through dialoguing with others and admitting to them that there are aspects of the gospel you a. struggle to understand or b. have a hard time believing, can be tremendously edifying and uplifting. If we undertake to start this process with every convert and reach out to our friends in a similar manner we can as a people fulfill the promise of the School of the Prophets and "all be edified together."

~Stew

Thoughts in the Temple Part 1

2011-01-24T13:34:00.005-07:00

By moving to Buffalo, C and I now live closer to a temple than we have in years. It is a short 1 hour 45 minute jaunt to the temple. Given our schedule this means we only go every four to six weeks but that's still more often than we've been since our years as temple workers. Of course the fact that it is the Palmyra temple we attend only adds to the spirituality (can I quote Animal Farm in connection with temples? I better not.).

In any case while there this past weekend I was reading through 1 Nephi 19 and I came upon a passage that I don't think I've ever fully appreciated before. v. 7

For the things which some men esteem to be of great worth, both to the body and soul, others set at naught and trample under their feet. Yea, even the very God of Israel do men trample under their feet but I would speak in other words--they set him at naught, and hearken not to the voice of his counsels.

Now this scripture is set in context the prophesies of Zenos and Zenock in relation to the coming of Christ, and so could easily be read as an indictment of those who outwardly reject the Savior. I couldn't help but read it as an indictment of those of us who belong to the Church.

I think each of us have pet subjects that we choose to follow more closely than those things that make us uncomfortable. For me I tend to focus on the temple and its place as the center of our worship. Yet I do this without presenting it as part of my life to my non-Mormon friends, something that would be a great missionary tool. I tend to accept the words of Joseph and Brigham that we shouldn't follow the prophets blindly without realizing that means that sometimes things I disagree with on a personal level are given to us from the prophet acting as a prophet. The list can go on and on.

It is appropriate that such an insight would come in the temple. For it teaches us that gospel itself is not merely a single part or aspect of doctrine, but that it all ties together in a great whole. To do missionary work is to do genealogy, for none of us exists independent of our kindred dead. To home teach is to do missionary work, for no dead stands in a vacuum. To go to the temple is to perfect ourselves, to preach to tie generations past and yet to come together in the great web of salvation.

In the end the principles of the gospel are like this. No doctrine is independent and to treat some with more deference than others is to set at naught the words of Christ.

Activation Efforts

2011-01-10T09:10:00.002-07:00

As a follow-up to my earlier post about my 2011 personal goals, I wanted to explore the third resolution in more detail. At ward council this week, our Relief Society president referred to section 5.3 in Handbook 2, which discusses activation efforts.

In this section we have a reference to 3 Nephi 18:32, where the Savior commands the people of His church to accept sinners among them, ministering to them with faith that they may accept the truth of the gospel message.

As we work with a huge ward with immense numbers of inactive, estranged, and incompletely converted members, this commands rings true, and it is a powerful final message from the Relief Society president who, shortly after the meeting, was released from her calling of over five years.

But even more powerful than the idea of continuing to minister is the promise. We may be the means of bringing salvation through this faithful persistence. It's true of temple work; perhaps many of those for whom we do proxy work will not accept the gospel, but those who do will love us for acting in their behalf. Children sealed to us may turn from the gospel, but our love can in the end help them find their way back.

As so, as I seek to minister with more power and more love, this verse speaks volumes to me. I must not shrink just because I don't see results. My getting-things-done mentality needs to cede to a longer-term view of conversion. And I need to minister more fully, more completely.

2011

2011-01-03T09:34:00.000-07:00

One of the best parts of having several weeks off around Christmas is that it gives me the chance to reflect on the previous year and set some goals for the new one. With four weeks between semesters, I find I can step back from the minute details of my life and really focus on what I want to do differently. I also get to sleep in a lot, which helps too.

But over the last few years I've done a lousy job of this, and my goals have been kind of prosaic--stuff like "lay sod in the back yard," an admirable goal for 2010 that, unfortunately, didn't come to fruition. And even worse, even if it had, I don't think it would have made a profound improvement in my character or life.

So this year I am making what I hope will be deep goals, things that are rooted in my core values and that have the potential to truly transform what I do as husband, father, Latter-day Saint, and member of my community. Following what was a successful approach as a missionary, each goal is tied to a scriptural phrase as part of the process of making that goal bigger than just a to-do list. And, because blogging something makes it more real for me, here are my three main goals for 2011:

Feast on the words of Christ. My scripture study habits have become soft over time, and I simply need to be more consistent. We've done it with family scripture study; now I need to do it with personal scripture study.

Seek learning by study and by faith. In addition to reading the scriptures daily, I need to broaden and deepen my learning. This applies to my dissertation, my gospel study, and my leisure reading. Across the board, I need to be both more selective and more voracious in finding, consuming, and internalizing valuable ideas.

Minister with power. The best experiences I have had this past year have been in one-on-one settings. Whether with members of the ward, co-workers, my kids, or my wife, opportunities to stop what I'm doing and listen to another person, to share a moment of connection and compassion have made the biggest difference. These moments make my work, my church service, and my life richer and more meaningful. As a hard-core introvert, this is not my natural state, so I need to strive for these kinds of opportunities. Like scripture study, it's too important to leave to chance. Rather, I need to actively create time for these sorts of interactions.

Here then are some specific actions I want to focus on for each of these goals.

Feast on the words of Christ. The real challenge here is to find the right time of day for scripture study. Mornings seem like an obvious time, since I tend to wake up early. But I also tend to have a lot to do early in the morning--grading essays, housework, emailing, etc. The commute to work might be a good time, as might lunch time. Either way will require disciple, which is definitely something I need more of in my life.

Seek learning by study and by faith. The main focus here must be my dissertation. I've had some serious obstacles over the past few years, but I need to stop making excuses and start working more consistently. That means writing every day, meeting with my adviser more often, and really developing an end-game strategy. Simply stated, I need to finish this year.

Minister with power. The thing I admire most about people with whom I serve in the Church is their ability to connect with people on an individual basis and make them feel valuable and loved. This is something I don't do well; my emphasis on getting things done often results in a hurried life devoid of personal connection or the kind of warmth that really makes a difference in people's lives.

Over the next few days I will make some additional observations about each of these goals, getting specific in terms of how I see myself doing these things and how this will improve my life. And maybe even get me out of laying sod.

Standing in Holy Places

2010-12-06T18:07:00.001-07:00

I was reading in the new Church Handbook of Instructions recently, where I came across a discussion of the role of the Church as a refuge for the Saints. In this passage was referenced a verse from section 101 of the Doctrine & Covenants--verse 22, in which we are commanded to "stand in holy places." In thinking about this idea and reading other references to it, I have come up with some thoughts that I find powerful.

But first, I would like to run through some of the verses in this section. The context of the section is important here, as the persecutions of the Missouri period were intensifying, and the sufferings of the members of the Church were taking their toll on the Saints. So the opening verses, with their discussion of affliction and chastening, are firmly rooted in the specific moment when the revelation was given.

This is followed by the promise given in verses 13-15--the scattered are gathered in, the sorrowful are comforted, the dead are raised up and exalted. These three promises are both poignant and profound, and point to all the ways in which the Atonement saves us, from our sins and wandering from God, from our sufferings, and from death itself.

The key then to receiving these blessings is to do two things: first, to "be still and know...God," and second, to "gather together, and stand in holy places." The first commandment focuses on an internal attitude whereby we create moments of peace and reflection to listen to the voice of the Spirit and acknowledge God's place in our lives.

As we do this, we then act on those blessings, and standing in holy places is a powerful way to think about this. We don't sit in holy places; we stand. We act. We claim our place among the Saints. And in so doing, we not only go to holy places like our meetinghouses and the temple, but we also create holy places in our homes and lives.

It is this trio of holy places--home, church, temple--that seems to be at the core of the new handbook. Emphasizing the central role of families, we as a Church have a responsibility to help individuals create patterns of righteousness in each home.

Church then becomes not the purpose of the gospel, but an auxiliary to the home. Classes, lessons, meetings, and activities all serve to strengthen the relationships of husbands and wives, parents and children.

Worshiping together and teaching by the Spirit leads us to the temple, where our families are sealed and the blessings of eternity become real.

In some respects, I would go farther, saying that the purpose of attending ward meetings is to be worthy to attend the temple, and worshiping in the temple allows us to develop the kinds of family bonds needed to make our homes holy places.

I like that this is the direction we are going as a people, away from the structures of being a church and closer to the ultimate goal of being families that are sealed through the covenants and that strive to keep those covenants.

1 Nephi 3

2010-11-03T13:42:00.001-06:00

First Nephi chapter 3 is famous for Nephi's declaration of faith (verse 7) and his courage in calling his older brothers to repentance and action (verses 15-20), but I find a few other verses of note in this chapter. In particular, Laban's response to the requests of first Laman and then the entire band of Lehi's sons.

In verse 13 Laban accuses Laman of seeking to rob him and take the plates, but in verse 25 it is Laban whose greed leads him to attempt to kill Nephi and his brothers. This may be the most pointed example of hypocrisy in the scriptures.

And it points to how we often project our own sins on those around us. When we are greedy, we see everyone as a potential theif. When we lie, we can't trust others. When we are easy to anger, we expect similar behavior from others and become defensive and closed off.

The key then, it would appear, is to be humble and aware of our personal weaknesses, to not assume ourselves above any kind of sin and therefore vigilant about staying on the path, but forgiving of others' weaknesses.

Not That Book of Revelation...

2010-11-02T11:49:00.000-06:00

For the past few weeks I have had the nagging feeling that I need to do a better job with my scripture study, which has become too casual and too unfocused. So recently I decided to begin reading the Book of Mormon from the beginning, doing a power read to finish by the end of the year. By way of confession, I have to admit that it has been too long since I have read the Book of Mormon cover-to-cover, so it's clearly time to repent and get going.

And, knowing that I do my bet work when I feel the impulse to make it public, I have decided to blog some thoughts on my reading—not necessarily every day, but pretty frequently. So, here goes.

Clearly, the Book of Mormon is a book of and about revelation. A large part of the purpose of the book, as stated on the title page, is to remind God's people that ancient covenants are in effect, that things revealed in the past are alive today, and that God will continue to speak to people in our day.

But even more than the coming forth of the ancient record, the first moments of the record itself rely on revelation. By the second page of his record—a scant six verses into things—Nephi tells us about a vision his father had. And it's here that all the trouble begins; everything the follows is a result of Lehi's prayer and God's answer to it.

From here, we continue with the vision f the tree of life, King Benjamin's inspired address to his people, Abinadi's preaching and the conversion of Alma, the subsequent visionary experience and conversion of Alma the younger, the conversion of Lamoni and his people, the Holy Ghost descending on the Lamanites after Nephi and Lehi preached to them in prison, Nephi's discovery of the murder of the chief judge, and the great events of the Savior's visit to the Nephites. Each of these powerful events relies on the opening of the heavens and man receiving revealed truth from God.

And so too does the impact of the Book of Mormon function, as outlined in Moroni's promise. The confirmation of what we read through the Holy Ghost makes personal for us what was personal for each of the prophets whose testimonies fill these pages. And, as with the restoration of the gospel in modern times, it all starts with a prayer and a vision.

General Conference Reflections, Part 5

2010-10-21T08:38:00.002-06:00

I've fallen behind on my General Conference reactions, so it's time to finish this project and move on to something else. I'm working on some thoughts relative to our recent stake priesthood meeting, as well as some ideas I have been mulling over regarding the idea of ministering. So let's hop to this discussion.

The Sunday afternoon session of conference was the hardest to get in to. We were all kind of tired, either physically or emotionally; the kids had sat through six hours of conference addresses over two days, and two more hours was a bit much. We were listening to the online streaming, and the connection cut out a few times during the session. And the work week was looming large, and reality was going to set in soon. All of this together made paying attention a bit difficult.

But I knew were in for some good stuff. President Monson was due to give his closing remarks, and we still hadn't heard from a few members of the Quorum of the Twelve, including one of my favorite conference speakers, Elder Bednar.

I've been a big fan of Elder Bednar since we has called to the Twelve. He's smart and a bit nerdy, and I like how he was called to this position without having been a General Authority previously. And one of his first conference talks focused on what I have called the thesis statement of the Book of Mormon, and I like to think he got the idea from me somehow.

His address at this recent conference was textbook Bednar--doctrinally-solid, a bit dry in delivery, but immensely thought-provoking. And with a decent body of his talks to compare this to, it's possible to see some interesting and important themes that seem to define his teachings.

One of those themes has to be the importance of the Holy Ghost in developing a testimony and learning the things of God. I am convinced that this is among the most important doctrines for our time, as the ever-growing church requires that each member develop a deep and lasting testimony, one that is independent of the individuals who, as missionaries, teachers, or leaders, help with the process of conversion. The simple fact is that at some point these individuals will be released, will move, or will let you down, and you will then need to go it (more or less) alone.

In a hierarchy such as the church, it's easy to overlook this need for individual testimony. Since we have priesthood leaders, we sometimes think we can rely on that inspired leadership. But we can't always. In fact, our attitude ought to be the exact opposite; we should be aiming to develop our own spiritual capacities so that we can serve as that bulwark for others.

And this is where Elder Bednar's discussion of the Holy Ghost becomes so vital to us. Understanding that each of us can and must receive the spirit into our lives, first through the ordinances and covenants for which the church and its priesthood authority are so crucial, and then through ongoing, personal spiritual development gives us a clear sense of our role in personal conversion. In order to accomplish my life's purpose, I must make and then keep sacred covenants, and keeping those covenants requires me to constantly strive to listen to the spirit.

General Conference Reflections, Part 4

2010-10-11T09:52:00.001-06:00

The Sunday morning session, like the Saturday afternoon, was a bit hard to follow along with, but I enjoyed the talks by Elder Oaks and President Monson. Elder Oaks is an iteresting fellow. When he visited our stake a few years ago, he was exceptionally jovial and funny, but he always comes across so serious in General Conference.

Similarly, his addresses are hard to pin down. They're usually intelligent and well-organized, but rarely inspiring or life-altering. Yet they age so well. A year later an idea from one of his addresses will stick to you and stick out. It's definitely a triumph of substance over style.

That's how I feel about his thoughts at this conference. The two lines of revelation--the personal and the priesthood--make for a great concept, and understanding the importance of and subtle distinction between the two is important. And, as the church grows and it becomes ever more important for every family to teach the gospel more fully in the home, this tension between the need for standardization and the importance of individual revelation will become ever more pronounced.

General Conference Reflections, Part 3

2010-10-07T08:34:00.001-06:00

The Priesthood session of conference was somewhat bittersweet. The messages were wonderful, and I was especially happy to see so many priesthood holders from our ward at the chapel where we watched the session (10 or so of us went out for ice cream afterwards, which was also pleasant).

But it was also a bit sad. I had been successful in getting two tickets to see this session in the Conference Center, and we had hoped to go up Salt Lake so my younger brother and I could go to the session together. The fact that we didn't go was a disappointment, and several times during the session I felt like I had failed by not being there.

The Priesthood session also makes me think about the future. In three years my oldest son will be a 12-year-old deacon, and three years after that I will have two Aaronic Priesthood-aged sons. Nine years from now our youngest will be a deacon, and each of those years should see me and my sons at the Conference Center for that session of conference.

This Priesthood session included several messages that impressed me, but none more so than that by Patrick Kearon of the Seventy, who weaved several personal experiences that highlighted his message that “complete healing and peace can be found at the feet of the Savior,” and that to achieve that we must overcome our tendency to laziness and rebelliousness.

I found in this message something that I have seen in my own life. My youthful inclination toward these two sins—which still rear their heads in my life today—limited my ability to feel the spirit. Humility and diligence, the opposites of the laziness and rebelliousness spoken of by Elder Kearon, are the things that bless my life, the attributes I wish to instill in my sons as they prepare to hold the priesthood, serve missions, and become husbands and fathers themselves. And these attributes are the things that will ultimately make me the person I ought to become.

General Conference Reflections, Part 2

2010-10-06T15:17:00.000-06:00

The Saturday afternoon session was a bit more difficult to follow: I was tired, the kids antsy, and the talks harder to get in to. But, as happened last April, Elder Anderson gave a great and touching address. The mighty change of heart of which he spoke resonated with what I have been thinking regarding conversion.

The idea that we can--and must--persevere, despite the tendency to be offended and to be ashamed, to shrink from the joyfulness we have felt at various times in our lives, gives me a sense of not only how I can hang on in difficult times, but also of how we can reach out to those who have lost the way.

Our ward is made of over 1000 members, and since we average about 250 in attendance every Sunday, we have over 750 less-active, inactive, and estranged members. Our missionary work must focus primarily on finding those who are lost, and our conversion must begin with those who at some time or another felt the Holy Ghost.

I think a careful and thorough rereading of Alma chapter 5 is in order...

General Conference Reflections, Part 1

2010-10-05T10:34:00.000-06:00

Every six months or so I start to feel a sense of lethargy and discontent, and it's only when I remember that General Conference is a few weeks away that I realize how much I benefit from the regularity of this part of my religion, this semiannual opportunity to recharge my spirituality. So it is that as September came to a close I felt anxious and ready for something, and over the past week I have been looking forward to this conference.

My relationship with General Conference has changed a lot since I was a teenager and I would go the Priesthood session broadcast with Dad on Saturday and not much else. We didn't get any at-home broadcasts of conference, and I think we saw the first weekend each in April and October as a mini-vacation.

At BYU I came to appreciate conference, and I was able to attend few session in the Tabernacle during my freshman year. On my mission conference was a belated event (most of my time in Italy was spent far from a stake center with the broadcast, so we would watch a video tape a few weeks later). But on those occasions when I did get to go to the broadcast, it was a pilgrimage, a chance to sacrifice to hear from prophets.

My adult life has involved a range of experiences: I've gone to the Conference Center a few times, we've watched broadcasts on TV when we lived in Provo, we've gone to a stake center a few times, and we've listened to the streaming online a lot. Recently we've gravitated toward listening online, and even the kids have come to look forward to a lazy weekend together.

This is followed a few days later by the audio files, which I load onto my iPod and burn to CDs for Summer and the kids to listen to in the car and at home. I spend a lot of time for a month or so after conference listening to the messages.

This conference, however, I want to try something new. For each session of conference I intend to write some quick impressions. I'd like to expand on this over the next few weeks with some more detailed blogging on themes and topics that stand out to me.

So, to start, here's what stood out from Saturday morning's session. I was impressed with Elder Christofferson's talk on consecration, an idea that I have to admit has been on my mind recently. Ever since Summer and I have increased our temple attendance, I've felt that life has been smoother. It's not easy, but we seem more capable of facing those challenges with grace and calm.

But I realize the addictive nature of spirituality—the more you get it, the more you need it. My slip-ups now seem like pretty minor stuff compared with the mistakes I made 10 years ago, but they seem to affect me more. I find myself working harder than ever to do more than ever. But—and here's the blessing part of it all—I feel more capable of doing what I need to do.

I don't think I'm that far on the path toward consecration, but I do feel good about the direction my family and I are going, and I see some very real and very powerful blessings in our home and in our lives of late. And that fact gives me great hope as Summer and I strive to live even better, that these small acts will bring blessings to us and our children, and to those we love and serve.

On Conversion

2010-09-28T08:57:00.002-06:00

I have been thinking a lot recently about change; there's a lot afoot at work, my children are growing at an ever-quickening rate, and in our ward we see great promise and great challenge. It's simultaneously exhilarating and frightening, and I find that much of my day is spent examining, pondering, and selling change, to myself and others.

In this context I read the account of what follows King Benjamin's world-changing sermon to his people. After bearing his testimony of the Savior, Benjamin looks out at the people he loves and sees what he could have only hoped for.

Mormon describes the scene thusly: "They had fallen to the earth, for the fear of the Lord had come upon them.

Clearly, humility is a key component of our response to gospel truths. (This reminds me of a great exchange I had with my father some years ago. Me: "Dad, you're one of the humblest people I know." Dad (without missing a beat): "And proud of it.") In order to accept change in our lives, we have to accept that something is less than ideal in how we live our lives.

The people then call out, giving voice to the humility they have manifested: "And they all cried aloud with one voice, saying: O have mercy, and apply the atoning blood of Christ that we may receive forgiveness of our sins, and our hearts may be purified; for we believe in Jesus Christ."

Seen in the context of my earlier discussion of the thesis statement of the Book of Mormon, the fact that the people call first and foremost for mercy through the grace of Christ is important.

The effects of this expression of humility and reliance on the grace of God comes next: "after they had spoken these words the Spirit of the Lord came upon them, and they were filled with joy, having received a remission of their sins, and having peace of conscience, because of the exceeding faith which they had in Jesus Christ."

And as the people are touched by the Spirit and forgiven for their sins, they are converted. They change their very nature, both in this moment and in the days and months and years to come. This is the kind of change that is meaningful, the kind of change that makes a difference in our lives. And as we grapple with change, we find the greatest hope for real change--change that we need in our individual lives, our relationships and families, our wards and neighborhoods and nations--as we accept our weaknesses and rely on something greater than ourselves to be truly, fully converted.

On Spiritual Strength

2010-09-21T08:30:00.000-06:00

On Sunday we had two high councilors visit our ward to speak, and both of their talks we inspiring and helped me better understand the theme for this month, which is "taking the spirit as our guide." I've been thinking of this theme in the context of Nephi's experience going back for the brass plates, but one of our speakers took us in a very different and enlightening direction that I would like to pursue further here.

Working off the parable of the ten virgins, our speaker explored the symbol of the oil as spiritual strength, which he then connected to President Packer's 2010 General Conference address about priesthood power. In this context, spiritual strength becomes analogous with not just the authority, but also the power of the priesthood as exercised in faith.

But for me the most meaningful part of this message was the reference to D&C 45:57, where this parable is explored in greater depth. Here we read that "they that are wise and have received the truth, and have taken the Holy Spirit for their guide, and have not been deceived—verily I say unto you, they shall not be hewn down and cast into the fire, but shall abide the day." Here the wise five "have received the truth and taken the Spirit as their guide," which would mean they have cultivated personal spiritual strength through the exercise of faith in their daily lives.

I think then about this in the context of our ward and this simple fact: we have 1000 members and over 50 active, temple recommend-worthy Melchizedek priesthood holders, three times the numbers required for a ward. Obviously, as our stake president has told us repeatedly, we need to be working to split this ward. Priesthood advancements and reactivation are part of this. But so too is the act of training each husband and father to step up and develop this sort of spiritual strength.

This message then ought to inspire each of us to be ready to serve and lead in ways that we may not be comfortable with. And the day will come (soon, I believe) when we are not just talking about two wards where now there is one, but a stake centered in this part of town, and men who are now leading quorums and teaching classes will be in bishoprics and a stake presidency.

The First in an On-Going Discussion of Faith

2010-09-13T13:02:00.000-06:00

Recently I've been thinking a lot about the idea of faith, and particularly the idea of taking a leap of faith, demonstrating faith regarding an unknown, uncertain, intimidating choice by acting. This line of thought has been influenced by some reading I've done and some events in the ward and my own life, and today some things came together.

The theme for the month in our stake is taking the spirit for our guide, and the idea of being led by the spirit was explained well by this week's speakers. And while they were talking, I began thinking about some scriptures.

The first--kind of an obvious one in this context--is 1 Nephi 4:6-7, as Nephi returns to the city to get the records of his family. Nephi, being young and impetuous (and a bit over-confident), didn't really have a plan. But still he acts, as he explains: "And I was led by the Spirit, not knowing beforehand the things which I should do. Nevertheless I went forth."

Doing some further reading, I found myself in D&C section 38, which holds several pithy bits of LDS belief. But an especially profound idea caught my eye in verse 33, where we read that the Lord's disciples "shall go forth among all nations, and it shall be told them what they shall do; for I have a great work laid up in store, for Israel shall be saved, and I will lead them whithersoever I will, and no power shall stay my hand."

I'm impressed here with several things. First is the idea of the Lord leading us, which echoes what Nephi says and does nicely. The next ting I notice is the idea of being empowered, and, in fact, several other verses in this section refer directly to the command to build a temple and be endowed with power from on high. With that endowment, we are given the great promise that the work we are involved in cannot be thwarted.

Finally, the work that the Lord lays out in this verse is powerful: "Israel shall be saved." There are obviously a number of important interpretations of this idea, from the literal gathering of Israel to the restoration of the keys given to Joseph Smith in the Kirtland temple.

But for me, this promise is all about what we have been asked to focus on as a ward and a stake, to rescue those who have gone astray. I use these two verbs--"save" and "rescue"--interchangeably, and given that we are, as members of the church, a covenant people and part of the House of Israel, then those who have lost sight of the gospel, who are not enduring to the end and keeping those covenants, truly need to be saved.

Seen this way, the promise of this verse is precisely what we need. As we receive power from God in the temple--and by extension through keeping those temple covenants, particularly to sacrifice our time and efforts--we are guided by the spirit. This leads us then to save God's children, both members of the church who have lost faith and hope, and those who have not yet made the saving covenants of the gospel.

Paradigms of Conversion

2010-09-05T22:18:00.004-06:00

Here's a link to a pipedreams presentation on the organs of Utah. This is one of my favorite public radio shows (especially for Sunday) and an interesting topic. Check it out.

It's a source of great pride and humor that as a Church we entrust a good part of our growth to inexperienced young men and women. The perhaps apocryphal quote from J. Golden Kimble is one of my all time favorites as it speaks to a real truth. We send boys and girls into a world about which they know very little and for which they are barely prepared to stand as representatives of the Church. Yet the system works by and large. It does so because of the Holy Ghost and the capacity the Lord grants all his servants to work beyond their natural abilities. We could go into the many miracles that we've all seen but I think I'll leave that to those who are better at writing inspirational posts than I.

I did want to point out something that occurred to me the other night while reading the missionary accounts of the sons of Mosiah. When they first arrived amongst the Lamanites all the brothers but Ammon followed what I think is the common inclination of missionaries. They went to preach to those with whom they thought they should share a common language, that is the Nephite apostates dwelling amongst the Lamanites. Now we all know the story, only one convert from the entire group.

Ammon on the other hand went to a people that were completely devoid of understanding of Nephite religion. From a philosophy of science perspective you would consider this the difference of paradigms. While they could speak of God they would do so using different languages. Despite these differences Ammon converted masses amongst the Lamanites.

This paradigmatic difference is seen even more sharply when you consider King Lamoni's father. The words he uses when he's praying following Aaron's teaching are these "O God, Aaron hath told me that there is a God; and if there is a God, and if thou art God, wilt thou make thyself known unto me." These are not the words of someone who comes from a common tradition but of someone who's religion is totally alien to the one being taught. In modern terms it is analogous to teaching non-Christians or those not religious.

The advantage that I see for the sons of Mosiah, is that by teaching a group completely devoid of understanding of "Nephite faith" they were able to: 1. start from the beginning and lay the whole panorama of salvation out, and 2. avoid the misapprehensions that so often cloud conversion by those coming a different branch of the same paradigm-tree. Pedagogically I don't think this means that we should change our teaching methods but I certainly think it means that we shouldn't prejudge those who would be receptive to gospel truths.

On Temple Covenants

2010-09-02T12:11:00.000-06:00

In a recent entry I referred to D&C 88:121, in which we are commanded to "cease from all [our] light speeches, from all laughter, from all [our] lustful desires, from all [our] pride and light-mindedness, and from all [our] wicked doings." Today I would like to revisit and expand on this idea.

I've spent a lot of time recently thinking about this commandment, especially in conjunction with temple covenants. I was fortunate over my recent break to be able to go to the temple several times, an experience that allowed me to really focus on temple worship and its role in my life.

Chief among my thoughts has been the series of covenants made during the endowment. And I see in them--both their content and the order of the covenants--a pattern for my life. In reviewing how well I keep each of those covenants I am better able to see both how far I have come as a member of the church, and where I need to improve.

For example, I have promised the Lord to live a certain way, to avoid a kind of boisterousness, to be reverent in my behavior toward sacred things. But I don't always do that, and I tend to be casual with regards to my spirituality. That, then, is a covenant that I need to work to keep more fully.

This is helpful to me as I ponder the other covenants I have made, especially to sacrifice. In particular, I feel that I need to make meaningful sacrifices of my time and interests for the good of my wife and children. The most important thing I can do for them, I believe, he most meaningful sacrifice I can make, is to be more virtuous in how I act, to invite the spirit into our home and lives more consistently and powerfully so that they will be aware of how the spirit can and will guide them throughout their lives.

More on Gospel Teaching

2010-08-27T13:21:00.002-06:00

Continuing on with a discussion from earlier in the week, I want to go back to D&C 88, starting with verse 119, where we read the oft-quoted passage, "Organize yourselves; prepare every needful thing; and establish a house, even a house of prayer, a house of fasting, a house of faith, a house of learning, a house of glory, a house of order, a house of God," which can easily be applied to our teaching in the church by replacing the word "house" (which itself can apply to our homes and the temple, among other things) with "class."

Other teachings in the next few verse also have clear applicability to formal teaching settings. Verse 122, for example: "Appoint among yourselves a teacher, and let not all be spokesmen at once; but let one speak at a time and let all listen unto his sayings, that when all have spoken that all may be edified of all, and that every man may have an equal privilege." Sounds like a good piece of class management theory.

Similarly, verse 120 has good advice about focusing the teaching by keeping an objective in mind: "That your incomings may be in the name of the Lord; that your outgoings may be in the name of the Lord; that all your salutations may be in the name of the Lord." By opening and closing with prayer we frame the learning experience with the proper context and purpose.

But less obvious lessons are also found in these verses. For example, in verse 121 we are told to "cease from all your light speeches, from all laughter, from all your lustful desires, from all your pride and light-mindedness, and from all your wicked doings." I will have more on this later, but the importance of establishing a learning environment that is conducive to being taught by the spirit is an important part of good teaching. This can be as simple as how the room is arranged or more profound, like the demeanor you have as a teacher and your relationship with the members of your class.

But I believe the most important thing we can know about gospel teaching comes from verse 123, where we read, "See that ye love one another; cease to be covetous; learn to impart one to another as the gospel requires." Caring for those you teach and knowing them individually is, in my opinion, the most crucial thing a teacher can do. Knowing the personalities and needs of our class members allows us to not just teach a lesson, but to teach a person.

On Mormon Guilt

2010-08-26T18:04:00.003-06:00

Here's another talk. I swear someday I'll write something original.

My wife has some of the best experiences around. In comparison my life and stories are dull and uninteresting. As such I’m appropriating one of her stories for this talk.

Carolyn was at work a couple years ago when two of her co-workers came into her office and as seems to happen often to her, they started discussing something completely non-work related. The two women started discussing their upbringings. One of them was raised Catholic and the other Jewish. As if this was a bad joke the conversation became a debate. Now this was not a doctrinal debate but a debate about which was worse, Catholic or Jewish guilt. As the pair left Carolyn’s office she overheard one of them ask the other “do you think there’s such a thing as Mormon guilt?”

I bring this up because in my conversations with friends who have left the Church this is a recurring theme. They bring up the idea that our meetings are depressing and that they feel like we as a people lay the guilt on a pretty thick. I personally don’t understand this. The expectation is only that we be perfect in dress, job, family, calling, home teaching, meeting attendance, missionary work, the commandments, and genealogy. Also there’s the whole class of “fun things” we can’t do because “we’re Mormon”. That’s not too much to ask right? I certainly have never fallen short of this, ask my home teaching families….well maybe not this month.

In his first talk after being called into the 1^st quorum of the 70, Elder Neal A. Maxwell gave in my mind the quintessential talk on “Mormon Guilt”. He addressed his remarks to “those who carry their own load and more; not to those lulled into false security, but to those buffeted by false insecurity, who, though laboring devotedly in the Kingdom, have recurring feelings of falling forever short[1].”

Who are these falsely insecure? Basically all of us who ever experience that moment of disquiet coming from the buffetings of Satan. Any of us who feel that we not only don’t, but can never match up to the perfection of the ideal Mormon, whoever that is. As Elder Maxwell said: [there are many of us who], “would not chastise a neighbor for his frailties [but] have a field day with our own. Some of us stand before no more harsh a judge than ourselves, a judge who stubbornly refuses to admit much happy evidence and who cares nothing for due process[2].” In another place he said that “many times our perpetual self-condemnation is like setting up a mental video that never stops. Over again, it replays the painful past as we sink lower into despair.”

How can we reconcile this with what the scriptures teach us? Look at 2 Nephi 2:25. “Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.”

This, next to Benjamin’s famous quote on service, is perhaps the most quoted verse in the Book of Mormon. Yet this verse does not guarantee us joy. I think that Lehi was trying to tell us the exact opposite. The language here is conditional. The first clause “Adam fell that men might be” teaches clearly that the existence of Mankind was contingent upon Adam’s fall. We know this very well. The second clause is equally important though. Men are that they might have joy. Might have joy? Why not just guarantee joy or command us to be joyful? Perhaps “Adam fell that men might be; and men are to have a good laugh and always be happy”. The problem is that our joy is contingent upon another condition. What is that? Well I’m not going to tell you yet because I still have more time to fill.

There are circumstances in life where right choices can lead to sadness and heartbreak. Making good choices might, cost us friends, jobs, and for many converting to the gospel even family. There are a plethora of scriptural examples of men and women who though they lived right, still struggled with this part of the human condition. I could list many of them but I want to look at two cases that we don’t usually include in the lens of guilt and sorrow.

In 1 Nephi 8, Lehi famously sees a vision of the tree of life. Now there’s a lot of reason for this being important, not least that the tree of life did play a part in the earliest forms of temple worship. To Lehi, a man now exiled from his home, in a culture that said the true temple was the one in Jerusalem, I imagine this vision would have been a cause of great joy.

In any event we know the story. Lehi is in a waste, calling upon God he beholds a tree who’s “fruit was desirable to make one happy.[3]” He goes up, picks the fruit, eats it, and finding joy in the fruit he calls his family to join him and rejoice in the fruit of the tree. For Lehi the burden of guilt and sorrow lies in his inability to bring his eldest sons to experience the salutatory grace, for that’s really what it is, of the fruit of the tree.

Nephi’s vision is similar but differs in a substantive way. Desiring to know what his father beheld Nephi prayed to “behold the things which [his] father saw[4].” The Spirit came to him in the form of a man and showed him the tree and placed before Nephi in v.10 a choice, “What desirest thou?”

Here is I think a cross-roads in Nephi’s life and a great lesson for all of us (See Grant Hardy’s “Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader's Guide” for a more thorough analysis of this). Nephi could have asked to experience the vision of the tree. To, like his father, partake of the fruit and feel the joy his father felt. Instead Nephi asks, “To know the interpretation thereof.[5]”

At this point in the story, the Spirit leaves Nephi and an angel comes. I’m guessing there’s a great meaning in this, which I don’t fully understand. Nephi sees the tree and learns that it was a “representation of the love of God.[6]” Indeed Nephi sees the meaning of all the parts of his father’s vision. Yet, I believe in some ways this was a burden.

Lehi tasted the fruit of the tree and partook and rejoiced in the redemptive love of his God. Nephi saw in vision that the fruit of the love of God was the atonement of the Son of God. While this is great knowledge and important for us all, He saw the children of Israel, the people that his father had tried to save through preaching, crucify the Son of God.

But the vision didn’t end there, he saw in vision his own descendents destroyed by the descendents of his brothers. He saw all his progeny reject the gospel that he held so dear. While the sadness that must have accompanied this was tempered by the vision of the restoration of the gospel and the building up of the kingdom in the last day, I cannot imagine that the burden was any less great. Indeed he tells us as much in the last chapter of 2 Nephi, where he says that he “prays continually for them by day, and mine eyes water my pillow by night, because of them”.

Both Nephi and Lehi carried a burden, one that many of us carry, the burden of having lost family and friends who at one time rejoiced in the fruit of the gospel. Nephi carried the burden of knowing that despite all his preaching there were countless descendents of his who would never respond to the sweet fruit that his father knew so well, just as we have so many friends who will not respond to the message of the gospel. This is the burden of Mormon Guilt, where despite doing everything we’re supposed to we’ve still somehow failed.

In the end both Lehi and Nephi bore burdens that those of us suffering under the weight of Mormon Guilt would understand. They tried their best and yet fell short of the standard that is human nature to set for oneself. The standard where we expect absolute perfection in everything we do and absolute perfection. We, like Lehi and Nephi, take upon ourselves guilt for things over which we truly cannot control.

Yet despite the sadness that Nephi experienced, he did not entirely despair. Look at the exultant language of 2 Nephi 25:26.

And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we preach of Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins.

Nephi found joy in Christ. This was one of the last lessons his father taught him. Let’s go back to that famous couplet in chapter 2 of 2 Nephi.

25Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.

26 And the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. (2 Nephi 2:25-6)

The Messiah coming is the condition of joy. Only in and through the redemptive power of the atonement can men truly find the joy the Lord intends for us in this creation. Ezra Taft Benson said: “Only the gospel will unite men of all races and nationalities in peace. Only the gospel will bring joy, happiness, and salvation to the human family.” In the end only atonement brings the relief from our shortcomings those self-perceived failures we all have, and will lift away the burden of “Mormon Guilt”.

[1] Neal A. Maxwell, Friday Morning October 1976, LDS General Conference.

[2] Ibid.

[3] 1 Nephi 8:10

[4] 1 Nephi 11:3

[5] 1 Nephi 11:10-11

[6] 1 Nephi 11:25

A Special Musical Post

2010-08-24T17:05:00.001-06:00

In sacrament meeting Sunday we sang as our opening hymn #85, "How Firm a Foundation," which is one of my favorite hymns. But every time we sing this hymn in a meeting I am disappointed that we only sing the first three verses, when, in reality, the best stuff is found in the four additional verses listed on the second page. Today I want to explore these verses a bit.

First, however, I want to look at Isaiah 43:1-2. Here the Lord speaks to his people, saying "Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine. When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee: when thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame kindle upon thee." These words of comfort and hope are echoed then in the words of the hymn.

Let's start with verse 4: "When through the deep waters I call thee to go, the rivers of sorrow shall not thee o'erflow, for I will be with thee, thy troubles to bless, and sanctify to thee thy deepest distress." The imagery of the water, reminiscent of Lehi's dream and the river of filthiness, is powerful. We often feel in this life like we are drowning, over our heads in the things we face.

But there is also a connection to the symbolism of baptism here, an image that comes up again in the next verse of the hymn. Here we read, "When through fiery trials thy pathway shall lie, my grace, all sufficient, shall be thy supply, the flame shall not hurt thee; I only design thy dross to consume and thy gold to refine."

Here the idea of baptism continues with the baptism of fire, which burns away the old self, leaving a renewed one. And the promise again is that of Isaiah, that the flame shall not kindle upon us. We are not drowned by the water, nor consumed by the fire, but renewed by each.

The next verse of the hymn speaks of enduring faithfully to the end: "E'en down to old age, my people shall prove my sov'reign, eternal, unchangeable love; and then, when gray hair shall their temples adorn, like lambs shall they still in my bosom be borne." Few other passages in prose or poetry speak such comfort and peace to me as this promise.

Finally, we come to the last verse: "The soul that on Jesus hath leaned for repose I will not, no cannot, desert to his foes; That soul, though all hell should endeavor to shake, I'll never, no never, no never forsake."

A note on pronouns. This hymn employs the first person frequently to serve as voice for the Savior, with the second person "you" referring to each of us. But I find a shift in this verse, as the "I" becomes faithful disciples and the third person referring to both Deity and one's fellow saints.

I am reminded here of the emphasis we hear at every priesthood meeting to rescue. In my mind, the idea of leaning on the Savior for repose applies to all who have made sacred covenants, and even when the world would crush them with sin, despair, and hopelessness, we are called on to succor, to never abandon.

The line "I will not, no cannot, desert" speaks to me, both as a priesthood leader and as a parent. No matter what those I love may do, my obligation is to serve and, if possible, help save.

On Gospel Teaching

2010-08-22T20:41:00.002-06:00

For the past few weeks I have been thinking a lot about gospel teaching, particularly in the context of class settings at church. I think our ward is in a good place when it comes to our teachers: we have called some excellent teachers over the past year or so, and most organizations are fully staffed and have good teachers in key positions.

It is with this backdrop that I am thinking about the move from emergencies (getting people called and committed to their teaching) to progress (helping good teachers learn from each other). I am especially interested in focusing on how we can teach the gospel more effectively by inviting the spirit to guide us as we prepare lessons and teach in our classes.

To this end, I have been looking over some of the church materials related to improving gospel teaching, including Teaching, No Greater Call and the Teaching Guidebook. Both are solid--if unexciting--resources that highlight the important principles of effective teaching. And from them I have found some valuable ideas for helping each of us become better as teachers.

In reading through these materials, I was taken to D&C section 88, a juggernaut of a section that covers a range of topics and provides us with several key teachings on the subject of teaching the gospel. I begin with verses 77 and 78: "teach one another the doctrine of the kingdom. Teach ye diligently and my grace shall attend you, that you may be instructed more perfectly in theory, in principle, in doctrine, in the law of the gospel, in all things that pertain unto the kingdom of God."

I'm interested here in the adverbs. (And, as long as we're on the topic, aren't adverbs great? It may be because I just read some Bill Bryson--the master of adverbs, but I'm feeling especially fond of adverbs these days.) The first that I notice is "diligently," which is how we ought to approach the calling to teach. We need to prepare diligently so that we can be ready to respond to the needs of our class members, often by ditching what we have prepared when acted on by the spirit to improvise.

The second--and, admittedly, tougher--adverb here is "perfectly," which, in this verse, describes how we are to be instructed. Kind of a tall order, if you ask me. Even on my best days as an educator, when things come together well and I'm firing on all cylinders, I don't think I'd describe my teaching as perfect. I'm always looking to do something better, to improve on that one rough part of the lesson.

But then I think about the footnote to Matthew 5:48, where the Greek origin for "perfect" is noted as meaning "complete, finished, fully developed." So, rather than viewing my teaching according to the standard of being flawless--which it will never be--I should think about completeness. If I have helped my students accomplish a meaningful objective, to understand and commit to live a gospel principle more fully, then I can view that teaching situation as being perfect in some sense.

Another meaningful passage from this section comes a few pages (seriously--this is a long section) later, starting in verse 118: "And as all have not faith, seek ye diligently and teach one another words of wisdom; yea, seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom; seek learning, even by study and also by faith."

Again, we see the adverb "diligently" used here to describe how we are to seek wisdom. But more than that is the source of the wisdom--"the best books." This is the sort of verse used by English majors at BYU to justify why we are reading literature instead of earning an MBA or going to law school, and we'd get kind of smug about how we were adhering to scripture in deconstructing Heart of Darkness or Faulkner's novels.

But, in the context of gospel teaching, the best sources we have to work with are clearly the scriptures. I am a strong believer that the best lessons draw heavily from the scriptures, that reading and analyzing even a few verses is among the most valuable things we can do in our teaching. In addition to focusing on the doctrine and inviting the spirit into the lesson (all admirable goals), this also models for class members the importance of reading, studying, and reflecting on scriptures. This is an especially important element of teaching children and youth.

One final thought in closing, by way of exploring this final point in more depth. Last Monday Evan had the assignment to do the Family Home Evening lesson, so he and I looked over the For the Strength of Youth pamphlet and chose a topic for his lesson. He opted for the topic of family, so we went to 1 Nephi chapter 8, verses 8-12.

As we read through this passage, we discussed how Lehi's first impulse after tasting of the fruit was to share it with his family. Using this as a point of departure, we discussed the symbolism of the tree, which has both roots stretching down and branches extending out, like a family, and how the fruits of a happy family are joy and the love of God. In just a few minutes of reading and discussing, we were able to dig deeply into an important doctrine (eternal families) and explore how the Book of Mormon gives us insight into that doctrine. I then had the chance to bear testimony to my children of the importance of the sealing power that allows our family to continue through the eternities, and how knowing that gives me a greater perspective in dealing with the trials and sorrows of life.

2 Nephi Chapter 11

2010-08-20T13:30:00.001-06:00

I'm finding that most of my personally meaningful insights into the scriptures these days come not from my personal scripture study, but from our family reading of the Book of Mormon. Part of this may be a factor of the time of day; we're reading together in the evening, and the quiet of reflection after the kids are in bed is perhaps better for me that the hecticness of reading on my own while commuting to work and then being thrust into the office and classroom.

Regardless of its cause, I'm enjoying what I see in 2 Nephi. Last Friday night the kids and I read 2 Nephi chapter 11, where Nephi repeats four times a phrase that impressed me: "my soul delighteth." Those three words seem to encapsulate much of what I think is crucial in our spiritual journey, the fact that we can find joy in the reality of the atonement and the promises it brings to each of us and to our families.

The second iteration of this phrase, found in verse 5, is to me the most significant, as the covenants of the Lord are at the core of the gospel, and understanding those covenants is the fundamental element of our conversion and spiritual growth.

In the context of this verse, this idea is especially poignant, as Nephi declares that his soul delights in God's grace, justice, power, and mercy, and "in the great and eternal plan of deliverance from death."

Obviously I am going to highlight this as further support for the thesis statement of the Book of Mormon (note, for example, how Nephi sews mercy and deliverance together once more), but the connection between what Nephi says here and what his younger brother taught a few chapters earlier is also important. Nephi had taught this idea, but he is also learning from Jacob's testimony and building on that.

The message of constantly learning and developing a deeper testimony is meaningful to me, as I find myself learning from my children at the same time that they learn from me and Summer.

2 Nephi chapter 9, Part II

2010-08-16T08:43:00.002-06:00

Continuing on with our discussion of 2 Nephi chapter 9, let us now go to verses 10-13, where Jacob lays out very clearly the purpose and nature of the atonement, an explanation that forms the foundation for later Book of Mormon teachings regarding the atonement. Here Jacob explores the need for and effects of the atonement of Christ.

The first key to these verses is Jacob's distinction between physical and spiritual death, what he refers to as "the death of the body, and also the death of the spirit." This serves as a useful model for what Jacob goes on to teach about the atonement, and I think this is the earliest reference in the Book of Mormon to this important distinction.

But what I find really powerful in this passage is how Jacob's explanation of the atonement mirrors what Nephi says in what I have previously referred to as the thesis statement of the Book of Mormon. Looking back at 1 Nephi 1:20, we see the emphasis on God delivering the chosen because of their faith, the idea that we are promised freedom as we exercise faith in Christ.

This concept is repeated throughout these verses, where we find these words: escape, deliverance, deliver, and captive. Building on Nephi's discussion of his own deliverance from death and the liberation of the children of Israel from Egypt, Jacob here gives us the most important freedom of all--freedom from our own mortality and frailty.

Knowing that the resurrection will repair all the inequities and pains of mortal life gives us the perspective to focus on eternal things. And knowing that we can be forgiven for our sins through the atonement gives us hope enough to overcome the sorrows of our own mistakes.

This dual redemption is crucial to LDS theology, and this multi-layered conceptualization of salvation is, to me at least, the most plain and precious of the truths restored through the Book of Mormon.

2 Nephi 9, Part I

2010-08-11T11:57:00.002-06:00

For the past few days, our family scripture study has had us working our way through 2 Nephi chapter 9, one of the fundamental passages of our theology, and I have been impressed by several points as I have read. In particular, Jacob's treatment of the atonement is both impressive and profound.

But before continuing on to explore Jacob's discussion of the infinite atonement that restores us through the resurrection (and if you think I'm going to connect verses 10 and 11 to 1 Nephi 1:20, well, then you know me pretty well...), I would like to touch on someting I mentioned at the close of sacrament meeting on Sunday.

It comes from verse 5, where Jacob tells his people, "I know that ye know that in the body he shall show himself unto those at Jerusalem, from whence we came." This is a common rhetorical device, akin to the phrase "in fact," which is often used to introduce an opinion rather than a fact. It consists of telling someone they know something they might not actually know, or might not realize they know. It's effective because it shows a high level of respect for your audience, a consideration of how they are on the same plane as you, while simultaneously convincing them unknowingly that your opinion is really a universal fact.

What Jacob accomplishes in this line is to bear his testimony and awaken his listeners to their own testimony. By joining the speaker and the audience, Jacob is able to emphasize the common humanity, the joint inheritance as fallen mankind, and their shared need for the atonement he will go on to explicate.

In this I find a model for what we do as we teach the gospel, whether in a missionary setting, in a church class, or in our own homes. We know the truth of the gospel, and something of that truth dwells in each person's heart. As we remind others of what they know--but may not know they know--we join with them, communing soul to soul.

In so doing, we invite the spirit to join in our testimony. We know something to be true, and by asserting that, we help others recognize (a word that itself comes from Latin roots meaning "to know again") truth and the spiritual manifestation of truth.

On Spiritual Gifts---A Talk

2010-08-10T05:05:00.005-06:00

Here's a talk I gave a couple years ago. I just stumbled on it cleaning the computer and was surprised how insightful I can sometimes be (Carolyn must have wrote it for me):

I. Introduction
Let me start with my mea culpa. I am not a reverent person. I know this takes many of you by surprise. My dulcet tones and softspokenness are legendary. But the reality is that I have the attention span of a squirrel who got into your neighbor’s coffee rinds. I don’t sit still during church or work or home, I’m constantly inattentive (ask my wife) and when I do pay attention I too often am over-analyzing the message being delivered.

My inattentiveness is coupled with a great dislike of anything that makes me uncomfortable. People crying for example, I don’t know how to react to that, I think you should only cry at funerals and if you win a sporting event. Unfortunately sometimes these two great flaws in my personality come together at church where I myself drifting off into the nether world of my imagination only to be brought back to earth by hearing someone tell of a dream, vision, or other spiritual experience.

Devoid of the context of the experience I find myself lost and a bit uncomfortable because I have forgotten the greatest advice the Lord has given us regarding our spiritual experiences. That we should

Remember that that which cometh from above is sacred, and must be spoken with care, and by constraint of the Spirit; and in this there is no condemnation, and ye receive the Spirit through prayer; wherefore, without this there remaineth condemnation. (D&C 63:64)

With the faults in my personality I find I often do not know how to react to stories of great spiritual experiences and of spiritual gifts being received. Worse and I think this is a failing for many of us, I don’t always know how to share my own experiences and so I keep my experiences, and the spiritual gifts the Lord has given me close to my chest.

Yet they are there for each of us who receives the gospel and the redeeming power of the atonement into our life. Said Orson Pratt of the matter:

Whenever the Holy Ghost takes up its residence in a person, it not only cleanses, sanctifies, and purifies him, in proportion as he yields himself to its influence, but also imparts to him some gift, intended for the benefit of himself and others. No one who has been born of the Spirit, and who remains sufficiently faithful, is left destitute of a spiritual gift. (Orson Pratt, Masterful Discourses, 539)

If we were to parse this statement there are layers of insight we could glean, but let’s focus on these words regarding the effect of the Holy Ghost on us “in proportion as he yields himself to its influence…imparts to him some gift…for the benefit of himself and others.”

II. Testimony as Revelation
Now obviously that proportion must begin with faith. Most of us know Alma 32 and the idea of faith as a seed growing within us. I think it’s interesting that the story of King Lamoni’s father shows us that faith starts with a desire, but that’s another talk entirely.

Yet once faith has grown within us, and we have followed the counsel to read the scriptures, and we have knelt in humble prayer, the Lord has promised us that he will confirm the truth unto us by the gift of the Holy Ghost. Millions have done this and the truth has been manifest to them. The way iin which the Lord speaks to them, it is important to note, differs greatly from person to person. Yet how many of us appreciate this almost ineffable experience (though we don’t use that term in the church) for what it really is.

No man can be saved unless and until he receives revelation. Revelation is the rock foundation upon which true religion and personal salvation rest…This revelation is called a testimony of the gospel. But a testimony is only the beginning of revelation. The recipient has just begun to drink at the fountain of revealed truth. He has but opened the door to an immeasurably great storehouse of spiritual knowledge. (Bruce R. McConkie, The Rock of Salvation, October 1969)

That moment of insight when we know the truthfulness of the gospel, the Book of Mormon, and the prophets of God is revelation. It is the first of the spiritual gifts given to men and women everywhere. And as Bruce R. McConkie states, it is but the opening of the door to an immeasurably great storehouse.

Indeed the scriptures are rife with examples of these spiritual gifts. 1 Corinthians 12, Moroni 10, D & C 46, and A of F 7, all contain lists of gifts available to those who are baptized and yield themselves to the influence of the Holy Ghost. What’s included in these lists? Well you all know the biggies: tongues, prophecy, revelations, visions, dreams, healing, mighty miracles, etc. these and many more are given to the Saints as the scripture says

9… for the benefit of those who love me and keep all my commandments, and him that seeketh so to do; that all may be benefited that seek or that ask of me, that ask and not for a sign that they may consume it upon their lusts.
10 And again, verily I say unto you, I would that ye should always remember, and always retain in your minds what those gifts are, that are given unto the church.
11 For all have not every gift given unto them; for there are many gifts, and to every man is given a gift by the Spirit of God.
12 To some is given one, and to some is given another, that all may be profited thereby.

Paul echoed this sentiment in his chapter on Spritual Gifts when he stated:

12 For as the body [meaning the church] is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
14 For the body is not one member, but many.

Each of us has gifts given to us at baptism some enumerated in our patriarchal blessings some that we come to know overtime in our lives. Personally I count my lack of fear in giving talks as one of mine with which the Lord blessed me. But holding onto our gifts without using them for the benefit of others robs us of many blessings. As one commentator put it:

The genius of this system of divine distribution of gifts is that all of us are in a position to be instructed, blessed, and edified by others. None of us can enjoy a fullness of the outpourings of the Spirit in isolation of the body of the Saints. (McConkie, Millet, The Holy Ghost, 54)

III. Accessing the Power of Heaven
Now let’s be frank, sometimes the scriptural accounts of the manifestations of spiritual gifts or even the accounts of Joseph in the early days of the Church seem incredible and outside our reach. LeGrand Richards mentioned this in a talk many years ago.

A statement reached us…a few days ago from one of our educators who…made this statement: “I don’t know whether it would be proper for us to teach our young people to read Leaves from My Journal, by Wilford Woodruff, for fear they might expect similar spiritual experiences, and be disappointed.”

I wonder if there are really very many Latter-day Saints who would be afraid to promise unto the youth of Zion the spiritual gifts and blessings that God, the Eternal Father Himself, has promised.

We cannot offer our young people the Bible as the word of God, or the standard Church works, and believe only a small portion of that which is written therein.

You brethren do not need to be afraid to promise your children or the youth of Zion that the blessings and gifts of the Holy Ghost will be theirs if they will live for them. You do not have to fulfill these promises. God, the Eternal Father, who made them, will fulfill them. (LeGrand Richards, The Promise unto the Children October 1943)

What a spectacular promise and it is all dependent upon us living for them. Like so many other things in the gospel, the gifts of the Spirit depend on the faithfulness of the one receiving. Does this mean simple and exact obedience to the commandments should qualify us for any and all spiritual gifts? I don’t think so. Listen to what Orson Pratt said on the matter.

I have thought the reason why we have not enjoyed these gifts more fully is, because we have not sought for them as diligently as we ought. I speak for one, I have not sought as diligently as I might have done…I have been blessed with some revelations and prophecies, and with dreams of things that have come to pass; but as to seeing things as a seer, and beholding heavenly things in open vision, I have not attained to these things. And who is to blame for this? Not the Lord; not brother Joseph—they are not to blame. And so it is with the promises made to you in your confirmations and endowments, and by the patriarchs, in your patriarchal blessings; we do not live up to our privileges as saints of God and elders of Israel; for though we receive many blessings that are promised to us, we do not receive them in their fullness, because we do not seek for them as diligently and faithfully as we should. (Orson Pratt, A Church of Order, May 1878)

We should seek for these blessings, especially those to which we have already been promised in our temples and our patriarchal blessings. Further as we live the covenants we have made to consecrate ourselves and our talents and gifts to the Church and kingdom we will bring blessings of our spiritual gifts to those who might not have the same. The D&C makes quite clear how important this service and interaction is in the first two gifts it lists in section 46.

13 To some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world.
14 To others it is given to believe on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful.

Without the first the second would be lost in this case.

IV. Culmination of gifts
In consort with one another in the body of the church and in the lives of all the Saints, the gifts of the spirit can and should have a perfecting effect. With them, those that heal can heal, those that can teach the word of knowledge with power can do so, those that are blessed with a listening heart can listen and help bare the burdens of their fellow saints.

Ultimately all gifts of the spirit lead to that day when the veil is burst and our salvation is assured, by revelation and that we shall as Bruce R. McConkie says “have the personage of Jesus Christ to attend us or to appear to us from time to time, and until even he will manifest the Father unto us.”

He continued with this statement:

I know man can commune with his Maker, can petition the throne of grace and receive answers to his prayers because I have done so.

I know man can receive revelations, because I have received them. God has spoken to me, not for the guidance of the Church, not for your benefit, but for mine. The same thing has or can or should happen in the life of every member of his kingdom. (Bruce R. McConkie, The Rock of Salvation, October 1969)

This revelation, beginning with testimony, which he speaks of, should happen to every member of the Church. I know it’s happened to me, and it can happen to all of us. We just need to be more direct. We need to ask not just for nebulous help but specific blessings. We need to recognize the diversity of spiritual gifts that have already been granted us, and we need to follow the example the Savior gave us in referring to the light of the gospel. Like that light, we should not put the light of the gifts which we have been given under a bushel, but use it to illuminate the lives of our fellow saints.

For me, my gifts are not of visions and dreams, but the Lord has blessed me richly with a knowledge of the gospel and has allowed me to cull insights from places that many wouldn’t think to look. But as great as that blessing is in my life, it is the testimony based on revelation that succors me. It is those moments of pure insight brought by the Holy Ghost which leads me (and led me here). And it is the promise of section 93:1 that if I am faithful in all these things, I may see His face and know that He is, which drives me to my ultimate goal of exaltation.

More Old Testament Fun

2010-08-09T09:48:00.002-06:00

This kind of feels like cheating, as the insight comes from our bishop, who shared it with us as the spiritual thought in ward welfare committee meeting yesterday. As some background, the assignment for the spiritual thought actually belonged to an organization that was not represented at the meeting (not naming names...), but Bishop Garrett was enthusiastic to share this with us. I'm glad he did, and I am impressed with the insight gained from these verses.

We read Numbers 20:1-13, which recounts an experience had by Moses and the people of Israel as they wandered in the wilderness. Most of us are familiar with Moses striking the rock, after which water flowed from the rock, and the analogy of the Savior as living water, typified by this experience, is strong in our theology, explored as it is by Nephi.

But I don't know if I had ever read this account of the episode, which is also retold earlier. Several things stood out to me as we read the verses, included the people's lamentation in verse 5 that they had left slavery, but at least there they had food and water, whereas in the desert they had it rough. Being willing to trade freedom for relative prosperity is an interesting human weakness, evident in fascism ("the trains ran on time...") and the current recession (immense deficit spending on the individual level nearly toppled the global economy). But that's more of an old-school Roy Rant.

The real point made in our meeting was the command given to Moses in verse 8:"Speak ye unto the rock." We know the rest of the story--that Moses struck the rock and the water came forth. But that's not what he as commanded to do; his task was to speak unto the rock. (In saying this, I am aware of the different account in Exodus, and I can't say which version might be more accurate, and that's kind of beside the point; there's a truth in this account that I think is important.)

I imagine Moses, upon receiving this commandment, being eager to fulfill it. Then, as he talks with the people and explains that their complaints show a lack of faith in the Lord and a lack of gratitude for their deliverance from Egypt, he buckles to the situation. His humanity rears its head and his love for the people made him reconsider.

"Talk...to the rock...here, in front of a people who already think I'm crazy for taking them into the wilderness. Really? Maybe I'll just hit the rock and at least get their attention, punctuating my message. If it works, great, but if not, I won't look completely insane for ,you know, talking to a rock."

The point made was that we can see miraculous things happen (this conversation was specifically in the context of welfare needs) as people are blessed through the efforts of the ward. But the warning is there: the Israelites endured years of trials before they arrived at their promised land, and part of avoiding those sufferings comes through paying close heed to the directions of the Lord. When we work with families in need and ask them to do something, we need to make sure they do it. When we are counseled to develop a three-month plan to get a family back on their feet, we need to stick to that plan and help them become self-reliant. If God says talk to the rock, don't just hit it with a stick.

Walking to Church

2010-08-05T10:58:00.001-06:00

With Summer and the kids gone last weekend, I walked to church Sunday morning, and since I'm addicted to my iPod shuffle, I decided to give a listen while I walked to 20 minutes (by the way--hurray for the intersection of Sage & Unser opening up, sidewalks and all!). But, rather than jam to Bon Jovi or Guns 'N Roses, as is my wont, I loaded the playlist with addresses from April's General Conference. And, being lazy, I left those tracks on for a few more days, so I got to listen to 5 hours of conference over the space of several days.

In doing so, I noticed some interesting themes, the first of which was the emphasis by President Eyring on the new Duty to God program, which I blogged about a few weeks back. In hearing the pattern of learn-act-share several times, I began to reflect on how this corresponds to our lives. While the categories I am going to outline are fluid, they provide a nice model.

Let's start by seeing youth as a time for learning, which is pretty evident by the amount of time children and adolescents spend in school, primary, youth classes and activities, seminary, and the like. This also explains why it is so important that we instill in our children the desire to be curious, to ask questions, and to think critically.

As we come to know more, we begin to serve. Certainly missionary service fits here, marking in many ways a coming-of-age for young people in the church, moving from receiving instruction to sharing what they know. We raise children the same way, teaching and serving, acting, in essence, on what we have been learning all along.

And the, as we amass a life of experience serving, we share those experiences, both in formal settings (I'm thinking of the first counselor in our stake presidency, whose addresses are always based on telling stories from his life of serving others) and casual moments. For parents, this is that exciting time when your children make the transition to adulthood and the act of parenting is less about teaching them things they don't know than it is about sharing with them tings they haven't yet done.

Again, it's not a fixed set of eras, but rather general categories. And knowing that I am squarely in the serving period of my life should inspire me to do more to bless the lives of others. And knowing how my children are going to learn to serve by watching me should also alter how I live my life.

Moroni, Pahoran and erroneous revelation

2010-08-03T11:44:00.003-06:00

Dave recently mentioned the exchange between Pahoran and Moroni at the end of the book of Alma. This is one of the more interesting exchanges in the Book of Mormon. Helaman, two chapters earlier, indicates that he's not receiving the support he would like. This sets Moroni on the greatest angry rant in scripture.

Chapter 60 of the Book of Alma is entirely devoted to this rant. With barely an introduction Moroni calls Pahoran under condemnation. Placing the deaths of his fallen soldiers squarely on the shoulders of the government, Moroni blames their greed and apathy (one could argue that this isn't too far from our current situation but I digress). The anger throughout is palpable,

²² Yea, will ye sit in idleness while ye are surrounded with thousands of those, yea, and tens of thousands, who do also sit in idleness, while there are thousands round about in the borders of the land who are falling by the sword, yea, wounded and bleeding? ²³Do ye suppose that God will look upon you as guiltless while ye sit still and behold these things?

Moroni is clearly building here. He has fought kingmen and potential despots his whole career and now he has developed the idea that Pahoran is yet another in a long line for him to take down.

²⁷And I will come unto you, and if there be any among you that has a desire for freedom, yea, if there be even a spark of freedom remaining, behold I will stir up insurrections among you, even until those who have desires to usurp power and authority shall become extinct.

Interestingly here is yet another paradox in the character of Moroni. He threatens the legitimate government with the very sort usurpation of authority through insurrections that he accuses them of.

Now this is all interesting as another example of the humanity found in the Book of Mormon text but it is verse 33 that is most interesting:

Behold, the Lord saith unto me: If those whom ye have appointed your governors do not repent of their sins and, ye shall go up to battle against them.

This revelation however seems to be contradicted almost immediately. In the next chapter we learn that Pahoran, who was appointed governor by the people, has been deposed and fled to the land of Gideon.

Now one could easily read this to say that the Lord was commanding Moroni against the usurping governors he just misinterpreted the command. I don't think that's the case however. The term "appointed" is the key here. In no way could the usurpers have been appointed democratically according to Pahoran's account.

I would suggest an alternate interpretation that happens to all of us from time to time. Moroni was passionate about the corruption of the government. From the record he seems to have felt the death of every soldier under his command acutely. Undoubtedly he like Helaman had wondered at the absence of extended support from the central authorities.

Faced with the suggestion from Helaman, the son of a prophet and Church leader, he leaped to the most obvious conclusion. This conclusion, placed the blame squarely on Washington, er Zarahemla. Moroni is here placed in a difficult situation. He has for his entire career opposed those who have tried to overthrow the government. Now feeling his government overthrown, he sees the need to do that which he has opposed so vigorously his whole life. Yet without a special dispensation from the Lord, Moroni would be no better than any other revolutionary in Nephite society. So in his passion and haste he finds the words he desires from the Lord spoken to his heart.

Now I might be wrong and the Lord might have been referring to the other governors as I mentioned early. However I think it is the disposition of many of us, when we desire something with a great intensity, to convince ourselves that the will of the Lord is for us to have it. This in fact is one of the great lessons of life, learning to differentiate between the Spirit and our own desires. I think this passage in Alma 60 is simply one example of where someone mistook self for Spirit. It is a great lesson to us all and something hidden deep within the otherwise dry war chapters of the Book of Mormon.

Fast & Testimony, Part 2

2010-08-02T06:55:00.003-06:00

As I mentioned yesterday, testimony meeting was a powerful spiritual experience. This is a follow-up to that, based on my reflections on what was said and felt. As the meeting progressed, I was touched by the sincerity, depth, and power of the testimonies born by children, youth, and adults, and as I listened to these testimonies, I was reminded of Acts chapter 2. And, if I had felt that we had the time, I would have shared the following thoughts at the conclusion of the meeting. As we were already 10 minutes over the meeting time, I declined to editorialize. But I am convinced that I need to share a few thoughts. To that end, here is what I was going to say at the conclusion of fat and testimony meeting yesterday.

Growing up and studying the New Testament, I often wondered what it would have felt like to be there on the day of Pentecost when the Holy Ghost descended on the assemblage. It felt like this [yesterday's meeting]. It was the great rushing of the Spirit that has entered into our hearts as we have heard each other's witnesses of the gospel.

And, as with that ancient group of saints, we may ask the question, "what shall we do?" When we feel the Spirit like this, we feel the impulse to act, but we don't always know what to do. How can we each maintain the sense of spiritual fulfillment we have felt today? Like Peter, our priesthood leaders give us a clear, simple, timely response to this pleading: "Repent and be baptized."

Most of us have been baptized already, so for us it is simply a matter of repenting, daily, continually. We have been lifted higher by the testimonies we have heard today, and the only way to keep that feeling in our lives is to change where we need to change, to pray more fervently, to study the scriptures more seriously, to serve others more selflessly.

There are among us those who are not members of the Church, and to you the invitation is what Peter said, to make your own repentance more complete by accepting the ordinances of the gospel and making the baptismal covenant, which invites the Holy Ghost to be with you as you have felt it today.

Fast & Testimony

2010-08-01T20:06:00.002-06:00

We had a great testimony meeting today, and it was my privilege to conduct, so I was able to bear my testimony prior to hearing from the members of the ward. In my remarks I referred to a scripture that was shared in our PEC meeting this morning. The connection between this and some of my earlier blog entries here was powerful to me.

The scripture comes from Alma 60, a section of the Book of Mormon that I typically skim quickly; I find the war chapters slow and boring. But the message that was shared this morning was impressive. Beginning in verse 21, we read: "Do ye suppose that the Lord will still deliver us, while we sit upon our thrones and do not make use of the means which the Lord has provided for us?" The first counselor in the Elders Quorum, who shared this with us, asked that we listen as if this were being addressed to us individually as home teachers, which pricks the conscience of inconsistent home teachers like myself.

Verse 22 continues: "will ye sit in idleness while ye are surrounded with thousands of those, yea, and tens of thousands, who do also sit in idleness, while there are thousands round about in the borders of the land who are falling by the sword, yea, wounded and bleeding?"

Now, our ward is big (1000+ members, generally ~200 in sacrament meeting), but we don't measure in the tens of thousands. But our ward covers a large section of the city, home to easily tens of thousands of children of God to whom we are to preach the gospel. It's certainly not a time for idleness.

But this isn't just a feel-bad-for-not-doing-your-home-teaching message. I back up to verse 20, which ends with this question: "? Have ye forgotten the many times we have been delivered out of the hands of our enemies?"

This, of course, takes me back to my most recent entry on 1 Nephi 1:20 and the idea of deliverance. Clearly, Moroni is taking us back to this theme of deliverance in his epistle to Pahoran. And clearly, we see in his words a testimony of the many times and ways in which his people had been saved in the past.

But as we apply this message to the spiritual duty of home teaching, we can focus this idea on our need to be spiritually delivered, to be saved from our sins and our weaknesses.

And in this I find a model for how we can serve the Lord. Like Moroni, we should be rallying our troops; it is the role of priesthood leaders to inspire those whom they serve to action.

Like Pahoran, we should not be upset when we are called to repentance, even when we are not in the wrong. Instead, we should be grateful for the commitment of those with whom we serve.

And like the Nephites, we should gather around the standard of truth, bearing witness of what we know and acting on that knowledge. Luckily for us, we don't need to dress in the war attire depicted in the Arnold Frieberg painting of Moroni and the Standard of Liberty.

The Thesis Statement of the Book of Mormon

2010-07-30T13:59:00.001-06:00

At least twice recently I have referred here to my concept of the thesis statement of the Book of Mormon, an admittedly geeky approach to scripture that, nevertheless I find valuable in my study of this particular volume of sacred text, and that informs much of my current understanding (such as it is) of divinity.

But first, the background. Toward the end of my time as a full-time missionary, I decided to major in English at college, and during my first semester back I started taking classes. At the same time, I found myself reading the Book of Mormon for the first time in a while in English.

In so doing, I looked for a way to continue to make scripture study meaningful, so I decided to read the Book of Mormon as I would read literature or academic writing. As a whole, the exercise was a failure, but as I began 1 Nephi chapter 1 I chose to look at this opening chapter as the introduction to the record.

As I read this way, I became convinced of two things: first, that good writing abides by some of the principles I had learned in writing classes my freshman year, particularly the idea of a thesis statement that controls the text and indicates its main ideas, and second, that if I found the thesis statement of the Book of Mormon I would better understand and appreciate what I was reading.

(Side note: I have backed off the first conviction since them, recognizing that not all good writing looks like scholarly prose--and vice versa. But, as will be seen, I stand by the second claim.)

I thought for a while about what a possible main idea for the Book of Mormon might be. The idea of obedience and prosperity is repeated throughout the text, but that sounded too capitalistic for me, and it's not something you encounter in the text until later on. Continuing revelation is a key theme of the book, but that seemed too broad. Even the statement of the book's purpose on the title page felt off, especially as that was penned by Moroni, which seemed like cheating. I needed to see Nephi (or Lehi) saying something early on that set the tone for the rest of the book.

And I found it at the close of the first chapter of the book. Now, 1 Nephi chapter 1 is probably the most commonly read piece of scripture among Latter-day Saints, as we tend to start the Book of Mormon five times before we really commit to finishing a cover-to-cover read. "I, Nephi, having been born of goodly parents" is familiar to millions of people.

And, to be honest, I had never found much in this chapter. Lehi has a pretty powerful vision, but we don't hear his own words, so it feels a bit removed. And throughout the early chapters, Nephi seems a bit of a braggart (I never liked guys who made a big deal of being big tough guys, so Nephi sounded like the obnoxious jocks from high school at times).

But then I found it. Verse 20, which explains that, after he began preaching, Lehi was threatened with death, ends thusly: ", I, Nephi, will show unto you that the tender mercies of the Lord are over all those whom he hath chosen, because of their faith, to make them mighty even unto the power of deliverance."

There it is, the theme of the Book of Mormon, and the central tenet of my faith. Like Lehi, we have the choice to testify of the witness of the Spirit that we have received, and, like Lehi, we might not find it going well (this was sort of the theme of my mission). But we find that, as we exercise faith, God's promises of deliverance are fulfilled.

Here's a more deliberate analysis. First, the idea of God's mercy is central to the story of Lehi's descendants, from leaving Jerusalem to crossing the sea to the war chapters to the promise of the restoration of Lehi's descendants to the gospel. We don't deserve ay of the great mercies we encounter in this life, save for the fact that we are on the receiving end of God's great love for us.

The second point that Nephi makes is that God chooses us according to our faith. Throughout the Book of Mormon, the only difference between the righteous and the wicked, the blessed and the cursed, is the exercise of faith. Even the seemingly stable distinction according to bloodlines (Nephi's descendents vs. Laman's) breaks down repeatedly, as one group repents and is converted and the other falls into sin and disobedience. So it is with us. The only thing that makes one person different from another in any significant way is the extent to which he or she acts on faith.

Finally, we find in this verse the outcome, the promise that Nephi finds is true, and which every one of us can find, that God will deliver us. The trope pf Moses and the Exodus recurs several times in the pages of the book, and it serves as a model for what happens to the children of Lehi. Nephi and his followers are able to escape from the violence of their foes. Alma and his converts are freed from their captors. The righteous Nephites are spared from death when the sign of the Savior's birth appears.

But the deliverance is not just physical. Escaping the world, overcoming the natural man, is a key theme throughout the Book of Mormon. Ultimately, I believe the message of the Book of Mormon is that God's mercy is sufficient to deliver us from wickedness (our own tendencies toward the base and low) as we develop and act on faith in Christ.

Sounds like a book worth reading.

More Moroni 10

2010-07-28T09:40:00.001-06:00

Today we will visit one last time Moroni chapter 10, this time focusing on three verses and two themes. Following the promise that Moroni gives to those who read, pray about, and reflect on the Book of Mormon, we find Moroni listed the various gifts of God, a section that I have to admit I have always found a bit pedantic and repetitive (the difference between teaching the word of wisdom and teaching the word of knowledge, for example, seems a bit opaque).

But right before this, we find Moroni wrapping up the discussion of how we can know truth my means of the power of the Holy Ghost. Then, as verse 7 comes to a close, we find this statement: "deny not the power of God; for he worketh by power, according to the faith of the children of men, the same today and tomorrow, and forever."

The idea that God work by power is clear to anyone who has been raised to believe in an omnipotent deity (a devoutly theist friend in high school would regularly argue this point with the tired bit of sophistry that goes thus: If God is all-powerful, can He create a rock so heavy that He cannot lift it?). But I think we often misunderstand what God's power means, much as my friend was mistaken in his supposed cleverness.

And I think this passage gets at this idea. God works by His power, but that power is conditional on our faith. This relationship between our faith and God's ability to work miracles in our lives is at first one of tension and apparent contradiction. But as we look deeper into Moroni 10, we see more clearly what this means.

In verse 23 we read that Christ has taught that "if ye have faith ye can do all things which are expedient unto me." The link between faith and our own ability to do things is clear here. If we understand faith the way Joseph Smith taught, as a principle of action, we understand how this works: if we have enough confidence in something to believe that acting will lead to a result, we are likely to act. If we have faith enough to repent--that is, change--we will in fact change. If we have faith to in relationships with others, we will form those relationships.

Taking this one step further, we find that our exercise of faith is what allows the effects of our acting on that faith to emerge. This, then, is what Moroni is getting at in verse 32: "if ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness, and love God with all your might, mind and strength, then is his grace sufficient for you, that by his grace ye may be perfect in Christ; and if by the grace of God ye are perfect in Christ, ye can in nowise deny the power of God."

If we have enough faith to act on what we believe, we admit (in both senses of the word) God's power, and thereby invite miraculous things to happen in our lives. The greatest of these miracles being the change that occurs within ourselves as we turn from pessimism, selfishness, violence, and the worldview that sees others as a treat, toward a life of hope, joy, charity, and opennness to all good things.

Ultimately, this concept will take us back to where Nephi begins the Book of Mormon, but I'll save my discussion of the thesis statement of the Book of Mormon for another day.

Differences in 1 Nephi 8 & 11

2010-07-27T06:18:00.005-06:00

Guest contributor Stewart here. I'm the one that's got Roy on this uber-religious posting kick of late. I'm sorry or you're welcome depending on what you think of it. In any case I was mulling over the visions of Lehi and Nephi in the beginning of the Book of Mormon and came to a few conclusions.

First off the Tree of Life is an important symbol, but it is most important within the context of First Temple period worship. Archaeologically we know this motif of the Tree was common throughout the Hebrew lands. Many scholars have put forward that it represented the female consort of God, often attributed to Wisdom.

Now we know that the Tree was used in both kingdoms and that in the southern kingdom the tree was present in the temple prior to Josiah. The canonical text makes quite clear that during the Josiatic reform, a reform which centralized worship away from ancient centers like Shechem or Shiloh to Jerusalem, that the tree was purged from the Temple. While this event is antecedent to Lehi's time it is an important event in understanding the significance of the Tree of Life from Lehi's perspective.

The internal evidence of the Book of Mormon indicates that Lehi was already an exile from the Northern Kingdom. Two items seem to indicate this. First his tribal affiliation with Manasseh. One of the tribes scattered when the Kingdom of Israel was destroyed, while undoubtedly not unique in Judah, this would indicate that Lehi was at the least part of a minority population. When coupled with his prophetic ministry in a society dominated by a tribal priestly class to which he was not affiliated, I would submit that there can be little doubt that Lehi would have been hostile to the reforms that centralized worship, removed the Tree of Life from the temple, and consolidated ecclesiastical authority within one group. We can see Lehi's opposition to this last in the sacrifices he offers in the wilderness, in defiance of constraints within the law relegating this responsibility to the tribe of Levi and the descendants of Aaron.

Now if you take the above for granted than we must look at Lehi's vision in a new light. If this is all true, then the Tree of Life in Lehi's vision was not only the Tree of Life known from the Garden of Eden, but also the Tree removed from the temple under Josiah. Representing the Garden, the fruit of this tree must represent eternal life and salvation. This being of course why its way is guarded, in Eden and following the judgement, by cherubim and a flaming sword.

Now here is where we get to the difference for Lehi and Nephi. Lehi is fixated on the fruit of the Tree of Life, whereas Nephi focuses on the Tree itself, never mentioning the fruit. When given the opportunity to experience the vision of Lehi's vision, Nephi asks instead of the Spirit to know the meaning of the vision. This single choice is vitally important for Nephi. Instead of feeling the joy that Lehi experiences in partaking of the fruit, Nephi sees in vision the Crucifixion, the destruction of his posterity, and the ultimate destruction of all mankind.

In the end Lehi's vision and Nephi's are totally different. Lehi's vision is a saluatory vision. It is the experience of the temple and its antecedent, the Garden of Eden. Nephi's vision is revelatory and has none of the joy that Lehi's does. Perhaps it has something to do with their ages at the time. Lehi, feeling his age, sees the ultimate consolation for his mortal ministry, his calling and election made sure. Nephi full of the piss and vinegar of youth, makes a different choice and wants only to know what his father's vision means. Devoid of the ineffable spiritual experience of the fruit, Nephi's vision becomes a burden that tinges much of his later writings with a sense of melancholy and causes him to end his writings with a statement of sorrow as he soaks his pillow at night with tears for his people.

Or I could be wrong on all fronts.

A Pleasant Passage from the Old Testament

2010-07-26T10:25:00.001-06:00

Today we're going to take a quick break from our exegesis of Moroni 10 to focus on three verse from the Old Testament. As with much of my scripture study, this comes from a passage I must have marked years ago, the context for which I no longer recall. But thumbing through, I read these words from chapter 6 of Numbers: “The LORD bless thee, and keep thee: The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.”

I am touched by the words of this blessing, and find in them a sense of how I ought to interact with my wife and children and friends. To the people I love I should wish this kind of joy, that the Lord might be gracious to them. And in these words I find what I myself desire, that God will smile on me and give me peace.

More Moroni 10

2010-07-24T14:08:00.001-06:00

Continuing on with my reading of Moroni 10, today I want to turn my attention to the promise that Moroni gives to those who read the Book of Mormon. We'll begin with verse 2: “And I seal up these records, after I have spoken a few words by way of exhortation unto you.” The key verb in this section comes from this idea of exhorting, and I find it a great concept; it's not as strong as a commandment, but it's more forceful than a suggestion. It's essentially what we do in raising our children; we exhort them to do certain things, things that we know will bless their lives.

Now we get to the crux of the chapter, verses 3-5. One of the first things that stands out to be here is how Moroni sets up this challenge. The first thing we ought to do upon encountering the text of the Book of Mormon is to remember how merciful God has been to His children throughout human history.

My assertion is that the Book of Mormon is all about God's mercy (I'll blog about 1 Nephi 1:20—the thesis statement of the Book of Mormon—sometime, but note in that verse the emphasis on God's mercy in delivering those who exercise faith), so this is perfectly in keeping with that idea. The only reason we have revealed truth, in the form of scripture, living prophets, or the whisperings of the spirit, is because God loves us enough to give us guidance to help us live happily and return to Him.

Then we get to our role in this process. Once we have read and reflected on the text, we are to pray to know if what we have read is true. I find it important here the manner in which we are to pray: sincerely, with real intent, with faith. When we seek answers to prayers, we need these three elements. In fact, any time we want to accomplish something significant, we need these things.

Finally, the promise itself: if we remember God's mercy and pray well, we will receive a confirmation of what we have asked. I am impressed by the certainty of verse 4: God will manifest the truth. It's easy to hedge on this matter and say we can receive an answer to our prayers, but Moroni is more direct—we will receive a witness of the truth.

And, like all profound and meaningful knowledge, this comes through the power of the Holy Ghost. Anything worth learning in life contains in it an element of divine power. When a complicated scientific or mathematical concept has finally made sense to me, I have felt qualitatively the same feeling as when I have gained a testimony of the gospel; it's not as powerful, but it's the same process of knowing beyond the plane of my own understanding.

That, then, it what I think Moroni means in verse 5: “by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.” I take that very literally—we can, by following what Moroni tells us, know the truth of every gospel principle, every commandment and guideline we receive from God and prophets, and every other kind of truth—including what we would consider secular knowledge.

Moroni 10, Part 1

2010-07-21T07:23:00.002-06:00

For the past week or so I have been reading Moroni chapter 10 looking for patterns and themes that I have not seen before. I don't recall exactly how this project began, but it's been a very good experience, and I think that over the next few entries here I will highlight some of what I am noticing this time around.

To begin, I feel it important to mention my history with this chapter. I've been familiar with the promise of verses 3-5 for 20 years now, and I've put it to the test a good dozen times. One experience in particular stands out. While on my mission, I read the Book of Mormon front-to-back at least 6 times in Italian (the first time through took 4-5 months, and the shortest time was one month).

As I reached the end of my mission, I decided to pace my reading so that I would finish the final chapter on the last day of my mission. That day I knelt in prater one last time and asked for a confirmation of what I had know at some level for nearly 10 years, and what I had spent two years sharing with people. The sense of surety and peace that came was the most direct witness I have received of the truth of the gospel we preach, and a gift I will never forget.

Through the years that have followed, I have read this chapter several more times, and while the answers to my prayers have been less memorable, they have still been real. I remember the first time I spoke in sacrament meeting in our current ward; I talked about those three verses, bearing testimony of what Moroni says and how knowing that changes your life forever.

With that lengthy preface, let's start parsing the chapter. I expect that some entries will cover just one or two verses, while others will fly through much more. For today, let's just look at verse 1: “Now I, Moroni, write somewhat as seemeth me good; and I write unto my brethren, the Lamanites; and I would that they should know that more than four hundred and twenty years have passed away since the sign was given of the coming of Christ.”

What stands out to me immediately (and I can only blame my career teaching writing to college students for this) is that Moroni directly announces his intended audience, and it's not what we typically think. He's not writing to everyone, or, at least, not directly. He is very clearly addressing this chapter, his final words, to his enemies, the apostate descendents of Lehi, the Lamanites. By this point in history, the term “Lamanite” is less a pronouncement of genealogy than it is a self-identification, as the centuries between the birth of Christ and the end of the Book of Mormon are marked by first a widespread conversion to the truth of all of Lehi's descendants, followed by another widespread conversion away from the gospel. Among the Lamanties now they were surely many of Nephi's descendents.

But the fact is that Moroni is not thinking about me as much as I had always thought. I am much less central to Moroni's thinking than I would want to admit. This doesn't mean that what he goes on to say doesn't apply to me; it just means that I have to work harder to make it apply.

For example, in 1 Nephi 14 we read how the Gentiles can overcome the wickedness of apostasy and come to the truth of the gospel (this comes right after chapter 13, in which Nephi's use of the term “Gentiles” makes it clear that he is dealing Europeans and Euro-Americans, what we in New Mexico call Anglos, whose modern history has been marked by some pretty awful eras—think Middle Ages, colonial conquest of indigenous peoples across the globe, and imperialism). To be acceptable before God, we have to repent, which includes accepting the witness of Nephi's fmaily as found in the Book of Mormon, and joining the true church.

According to 1 Nephi 14:2, doing this numbers us among the seed of Lehi. So, I think it is not too much of a stretch to say that, by being humble enough to read, study, and pray about this book of scripture, we become eligible for the promise the Monroni goes on to give.

In my case, this realization is very humbling, because none of this was my own doing. I first read the Book of Mormon because of the example of my parents and grandparents. I was fortunate to be born in a family that had already begun the process of joining Lehi's seed, or being converted. Clearly the communal aspect of this process is balanced by the individual need for faithfulness, but I fear to think what my life would be like if the generations before me had not accepted and passed on the truths I now know for a surety.

"I Know Their Faith"

2010-07-20T08:16:00.001-06:00

For the past several days I have been working on an entry related to my recent study of Moroni chapter 10, but while that is in process, here's something I noted as we read 2 Nephi chapter 3 last night with the kids. In this chapter, Lehi is talking to his son Joseph, and he soon begins recounting some of the prophecies made by Joseph in Egypt. These range over many eras of human history and include discussions of Moses, the family of Lehi, and Joseph Smith (interesting side conversation as we read: Summer asked if Joseph Smith realized as he was translating that the seer referred to in these verses was him, and, if so, what he thought of all that.).

But for me verse 19 is the most poignant. In discussing the latter-day restoration and the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, the Lord connects these promises to the covenants referred to early in the chapter. It is in the fulfilling of those covenants that we see God'smercy—even though mankind had repeatedly rejected the truth, fallen into apostasy, and wallowed in ignorance and lies, the covenants that God had made with ancient prophets were enough to make a restoration of the truth a sure thing.

And here's the kicker, at the end of verse 19: “I know their faith.” In English we use the verb “to know” in a lot of different ways (especially in the KJV of the Bible...), so the depth of this verse might be lost at first. But in many Romance languages, there are in fact two verbs for “to know,” one that applies to facts, and one that applies to people; it's the difference between knowing where the grocery store is and knowing your closest friends.

In this sense, God knows our faith as He knows us—fully, intimately, personally. Omniscience is less about seeing everything than it is about knowing each person, a fact that is possible because we are truly God's children. Just as I know my own children well enough to anticipate their behavior, the Lord knows each of us well enough to be familiar with our level of faith, our testimony, and our commitment to the covenants of the Lord.

Happiness

2010-07-13T07:02:00.002-06:00

The other day I picked up a new book at the library, and I'm finding some interesting connections to my recent emphasis on using Preach My Gospel in my scripture study. The book is called Happiness, and the author, Daniel Nettles, reviews and analyzes psychological research into what makes people happy. At times a bit dry, it is nevertheless an intriguing look into something about which Mormonism has a fair amount to say.

The basic question the book grapples with in the opening chapters is how happy people are, and how we can tell. The crux of the matter is this: people are horribly inaccurate and inconsistent in terms of rating their own happiness, and even worse at analyzing the causes of that happiness. So we are left to extrapolate from the data conclusions that are not grounded in much solid science.

In dissecting this issue, the author makes an interesting claim about the fact that most people rate their overall level of happiness higher than average, resulting in a pretty skewed bell curve. So, he comes to the conclusion that life is a messy mix of happiness and sorrow, and that things are generally better than they could be, but worse than could be hoped for. Here, then, is the part that gets me: “Far from being a disappointment, this conclusion is strangely liberating. It relieves us from the anxiety that someone else's life is a paradise and ours somehow is not” (64).

Compare this then with the doctrine we teach from Lehi: “men are, that they might have joy.” This is often oversimplified to mean something life “smile, and if you can't smile you're clearly being iniquitous.” No wonder anti-depressants are so widely-prescribed in Utah; if you feel bad about not feeling good, you get in a pretty vicious cycle pretty quickly.

But I parse this verse differently, in light of the introduction to PMG, which explains what we preach when we share the gospel: our potential as children of God to find joy in our relationships with each other and Deity. To me, the key word in the above verse is “might.” There's no guarantee implied, but happiness is possible. And, what's more, that potential happiness is an inherent part of the human condition; we're hard-wired to strive for happiness. Nettles makes a similar point in tracing the evolutionary value of a happiness gene, which gives us a way of seeking conditions that make us more likely to survive and reproduce.

Knowing this, we can--and, I think, should--be aware of what brings us happiness. With that awareness, we are more likely to make choices that lead to happiness. To that end, I have been conducting a brief experiment on my work blog, noting each day what brought me joy in my work from the previous day.

It's been quite enlightening. Most of what I have noted has related to the success my students have had; to me this is a good sign that I'm in the right line of work. And I can similarly note that in my personal life, the things that bring me joy are quality time with my children, good conversations with my wife, and chances to do things for others that are meaningful and use my skills.

Doing these things more frequently and deliberately then should result in more joy in my life. Interestingly, these same things build relationships and bless the lives of others, all things that, in the long run, with a lot of patience and faith, result in the godlike characteristics we ought to be focusing on in this life.

Duty to God

2010-07-07T10:38:00.001-06:00

One week into this new use of the blog, I'm ready to deviate slightly from the explicit stated purpose of exploring my daily scripture study. This is partially a reaction to the practical issue: I'm not posting every day, so claiming to share my daily insights is inherently inaccurate. But reflecting on spiritual thoughts is a more natural approach, and this is what today's entry is meant to do.

During General Conference this past April, several speakers alluded to and discussed the Church's new Duty to God program for young men, and, as the father of three boys, I have been eagerly awaiting the new materials. I've spent some time speculating about how this new program might fit with the Church's Scouting program (I'm convinced that within my lifetime the Church will have to or choose to abandon Scouting, and the revised DtG program will serve as a basis for a post-BSA era), but more than that, I've been interested to see how these materials might correlate with the young women's new Personal Progress materials.

Last Wednesday our ward's shipment arrived, and I've spent this past week looking over the booklet each boy will have, and I am very impressed. First, I find the booklet to be simple, clear, well-organized, and attractive. Having the materials for Deacons, Teachers, and Priests all in one booklet is a marked improvement over the old program, and the basic structure for each age group (spiritual strength, administering ordinances, a project based on a principle from For the Strength of Youth, etc.) is excellent.

But the thing that interests me the most about the new materials, and that I find the most intriguing, is the basic model it presents for each endeavor. The approach is to first learn basic principles, then to act on that new understanding, and then to share the results of a project with family members and peers. There's nothing earth-shattering in this model, but I find in its simplicity some powerful truths.

As I reflect on this model, I realize that this is precisely what happens in any effective teaching setting, be it formal or ad hoc. When my students are learning well, it's because they are learning an idea, using that idea, and sharing their work with each other and with me. The same is true with my children; when they understand something and then act on it, they learn it, and when they teach each other something—whether it's math or the new game one of them has invented—they find joy and fulfillment.

And I think this ought to be the way we approach anything we do—learn it, do it, and share it with others. The social networks we use are actually very conducive to this—I read an article or book or blog, I do something with that by reading or trying something out, and I post the link or blog about it. In fact, in a sort of meta-way, that's what this is, as I read and studies the new DtG materials, mulled it over and wrote, and then posted my musings here for you to read. Now get off the computer and do something. Then, tell me about it.

Ezekiel 47

2010-07-06T07:44:00.002-06:00

Another riff based on our recent stake conference. But first, a peek into my youth. As a high school student, I lived in a rural area of south-central Pennsylvania, where our ward was a strange mix of diasporic Mormons from the mountain west and local converts, some with several generations of membership in the Church, and others being the first in their families to be baptized. There were other elements of diversity, including education (from college professors to high-school dropouts), profession (a lot of blue-collar workers and some doctors and lawyers). Somehow it all worked, and great things happened in that ward.

But, as is the case with any ward, there were issues, especially when it came to gospel instruction. To put it plainly, I was presented with a lot of false and outdated doctrine in Sunday School, seminary, and priesthood quorums. And it has taken much of my adult life to sort through that and determine both what is true and why good, well-meaning Latter-day Saints would so adamantly believe things that are patently untrue.

I say this because on the Saturday of stake conference, our temple president (who I'm still trying to figure out—he is clearly a spiritual man with a deep testimony of the Savior and His church, but his tendency to name-drop and seem rather self-centered rubs me the wrong way, especially when I contrast him with the exceptionally humble temple president who preceded him) clarified a chapter from the Old Testament that had long bothered me. This will likely seem a simple insight, but for nearly two decades the false interpretation I got as a youth has deeply affected me, and the correct version presented at conference has been enlightening.

The chapter is Ezekiel 47, in which the great Old Testament prophet is shown in vision the holy temple. The first few verses of the chapter are beautiful, as we see, as the temple president put it, the healing and life-giving power of the temple represented by the flowing water. And the symbolic meaning of verses 1-5, that the farther we go, the deeper that healing becomes, is especially encouraging for me as I look for motivation to attend the temple more frequently and consistently.

But it's verses 7-9, where Ezekiel tells of the river flowing to the sea and healing it that we get to the false doctrine. Or rather, the shallow and overly-literal interpretation of scripture that we tend to sometimes in the church. I distinctly remember a class setting as a teenager in which our teacher—a good, honest, decent person who, unfortunately for the youth in the class, always read scripture on a very literal, simplistic, and conservative level—explained that this clearly meant that at the Second Coming, Christ would set foot on the Mount of Olives, which would then break asunder and bring fresh water to the Dead Sea.

Ignoring for the moment the science of it all (a highly salty body of water is not caused by what comes in, but by the fact that nothing comes out—itself a wonderful analogy), there's something in this reading of these verses that I find very troubling. For lack of a better term I”ll call it the CNN Syndrome, and I saw a lot of it in my growing up years. It goes something like this: members of the church who are highly focused on the impending Millenium see it as the solution to all their woes, both real and imagined. Combining this with the habit of watching too much TV, especially cable news (in the early '90s this meant CNN), and you get a worldview in which the end of the world is right around the corner (a lot of these folks were the Y2K crowd who expected the Second Coming in 2000) and will be heralded with live TV coverage.

What I find most disturbing about this approach to Mormon theology is not the political aspect of it (how many Mormons saw Bill Clinton as the anti-Christ and a sure sign of the end of the world?), but rather the way in which it blinds us to the profound and life-changing truths of the gospel. The healing of Ezekiel's vision is not about a body of water half a world away; it's about my own soul and the need I have to be refreshed, renewed, and reborn on a regular basis. It's about how striving to worship in sincerity and commitment leads me to deeper happiness and spiritual fulfillment. It's about how the Second Coming is less about the dramatic and spectacular version imagined by pop culture Christianity than it is about how I can—if I am worthy and faithful—both feel Christ's presence in my life and see Him, in this life or the next. (I have more to say on this topic another time.)

And so I am left at the end of this rant with two emotions. First, a sense of sadness for the tendency we have to miss the boat in our exegesis and to read things—especiaally the writings of Old Testament prophets—on an overly-literal level, sometimes completely misleading others (this same teacher once explained that Isaiah clearly meant that the moon would fall to the earth, creating a land bridge between Hawaii and the continental US). And second, immense joy for the truths of the gospel and the power of temple worship in particular in mending our broken lives. In particular, I am impressed by the power of temple worship, and reflecting on Ezekiel's words, I am committed to further tapping into that power in my life and in the lives of my children.

A New Way of Ranting

2010-06-29T15:18:00.001-06:00

For some time I have felt that my personal scripture study has been stagnant, and none of my efforts have made a significant difference. At our ward conference in January, our bishop specifically asked us to make daily scripture study a priority in our lives, and he promised that doing so would have positive effects in our lives and families. So, when my brother-in-law emailed me last week with some thoughts on 2 Nephi chapters 31 and 32. After some back and forth discussion via email, Stew proposed that we move the conversation to the blogosphere, and, since I'm not ranting very much these days, this seemed a good venue for the dialogue.

So here's an opening salvo, drawn directly from this past weekend's stake conference. The one message from the six hours of meetings I attended over the weekend that stands out to me the most was the first one, from our stake president. He emphasized the importance of each member of the stake making a concerted effort to share the gospel with others, and he reminded us of the challenge he gave at the last stake conference for each family to share the Book of Mormon with a friend or neighbor.

Then he spoke of how using Preach My Gospel as part of daily scripture study will help us be more capable of and committed to sharing the gospel. In particular, he promised us that studying chapter 6, which focuses on developing Christlike attributes, will help us be more holy, more prone to receiving promptings that will bless the lives of others.

(As a sidenote, last week a member of our ward sent me the network access key to the wireless network in our stake center, so as our stake president spoke, I accessed PMG online, saved a PDF version of the book, and began to download audio files of the missionary manual (I'm listening to chapter 1 while I write this).)

So, in reading through chapter 6, I found a scripture reference that has great meaning for me, and which takes on a new significance to me as I think of it in terms of becoming more like Christ and thereby being more able to share the gospel. Moroni 8:25-26 come at the end of Mormon's epistle to Moroni regarding infant baptism. Here's the text:

"25 And the first fruits of repentance is baptism; and baptism cometh by faith unto the fulfilling the commandments; and the fulfilling the commandments bringeth remission of sins; 26 And the remission of sins bringeth meekness, and lowliness of heart; and because of meekness and lowliness of heart cometh the visitation of the Holy Ghost, which Comforter filleth with hope and perfect love, which love endureth by diligence unto prayer, until the end shall come, when all the saints shall dwell with God."

As I came to the end of my mission, I had a profound experience with this scripture. Elder Neil Anderson, then of the seventy, was touring our mission, and at a zone conference in Verona, he ran us through an exegesis of this chapter. His argument went something like this: Moroni 8 is not just about one particular doctrinal issue (baptism and accountability--does a child need baptism?), but the more broad principles of repentance and salvation.

These two verses form the core of this argument: baptism is a result of faith and repentance, and through it, we begin the process of becoming meek, which ultimately allows us to learn and develop Christlike attributes. As we develop faith and desire to change, we come to the moment of truth, when we must decide to act on that new-found faith; baptism becomes the key choice, and through baptism we become eligible to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, whose guidance gives us hope, an assurance of the truth.

But even more meaningful to me, both as a result of where I am in my life and building on the email dialogue with Stew last week (I'd like to see you post a continuation of your insights into Nephi's discussion of enduring to the end), is the very end of verse 26. Our hope fills us with divine love—for God and for His children—and it is this love that allows us to overcome the challenges of life. Enduring through the power of prayer—a reliance on the higher power that first filled our souls as we began the process of conversion—is therefore the key element of our long-term efforts to become more like the Savior.

As I sat there that June day in 1997, I was feeling a turbulent mix of emotions. I knew that within weeks I would return home, take off the name tag, go back to college, and have to reinvent myself. I was grateful for the great experiences I had been privileged to have as a missionary, and I felt unworthy of those blessings. More poignantly, I felt a sense of sorrow, questioning if I had done enough with the two years I had been given. My mission was not wildly successful by most of our criteria—baptisms, growth of wards and branches—and a sense of regret, mingled with the joyful feelings I had in light of the life-alteringly good experiences I had enjoyed, left me feeling confused.

And then Elder Anderson read the final words of the passage: “ until the end shall come, when all the saints shall dwell with God.” In the margins of my English-language scriptures I wrote “even little old me.” In that moment I saw something of my place in the great plan; in the world of the mission I was a mid-level manager, a career district leader who never served in the upper echelon of zone leader or assistant to the mission president, but this passage spoke to me. I do not expect a life of fame, wealth, or renown, and in that moment, I realized that doesn't matter. If I am to endure, to work through the struggles of life, finding joy in the work I do and in the relationships I form (I had no idea on that day 13 years ago that less than one year later I would married, let alone to a woman as wonderful as Summer), I am just as eligible of the great gift of eternal life as any other.

Looking back on this experience, I recognize how the promise given by Mormon has been fulfilled in my life: I have been blessed with a happy marriage, wonderful children, and a life that, while not easy, is full of joy. I have learned to love my wife and children and those I serve in ways that I would not have expected in 1997. And the realization of that promise gives me greater faith that the ultimate promise,a surety that even I can “dwell with God.”

On Hate and Ignorance

2010-04-27T09:35:00.002-06:00

Recently I did something very out of the ordinary: I joined a Facebook group. And not just any group, but a petition group with a political bent to it. Last week I started to see friends joining a Facebook group that not-so-subtly hinted that the death of the President of the United States would be an answer to their prayers. Beside the absolute lack of class this demonstrates, the fact that this would make Joe Biden the leader of the free world ought to trouble anyone.

So I joined a group petitioning to have this removed. I don't really want it removed; I really don't care what foolish and hateful things exist online, as long as I am seeking out and finding things that make my life better. Nor am I unfriending the people who joined the aforementioned tasteless group; petty and childish behavior is best left to the kinds of people who join these groups. But I found joining the petition group a good way to voice my disapproval and disgust. (Ranting, I have found, also helps.)

In addition to the hypocrisy of folks who a few years back were saying that calling into question the judgment and executive power of the President is tantamount to treason now praying for the death of the Commander in Chief, I find the idea of thinking you're clever for following the lead of someone who formed a group of hateful people disturbing. The herd mentality at its worst, really.

But it's not at all out of character among the hate-mongers and demagogues who rally against government spending, taxation, and regulation. I read the other day a spot-on analysis of the historical illiteracy and dangerous rhetoric of the Tea Party protesters who shout out epithets and threats aimed at anyone they consider to be too liberal. We're in a historical moment in which the shrillness of one's crying is equated with the quality of one's argument, the hyperbole of mislabeling one's foes is considered clever and intelligent.

It's especially disgusting to see people with whom I worship getting caught up in this. Elder Cook's message from General Conference--"We can disagree without being disagreeable"--and President Uchtdorf's--with the emphasis on compassion, love, and mercy--seem completely at odds with the loud and caustic voices that would render illegitimate an administration that won a hefty majority of the popular vote and an overwhelming majority of the electoral vote. To call President Obama or a democratically elected Congress "dangerous" or "rouge" is to fundamentally misunderstand what the Constitution puts forth as the means of establishing a government.

It also shows an utter lack of faith, hope, or charity. If you believe, as the Church clearly teaches, that this nation has a divine mandate and role, that the founding documents thereof are divinely inspired, and that freedom is a central part of God's plan for humanity, then demonizing, dehumanizing, and disrespecting that government carte blanche demonstrates a lack of vision, a perspective so clouded by the talking heads on television, talk radio, and the web that reason and discourse have no place in your heart or mind. And that's a truly sad state. If the current administration is in the wrong, then time will right those wrongs--exactly the thought that kept my head held high from late 2000 until November 4, 2008.

One final note to hopefully show that this is not just a bleeding heart liberal getting his feelings hurt. This is something I believe deeply. On a sunny Tuesday morning nearly nine years ago I watched, at the end of a terrible day for our country, as the President--a man I did not vote for, did not like, and never did think highly of--returned to the White House. I sat in front of the television with my wife and two young children, praying for his safety. None of us truly understood what had happened that day, but we knew we couldn't stand another tragedy, and it was a relief to see the leader of the nation safe. And even when that administration engaged in policies and acts that I considered wrong and wrong-headed, I still insisted on saying "amen" when prayers for the leaders of our nation were offered. I don't think it's too much to ask even the most politically conservative among us to give an elected leader who has sworn to protect and defend the Constitution that kind of prayerful support, regardless of who that person is.

On Being Messy

2010-01-20T07:49:00.002-07:00

As part of my new gig as department chair I am required to participate in a year-long training, a portion of which entails setting a series of goals for developing my leadership skills. As anyone who has known me for longer than a few minutes is aware, I despise this sort of thing--setting goals as part of a tightly-crafted system for self-improvement is a chief reason why I dropped out of Boy Scouts.

So I really struggled to set some good goals, winding up with vague things like “improve my conflict-resolution skills” and “raise my QDLRS scores”--rubbish all of it. But after getting some feedback on these ideas, I was convinced that the best thing I could do was to study, to read some leadership books and get some ideas.

This appealed to me because a) I wouldn’t have to do anything, just read about people who do things, and b) it would be a great excuse to read more books.

After looking through some suggested reading lists, I decided to hit the library and browse. I found myself wandering more or less aimlessly through the 600s, where I picked up a handful of volumes. One of these--easily the most interesting--is my current read: A Perfect Mess.

The basic idea of the book is that people and organizations have a tendency to overemphasize order and structure, when, in reality, randomness and certain degree of messiness are much more fruitful.

This is a fascinating--if dangerous--idea (Summer has a habit of looking at me sideways when I’m reading as if to say that 12 years of work may be going down the drain). I am an inherently sloppy man, and if anything, assuming a new responsibility would require that I get my act together more, not less.

But that’s the whole point of the book. We have been trained to believe that the only way to accomplish anything meaningful is to be more organized, to spend more time and energy scheduling, planning, sorting, and controlling. The reality, however, is often the opposite: in accepting and even fostering a moderate amount of randomness in our lives, we can be more efficient and effective.

There are some interesting applications of this theory to organizational leadership and everyday life (my favorite, from the chapter on accepting messiness in our homes: “Making a bed after getting up in the morning is a bit like tying your shoes after you take them off.”), but here’s one I did not expect: church administration.

This seems incredibly counterintuitive; we typically laud the church for its administrative organization. Wards run smoothly even with a lay--or as I like to put it, amateur--clergy, General Conference is a tightly-orchestrated affair, humanitarian aid is shipped off in a matter of hours after a crisis occurs.

However, at our stake conference this pat weekend, I was reminded of something that resonated all the louder because of reading A Perfect Mess. In the priesthood leadership session, our stake president made the distinction between being ministers and administers. His point was this: priesthood leaders are not called simply to deal with paperwork and processes, but also--and more importantly--to serve people individually.

To me this means we have to be willing to let go of the agenda, to drop the schedule. In the end, the most important form of messiness we can accept--and perhaps seek out--it to listen to the Spirit and be willing to heed inspiration when it comes.

To me this speaks volumes of the need to allow some messiness in our meetings and into our organizations. I am reminded that the most precious experiences I have had in my life have come when I have dropped my plans and improvised. It has been true of my church service, my teaching, my parenting. It’s a hard truth to accept, as I have fought to be more structured, but nevertheless, it’s a truth, one that I really need to remember.

Bibliophilia

2009-12-28T20:46:00.002-07:00

I'm about halfway through my winter break, and I'm really enjoy the unadulterated sloth in which I currently exist. I wake up when I hear Evan yelling that he needs to use the bathroom, I play tons of games throughout the day, I cook and clean as needed, and I read. I've gotten some serious reading done these past few weeks, and it's made me a bit contemplative. So, here is a review of some of my 2009 reading accomplishments:

I've read several dry tomes related to my dissertations--titles like Mixing Race, Mixing Culture: Inter-American Literary Dialogues. And I suppose "read" is a bit inaccurate and should be replaced by "skimmed as quickly as possible while taking notes and eating Doritos."
I'm reading Notes from a Small Island by Bill Bryson, a Christmas gift from Summer, who, realizing how excited I get about what I'm reading, hopes this will convince me to go to England. This comes on the heels of reading A Walk in the Woods, in which Bryson recounts his summer along the Appalachian Trail (I spent several days picturing myself strolling along some lonely trail). I also read The Mother Tongue and In a Sunburned Country by Bryson. I've decided that I like this man for several reasons: he's wry and witty, he writes in an erudite style that is nonetheless accessible and self-deprecating, he travels widely and thoughtfully (both in space and in themes), and, as I just learned in chapter 2 of Small Island, he's left-handed, all of which is meant to say that he's me.
Late last winter I read Barbara Kingsolver's Animal, Vegetable, Miracle, which I discussed here. It was inspiring, but it didn't make me much of a gardener. Maybe I'll read it again soon. I'd also like to dive into some Michael Pollan this year (Summer's reading In Defense of Food right now).
I also read Jack Turner's Travels in the Greater Yellowstone last winter, an experience I reviewed here. He's also got a book on the history of spices, which I somehow haven't gotten to yet.
Toward spring I read The Hobbit again, followed by working through The Lord of the Rings over my May break. For what it's worth, I also watched the movies a few times. (I had vowed to wait until finishing my dissertation to read the latter, but I decided that if I put off living for my PhD I might be pretty miserable.)
In early March I finally tackled In the Name of the Rose, by Umberto Eco. I've read several collections of Eco's essays, so this was fun, even if the unraveling of the plot was a bit clumsy. I also got to lend this to Dad, which is always nice.
Over the first few months of the year I read a few pieces of non-fiction: Speaking of Faith by Krista Tippett, a volume each of The Best American Travel Writing and The Best American Non-Required Reading (I thoroughly enjoy the Best American series). These are good volumes that I can readily pick up again at a moment's notice.
This fall-winter, I read The New Kings of Non-Fiction, edited by Ira Glass, and two Malcolm Gladwell titles: Blink and The Tipping Point. I also read Freakonomics. The last three were interesting--thought-provoking and well-written, but after each one I couldn't quite decide what the point was. Perhaps my expectations were too high, but I couldn't help shaking the notion that these were more style than substance.

I'm sure there's more, but this is enough to make me feel good about myself. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have a book to get to...

A Real Man

2009-11-14T18:01:00.002-07:00

Today was a very relaxed day...until we woke up. Unlike most of the past week, we had no plans or specific obligations, so we began by cleaning the house. While working on our bathroom, Summer asked me to see if I could redo some of the caulking in the kids' bath, which is where the fun began.

Pulling up the faulty caulk I had put in several years ago quickly led to the discovery of water intrusion into some of the drywall. Within an hour I had a pile of dirty caulk bits and a small hole in the wall.

After several hours of work and two trips to Home Depot, I had patched the hole, spackled the other gaps, and cleaned up my mess. We'll now need to repaint, but that was in the cards anyhow.

On one trip to the store I also picked up a rake for all the leaves that fell yesterday. Seven years in New Mexico and we had never had to rake leaves. But this year the trees were big enough to warrant it. So here are some shots of the kids jumping and playing in the leaves:

While I was transferring the leaves to a bag, Summer comments, "You're like a real man today." I suppose it was about time...

Not Even a Real Rant

2009-10-11T20:51:00.002-06:00

More of a thought that occurred to me last week at the Priesthood session of General Conference. Elder Ballard's talk on fathers and sons was touching, and it made me realize the following: in 10 years I can go to the Priesthood session with all three of my sons. Ryan will be 18, in his first semester of college, and quite possibly an elder already; Isaac will be a 15-year-old teacher, and Evan will be a freshly-minted deacon. (We needn't mention how old I shall be.) We should go to Salt Lake and go to the Conference Center that October. Anyone who wants to join is invited...

A (Kind of) Conservative Rant For a Change

2009-09-29T08:50:00.002-06:00

I'm taking a brief break from my occasional series on why I'm not politically conservative to write a piece that may undermine that entire project. I listen sporadically to a podcast called The Story (kind of a conceited title, I think, but it generally makes me think, which is good). Some of the episodes are poignant and touching, while others feel a bit flat, so I don't listen religiously, but I try to catch a few episodes a week.

Yesterday I listened to an episode from last week with two very different stories. The first was about an American couple who retired and moved to Mexico to enjoy better and less expensive health care. I wanted to get behind their story, as it highlights much of what is wrong with the health care industry in America today. But in the end I found the husband, who is at the center of the story, a completely unsympathetic figure.

In part this is a result of the phrase the host kept using to describe why Steve Minnick and his wife moved to Mexico: "to take advantage of that country's health care system." I know what he means, but "taking advantage" of something is a messy phrase that implies something that was, I believe unintended but telling. The idea of exploiting a system to which you have no real connection is troubling.

I also find it hard to be sympathetic for someone who's complaint is that he has to return to work because the recession harmed his retirement savings. When the poor are losing jobs and homes, it's hard to feel for someone who lost (which means he had) $300,000 in retirement and had to sell his home in Mexico, move back to America, and return to work so he could save enough in his retirement account to live quite comfortably seven years from now.

And I contrast this with the other story in the episode, in which Robert Johnson recalls his father's sacrifice to support his family during the Great Depression. This man fought six rounds at a county fair against a professional boxer, nearly dying in front of his son, to earn $25 to pay rent. It makes unretiring look pretty pedestrian a sacrifice, I think.

This gets at something that has bothered me throughout this recession. People complain about decreased or lost income, but still get cable TV and drive SUVs. We talk about scrimping and saving, but still rack up credit card debt. And the federal response has been to spend more and bail out failing companies while cutting services for the poor.

I contrast this with the New Deal approach. Instead of bailing out banks, the federal government put people to work. Instead of encouraging us to spend more, it provided a safety net for individuals and families. A welfare system that focuses on people, not corporation, is far superior. The New Deal was no a panacea, but it seems better than the way this recession has been addressed.

And I think this says something ugly about who we are, that our response to tragedy is to amass material things, to spend, to stimulate our way out of a crisis rather than to make real sacrifices. I makes me a bit sad and ashamed.

How Big a Tent?

2009-09-22T15:35:00.000-06:00

When over-the-air television broadcasts went all-digital this summer we lost our signal, at first with some misgivings. Living in modern America without TV seemed unthinkable. But now, just a few months later, I am amazed, not just at how well we've adapted, but at how much more we get done. We read to the kids more, we play outside more, we cook and talk and simply live more.

I kind of wish we had ditched TV earlier, say a year ago, during the height of election season. Not just for the election ads that bombarded our humble swing state, but for the other, less obvious aspects of the presidential campaign. I speak specifically of the conventions, an archaic holdover from the era of cigar-smoking obese men who made backroom deals and decisions, a holdover which is poorly adapted to the world of mass media and instantaneous communication. They drive me crazy, with the pomp and self-importance of political parties (there's a reason I register independent), the pontificating speeches and fake drama of it all.

But the most jarring part of last year's convention season was not the size of the crowd in Denver or the small-time acts by Guliani and the other nominee also-rans, but the shots of the crowd at the RNC in Minneapolis. This homogeneous group of middle-aged white people was a perfect symbol of what I believe is the ultimate undoing of conservatism in America: its failure to understand, appreciate, and foster a diverse, pluralistic society. This profound failure marks conservative thought as antiquated and obsolete, much like the conventions themselves.

I approach this topic with a great sense of hesitation, based primarily on my own identity as a middle-aged white heterosexual Christian male. (It has always been odd in job interviews to answer the obligatory diversity question: “I think we need a diverse faculty to represent the multiplicity of cultures and viewpoints in our community. We should hire fewer white men. Let's start that as soon as you hire/promote/reward me.”) I am simply too racist, sexist, and homophobic to get on a soap box here when traditional discussions of diversity come up.

But I can speak of what I find to be the most indicative but underappreciated instance of bigotry and prejudice in the contemporary conservative movement: the debacle that was Mitt Romney's primary race last year. Now, I don't like the former governor of the commonwealth of Massachusetts. I find him vapid and uninspiring, and, obviously, I disagree with many of his stands on the issues. (In other settings I have referred to him as my least favorite Mormon, but it seems Glenn Beck is intent on holding that title indefinitely.) But the fact is that a qualified and electable candidate with policy views in line with the mainstream of his party who poured millions of his own dollars into the campaign had no realistic chance of getting that party's nomination.

And why was Romney so soundly beaten by hacks like Huckabee in the southern primaries? It all comes down to simple, unadulterated prejudice. A Mormon candidate in the GOP primary in South Carolina has a huge disadvantage due entirely to the conservative mindset that labels any identity outside of the narrow definition of mainline Christianity as unacceptable. And this is evident time and time again in the right-wing, as moderates like Senators Specter and Snowe are either driven away or derided as phonies. Anytime your movement is so narrow as to exclude even those who tend to agree with you, you know you've painted yourself into a corner and out of the mainstream.

So I'm not sure what to suggest to conservatives concerned about doing poorly in elections when the female and minority votes break bad for them. When your political philosophy is built on the idea that those who have traditionally held power and wealth should be the first and primary voices in debating, setting, and benefiting from national policies, it's hard to feel sympathy when demographic and social transformations undermine your political viability. It's time at that point to not just revise a platform or alter a message. It's time to admit that conservative views toward contemporary American society--who we are and how we interact with a range of people--have become provincial and useless in the 21st century.

Government

2009-09-18T13:04:00.001-06:00

I suppose I ought to just start this project with the big issue, the thing that differentiates liberals and conservatives. I'm not talking about the Iraq War, abortion, taxes, gun control, or welfare (although I will be tackling some of these down the road). I speak instead of the elephant in the room (all puns, of course, are intended) anytime conservatives attack liberals: government.

(I actually thought about saying the number one issue is that of pronouns, but that seemed too geeky even for me. But we'll circle back to parts of speech in a minute.)

The more I think about this, the more I'm convinced that the defining trait of conservatives is a fundamental misunderstanding of what government is and does. (This is especially unnerving, since so many of them are in elected or appointed government posts.) But, nevertheless, it is the case that conservatives seem to view government as a monolithic, intrusive, intimidating force bent on stealing every freedom imaginable, some sort of cross between an Orwellian nightmare and the Third Reich. Governments can certainly evolve (or, rather, devolve) into this sort of thing, but the knee-jerk reaction of calling anything government-related evil is simply incorrect. No, that's not it. It's stupid. Even that misses the point. It's unpatriotic. There, that's more like it.

Now, in ,making this claim, I do not say that dissent is wrong. On the contrary, when we believe that our government is in the wrong, we have not just the right, but the moral obligation to speak out, to protest, to vote and to act for change. Having been highly opposed to many policies during the Bush years, I cannot condemn criticism of one's government. In fact, intelligent and constructive criticism is a bedrock principle of a citizen's role in a democracy (a fact that seemed frequently missing from the discourse during the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq, for example, when critics were told to keep their mouths shut, as if any act of protest were treason). What I speak of is the Goldwater-style conservatism that casts government as the antagonist of every freedom-loving man, woman, or child. That is the unpatriotic approach and attitude of which I speak.

Here's what I mean. I believe it is unimaginably unpatriotic to view American democracy through the same lens as Stalinist Russia or the French Reign of Terror. This is especially true for Latter-day Saints, who make claims of love of country and who believe that Heaven blessed the founding of this nation's government. To speak with casual disregard and intense disdain for that same government so immediately whenever one makes a political statement—to say that you distrust, fear, or hate our government—is an affront to both the spirit of the founding of the nation and the two and one-thirds centuries project of striving for “a more perfect union.”

Here's where the pronouns come back into play. Note what I said in the previous paragraph: “our government.” We share this common bond as Americans; no matter what region you live in, what color your skin is, what music or movies you like, you are part of something greater than yourself. It's a unity. But the pronoun “our” also indicates something of ownership. It is government by and for, but first and foremost of the people, belonging to and serving us. Now contrast that with, for example, the language used in the health care debate. A conservative will typically refer to government in the third person: “they.” As in “they want to take over health care.” A liberal will speak in the first-person plural: “we.” As in “we have a responsibility to care for and help each other.” (I'll address this idea of responsibility in a future entry.) This word choice indicates one's relationship to the republic of which one is part; the former indicates a separateness, a radical and dangerous emphasis on the individual that is at the core of conservatism, while the latter speaks of a sense of community that is central to what is best in liberalism.

I don't pretend to think that government or government involvement is the best answer to all problems. As an example, I am deeply troubled by the role of the federal government in the financial markets and other industries in the wake of last year's market crash. I felt then and feel now that the executive and legislative branches overstepped their bounds in bailing out failing companies. My liberal philosophy (which echoes my father's more conservative one on this matter) is that a mismanaged and inefficient company deserves to fail, and that the proper role of government is to serve as a safety net, to provide resources and assistance—not to the companies and their overly-compensated executives, but to the working poor who find themselves unemployed, to families and children, to those who want to work and are willing to do so. In essence, I would have preferred to see an effort akin to the Depression-era WPA and CCC initiatives. I would prefer a liberal approach to government, one in which we (note the pronoun) watch out for each other, not just for those businesses that have failed to adapt to changing markets (see GM and Chrysler) or that made greedy and short-sighted choices (see the mortgage and housing markets). That is what our government can and should and is meant to do, what it can and should and is meant to be.

Back to the Ranting

2009-09-17T13:35:00.000-06:00

It's an odd season politically, and that's evident in how this blog has stagnated. The left (myself included) has been dealing with an odd post-inauguration hangover, so happy to have a competent, intelligent, qualified president that it's hard to tap into that characteristic liberal anger that has historically driven so much of our work. (This is different, by the way, from the typical claim of liberal self-loathing, but not, I suppose, by much.) And thus I've found myself unable to really rant properly.

But the oddness is also a result of what I believe is a strange strategic move by the Obama administration. Health care reform is a tricky endeavor, and the White House has handled it poorly. And support for needed reform has been horribly uneven. The people who need it most tend to distrust government and vote Republican (or be young and uninterested in the issue), and the people who believe in it most are both largely unaffected by it (the more affluent liberal types) and such reliable Democrats that there is little incentive to woo them

I, for example, fit into several of these categories. I have good insurance, am healthy, and still feel young and invincible. At the same time, I believe in the need for health care reform, and I support most of Obama's statements and plans on the issue. I just don't feel that this needs to be the number one priority for the nation or the administration, and I have a hard time getting fired up about it. And it's been frustrating to see Team Obama, which ran such a focused, efficient, powerful campaign, struggle to get a clear message out persuasively.

It's this sense of frustration then that brings me back to the blog. The summer of political discontent—the lies, the yelling, the threats of violence and succession by right-wing demagogues and their followers—has reached a breaking point for me. I'm sick of the hypocrites and liars calling us out. I'm sick of the attention that's been given to people who are uninformed, loud, and bellicose. And I'm sick of sitting back and watching it all unfold.

Thus begins an occasional series on this blog to counter the logic and arguments of the right. I'm calling it “Reasons Why I'm Not a Conservative and Can't Support Republicans.” I undertake this with great respect and fondness for my conservative friends and relatives. I love and admire many of you, and I have learned and continue to learn much from you. And I aware that very few may ever see this, that some who do see it may be offended, and that I can do very little to change the national political discourse. But I feel a powerful obligation to speak up for what I believe, and this is my chance to do so.

So, here is my basic thesis. I believe that the liberal impulse is a smarter, more moral, and more American approach to governance, ethics, and social justice than the conservative one. It is fairer and more in line with the foundational principles of democracy. In short, it is a better way of conceiving of and operating a society and a system of government. Over the next few days and weeks I will post entries here detailing some of the specific issues that support this thesis. I think it'll be fun.

Postcolonialism and Religious Discourse

2009-07-28T19:14:00.000-06:00

This may be the first time on this blog that the title is actually more boring than the entry itself. I know, it sounds like the title of a bad graduate-school paper (in fact, I may have written a bad graduate-school paper using that title). But I really do mean for this to be a thoughtful, highly personal piece.

The impetus for this is a comment from a friend on a recent entry here. Ted pointed me to an article in Indian Country Today about the Episcopal Church's repudiation of the "Doctrine of Discovery." My first reaction to the article was that it was interesting, but irrelevant to the life of a 21st-century white Mormon. But with some thought, I saw that this really is the issue that defines the intersection of my religious and intellectual life.

Here's the historical context. At the dawn of the Age of Exploration, as Europeans begin to explore, colonize, conquer, and control large areas of the globe, a new strand of Christian thought emerged. Now, the seed of this is central to the evangelical nature of biblical Christianity--take the gospel to all the world. Once Peter received the revelation permitting the apostolic church to preach to and convert the Gentile nations, Christian spread through Europe, northern Africa, and southwestern Asia. Now, with trade and travel taking merchants and military from Christendom both across the Atlantic and around the Cape of Good Hope, a new version of Christianity was born.

Unfortunately, this version of Christianity bears little resemblance to the gospel that I encounter when I read the New Testament. Gone was the emphasis on peace, forgiveness, and meekness, all of which were replaced by a hyper-evangelical misreading of the Apostles' commission to preach the gospel to all the world. Married to incipient capitalism and military might, this colonial Christianity became the grounds for conquest, slavery, and genocide.

As a graduate student working with literary texts from many of the places most affected by colonialism, I found this history to be incredibly troubling. In a moment of spiritual crisis, I turned to the Book of Mormon, reading it not only as scripture, but as a literary text (a trick I learned in a "Bible as Literature" class I took as an undergrad). The experience, while short-lived (I don't think I got past 1 Nephi before the experiment had run its course), was life-altering.

Much of the value of this reading came from Nephi's vision. After seeing the Tre of Life and some of the other elements of Lehi's vision, Nephi is shown much of what befall his descendants through the subsequent centuries. In chapter 13 we get the postcolonial meat: the Great and Abominable Church (which I understand to be corrupt and worldly Christianity of all denominations) is founded, and the Gentiles arrive at the Land of Promise and scourge the descendants of Lehi (the chapter heading even uses the word "colonizing"). Reading this chapter as a postcolonial text made the events of colonization in the Americas not just historical fact, but prophetic reality. This, to me, was the turning point.

A professor at BYU once told me that sometimes God does His work through imperfect--even wicked--people. Such is surely the case with this history. To defend Columbus, Cortez, Coronado, Onate, and others outright is disingenuous, but to see them as part of a necessary process, of bringing the biblical text--corrupted and poorly interpreted as it was--to the Western Hemisphere, as well as eastern Asia, Africa, and the Pacific, makes sense to me. Joining the sticks of Ephraim and Judah was a necessary part of the dispensational events that form the basis of the Book of Mormon prophecies. Even if men who did wicked or shortsighted things were invovled, it was still

As Lehi puts it in his final words to his children, "there shall none come into this land save they shall be brought by the hand of the Lord." Whether I like it or not, that includes slave traders and criminals, racists and persecutors, colonizers and liars, as well as my own ancestors (some of whom undoubtedly may fit into some of these other categories as well). (As a side note, Dad once posed the troublesome question of whether this meant that Africans sold into slavery were brought by the hand of the Lord, and I think this reading answers that with a resigned "yes," which also means that we have to consider contemporary immigration--even of the illegal sort--similarly.)

All of this is then to permit the multicultural, multilingual, dynamic place that is our nation (and, more broadly, our hemisphere) today. If we look at the migration of Lehi's family as the beginning of a long history of cultural displacement--sometimes through violence--we see that the Book of Mormon truly speaks as a voice from the dust--meaning not only that it testifies of the words of prophets who lived ages ago, but also that it witnesses of the very earth upon which we tread. The land in which we dwell carries the histories of colonizations, both ancient and modern, and the foundational text of Mormonism helps us understand the bloody, messy, complicated history of this part of the globe, and through that, a wider understanding of how God works on the macro level to reveal truth to and bless the lives of His children.

Education

2009-07-23T21:33:00.000-06:00

At last week's scout campout, one of the scout leaders posed an interesting question to the boys (running at the end of the pack, I caught little of the conversation, but it caused me to think heavily for a mile or so). He asked the boys what their number one priority would be if they were President of the United States.

It's the sort of thing I'm sure I thought about and cared about deeply hen I was in my late teens and early twenties, but my jaded adulthood has kept me from such thoughts. I'm much less passionate about some of the issues that once got me fired up, and, while I'm still interested in politics, I find myself much less partisan. Probably for the best.

So it took me a while to figure out what I care about, what my priority would be. But I finally came back to what I've been doing all my life, the only real job I've ever had: education.

And I come at this topic with a perspective very heavily influenced by my faith. The other day I was reading in 3 Nephi chapter 6, one of the more breakneck paced chapters in the Book of Mormon. After Nephi seals the heavens and the people repent, they quickly return to wickedness. (It always amazes me when the narrative account moves--in the space of two chapters--from a profound sense of happiness due to the righteous living of the people to their fully iniquitous state.)

In describing this wickedness, Mormon uses some language that I find intriguing. In verse 12, he states that "the people began to be distinguished by ranks," an inequality that always marks iniquity (the etymological roots of the two words are very entangled). But the cause of the inequality is in "their riches and their chances for learning."

The next few verses (I'm especially interested in verses 13 and 15 here) go on to explore the results of this disparity. But the cause--the vastly differing opportunities for education among the people--is what interests me. So, here's my response to the question posed on the hike.

I would radically reconfigure how the federal government supports higher education. Not in terms of mandating what degrees are offered or how programs are run, but in how opportunities for higher education are made available. I would rework the Pell Grant system to address the tuition cost crisis.

(I read recently that when the Pell Grant system was instituted, the grant amount covered somewhere in the neighborhood of 70% of average education costs. Today, they cover closer to 35% of the cost of a degree. Between out-of-control increases in tuition and [not coincidentally] administrator salaries and lagging increases in funding, we've slipped in our support for students, especially for the students who need higher education the most.)

But it's not just about increasing the amount of Pell Grant money available. I some cases, that would make matters worse. (Here's an example. At the college where I teach, tuition is very reasonable--the classes I teach are tuition-free for residents of the local tax district. So many students get money back on Pell Grants. This leads to pretty massive [unofficial] enrollment drops the day after Pell checks are distributed. This then bites the students who fail to pass enough of their classes, as they go on academic probation and often lose their Pell eligibility.)

Instead, what I want to see is smarter funding, attached to both tuition cost and student income. Make not only community college education, but also public and private universities accessible and affordable. Offer students the opportunity to invest Pell money in excess of tuition and book costs in a personal savings plan with matching funds (perhaps at a 2-to-1 ratio) for graduate studies, opening a small business, or buying a home. Or direct any excess funds back to the institution with the stipulation that a) the funds go directly to instruction and certain support services (tutoring, advising, etc.) and b) retention and graduation rates exceed certain rates.

None of this makes for a perfect solution, and there would be all sorts of resistance from administrators, faculty, politicians, and parents. But, I think we need to be, to use my favorite Obama term, audacious in tackling this iniquity.

On Self-Reliance

2009-07-20T20:30:00.000-06:00

This past Sunday, the Living section of our local paper featured a cover story on how LDS teachings related to self-reliance are valuable, especially in the midst of a recession. I found the coverage of this important doctrinal aspect of our faith--and its practical implications--to be clear and accurate. It also made me think about how self-reliance embodies a gospel-centered approach to life.

I first began to understand self-reliance several years ago when I served as our ward employment specialist. In many ways I was a horrible failure in this calling--I don't think anyone I worked with got or improved their employment. But I did play a role in developing a self-reliance plan for our ward, which enabled the Bishop to focus our resources on helping needy families and individuals in meaningful, long-term ways. And I believe this was a key part of that Bishop's time in that calling, shifting our ward's welfare work from putting out fires to helping people make lasting changes to move toward being self-reliant.

This has also been a blessing for our family. We worked hard at that time to pay off our credit card debt, and while we have months where this issue recurs, we have enjoyed the freedom that comes from having more of our paycheck available for our own use. The decreased stress and the ability to be of more service to others have been immense blessings.

But I am also impressed by how self-reliance has come to mean more to us than money. We have worked on our food storage and our emergency reserves, we have made changes to our physical surroundings (although the backyard is still a work in progress and source of marital strife at ties), and we have worked to instill in our children a respect for the blessings we enjoy and a willingness to work.

This, finally, is the direction I wish to go as a family in regards to our efforts towards self-reliance. As with any important principle of the gospel, this is not just for us, but for our children. I want them to grow to be wise, happy, hard-working individuals who contribute to their communities. I wish for them to be free of debt, to earn as much education as they can, to find enjoyment in the work they do.

On the Loyal Opposition

2009-07-12T19:52:00.000-06:00

With the confirmation hearings for Sonia Sotomayor beginning today, I thought it timely to return to this unique part of American democracy for today's rant. In large part I approach this topic with gratitude for a system in which the deliberative Senate has the opportunity to question the president's nominees to key posts, most especially the Supreme Court.

But I am also bothered by the role being played by Senate Republicans in trying to define the terms of what the judicial branch is to do. The insistence that the courts are to practice what Justice Scalia has called "strict constructionsim" (which he and the other conservatives on the court immediately abandon in cases involving eminent domain, voting rights, and campaign finance) is annoying, as no such philosophy exists or has existed, save in the minds of reactionaries who see anything progressive as inherently degenerate. This is particularly galling, given the disdain with which the right views the judiciary whenever a ruling goes against conservative thought.

This op-ed piece by Senator Jeff Sessions, the de facto Republican voice on the SCOTUS hearings made this argument in a particularly flimsy manner, rife as it is with misinterpretations, generalizations, and contradictions. Let's get to it.

For starters, we have the tired argument against empathy, of which more later. Sticking to the Joe-the-plumber-style GOP talking points, Sessions states that empathy "says that justice should not be blind, that it should not be based only on the law and the Constitution, but that it should take a judge's own personal and political feelings into account." Ignoring the fact is always the case that a human judge is influenced by his/her own subjectivity, Sessions seems to argue for an automon-type approach to the judicial process. This, of course is interesting, given the highly emotional nature of right-wing positions on issues ranging from abortion ("baby-killing!" they shout) to immigration ("stealing American jobs!" they cry).

Sessions follows this with (to use the terminology of classical rhetoric, a la freshman comp classes) an appeal to pathos, when he asks "if you or I step into a courtroom, shouldn't we be able to do so with confidence that we will get a fair day in court no matter our background, experience, or politics — and no matter the background, experience, or politics of the judge?" Failing to acknowledge that historically the vast majority of judges have been old white men, often ruling against women, minorities, and the poor and disenfranchised, Sessions appeals to equality, but only inasmuch as it applies to people who are--ethnically, culturally, and socially--like him.

To accomplish this, the Senator refers (predictably) to the recent Supreme Court ruling in the Ricci case. As if confirmation to the Supreme Court required one to have a perfect batting average vis-a-vis the Court, Sessions argues that Sotomayor's lower-court ruling on the case places her outside of the national mainstream on issues of racial diversity and affirmative action. In summarizing the case, Sessions says "Eighteen firefighters, one of whom suffers from a learning disability, studied for months to pass the city's promotion exam. They did. But the city junked the results because they didn't feel the outcome met the appropriate racial quota. Sotomayor sided with the city and even denied the firefighters a trial." Besides the use of the inaccurate term in describing the legalities of the case ("quotas"), Sessions makes a plea here for the very quality he derides--empathy.

If we are to expect, value, and even demand equal treatment for both parties, the fact--so often cited by conservative pundits in referring to this case--that the plaintiff "suffers from a learning disability" and made great sacrifices to study for this exam is entirely irrelevant. Clearly what we see in this fallacious argument is politicking at its worst. To base a claim on a constitutional value that one then disregards when it is convenient, to oppose a highly qualified nominee simply because that person's ideology is contrary to one's own, to vilify a moderate as a radical while ignoring the radical nature of one's own position in the (hopefully) vain attempt to shift the political spectrum--all of this is to perpetuate the win-at-all-costs Rovian politics that sullied the Bush administration and led to intellectual hollowness of the GOP and its current exile from the national political landscape.

On second thought, let's hear more from Senator Sessions. I'm sure it will only make Judge Sotomayor and President Obama look that much more impressive by comparison...

Reflections on Independence Day

2009-07-06T11:27:00.000-06:00

The Sunday closest to Independence Day has always been an odd moment for me. I like the national anthem as much as anyone else, but singing all three verses while standing up is a bit wearisome. And America the Beautiful gets crazy in the last verse: "Thine alabaster cities gleam/ Undimmed by human tears."

This is complicated even more when the conservative politics of many members influences patriotic sentiment in ways that I am not always comfortable with. Suffice it to say that I have gritted my teeth at times on the first Sunday of July.

That's why I was so pleased with this Fast Sunday. The testimonies were focused on the gospel, not the cultural aspects of Mormonism that can be problematic. I was especially touched by the closing prayer and how the good brother who offered it gave thanks for this nation, a land of freedom in which the gospel could be restored and then taken to all the world. In a succinct and heartfelt prayer, this man summarized the essence of gospel-based patriotism.

Over the weekend I read this blog entry at BYU's Religious Studies website, and I find it an insightful way of viewing the past holiday and the implications for Latter-day Saints. The entry gets at my own pet peeve, the tendency we have to replace genuine patriotism and love of country with demagoguery and nationalism, and I appreciate the warning tone.

I see this issue a lot like parenting. I don't love my children because they are better than another person's children, but because they are mine. We love our country not because it is better than Spain or Japan or Kenya, but because it is ours, and because we have an obligation to constantly make it better.

To Do Lists

2009-07-02T10:56:00.000-06:00

Over the last few years I have experimented with a number of different to-do list tools. I've used index card lists, Outlook's tasks feature, Freemind, My Life Organized, Google Calendar, Remember the Milk, Now Do This, and several combinations of these. And I'm still working on a system that I can easily transfer among the half-dozen computers I use (fours of which I use on a daily basis).

Earlier this week I read this piece from Slate, in which the author reviews a (seemingly arbitrary) handful of web-based to-do list tools. I find these reviews to be useful, but that utility is limited by the fact that the author's criteria for choosing a tool are different than my own.

So, in the spirit of the article, here's a request for some feedback. What kinds of tools do you use, and what are their advantages and limitations? And, given the following parameters, what suggestions do you have for me?

I need/want a system that has the following characteristics:

Web based, preferably with an offline/export feature
Visual (either nesting hierarchies, mind mapping, or color-coding)
Expandable
Flexible (I want to be able to move tasks from one category to another easily, or to take a sub-task and promote it)
Deadline/calendaring
Free (I don't want to pay for a tool that I fear will become obsolete in a year)

What do you think?

Freedom

2009-06-23T07:01:00.000-06:00

It has been fascinating and inspiring--and simultaneously distressing and sorrowful--to follow the news from Iran. Unexpectedly, a highly spurious election--the kind of thing we have come to expect of many places throughout the world--has met resistance, as people have made noise, proudly and bravely, longing for a right that is so fundamental as to be taken for granted in these United States of America. And, with July 4th not much more than a week away, this has prompted me to reflect on the nature of freedom.

A common theme of the commentary on Iran has been a bemoaning of the laissez-faire approach of the Obama administration, ridicule and contempt for the lack of forceful denunciations from the world's superpower. The right-wing pundits have hopped on this as a sign of both the president's lack of spine and his acquiescence to the foes of liberty. At this I raise my eyebrows.

It seems to me a misreading of what freedom is. At work I share an office with another English faculty member, our chair, who leans left in his politics, but who is far from a rabble-rousing radical. But for over four years he had one political cartoon on the office door (it came down in January). The scene is titled "Johnny Freedom-Seed," and depicted George W Bush dancing about with a basket, tossing in the air miniature missiles that blossomed not into trees, but small explosions. It is, I believe, a fitting metaphor for the previous administration's worldview of freedom, a commodity that can be given, imposed, transplanted.

But freedom cannot come from another. As we learned from the Civil War and Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, freedom is not granted simply by our words, but by our actions, the deeds of Gettysburg and Antietam, of Selma and Montgomery. Freedom is not the toppling of a statue of Saddam Hussein, but in the purple fingers of Iraqis voting years later. The Cold War taught us this as well, as it was not merely ICBMs, but East Germans with sledge hammers, that brought an empire to its knees.

And so I applaud a president who, as John Dickerson argues, understands that we cannot win Iran's people their freedom; they must fight for it. Whether that revolution is happening now or happens decades from now, it will only happen when normal people, pushed too far, like the patriots we honor in our parades next week, decide that freedom is not simply a right of mankind, but a privilege we partake of only to the extent that we understand, honor, value, and struggle for it.

On Expectations & Doctrines

2009-06-12T11:20:00.000-06:00

Every month our ward holds a ward find activity. We identify individuals whose records are in our ward but whom we do not know, and we send people out to knock on doors and find them. It's a good and important thing to do, and we've had some really positive experiences with it.

This Sunday I went out with the full-time missionaries to find some of our members, one of whom was at home. She was surprised to see us, and I was surprised by her explanation of why she is not active: "serious theological differences with the Church." Rarely do you get that kind of candor; often it's feeling unwelcoming or being offended or being uninterested in worshiping.

This got me thinking about why people leave the Church. Here are some thoughts, beginning with an interesting entry I read at By Common Consent on how the cultural expectations we have as members of the Church can be problematic. The author discusses how she felt underprepared for some of the big life events that define one as LDS, and many of the comments mirror that sense of pressure that many young members feel at the prospect of the milestones, especially those associated with the temple.

In many ways this sentiment is very different than my experience. I was immensely excited to go to the temple. (When, during the first week of my freshman year, I was called as the president of the Elders quorum in my student ward, I sort of hoped that it would require that I be endowed.) Leaving on a mission and getting married in the temple were equally exciting for me.

But I do know something of feeling alien within the culture. This was most evident in the post-9/11-pre-Iraq-War period when we had just moved to ABQ. (I've blogged about this before, so I'll spare you the details here.) I felt like I did not share the same values or priorities as those with whom I worshiped.

I think about this in the context of another piece from BCC, this one from earlier this month. Here the idea of cognitive dissonance is used to explore faith. I like the argument that we develop faith when that faith is tested, when we are not ready for or comfortable with what we see or do.

And I think this becomes a useful and valuable way to look at faith. It is not believing when it is easy, or practicing your religion in ways that are familiar. Our spiritual growth--like any sort of growth, really--comes only when we are pushed. Only when we come to the questions we cannot answer do we find what we truly believe.

I suppose this is what struck me about that conversation. We tend to think of Mormon doctrine as being pretty homogeneous and top-down: the Prophet receives revelation and we fall in line. But there's a lot more diversity of views than that image would imply. As the Church continues to grow and define itself more articulately, it is important that we be aware of this fact; a 13-million member body with temples in Manhattan and Accra is radically different than one with the majority of its population in small farming communities in the Rocky Mountains.

We Believe in Meetings

2009-06-10T15:58:00.000-06:00

We don't always (often? ever?) like them, but as Latter-day Saints we hold a lot of them. And I find myself in more of them than I would like these days. In my effort to make meetings more manageable, I've found a few resources that I believe are helpful.

The first comes from Mormon Times, and explains the role of Church meetings and makes some suggestions for how one ought to act in a council or committee meeting. The emphasis on an agenda stands out as being especially pertinent (and with our new ward clerk, I think the quality of the agendas--which I have been hobbling together recently--will improve).

The other is an episode of the Public Speaker podcast, and discusses meetings more generally. Again, the importance of planning the meeting is made clear. This is an area where most Church meetings lack. We hold PEC because we're supposed to, not always because we have a clear vision of what we're supposed to do.

Slowly I'm beginning to see the meetings I attend as necessary and vital parts of ministering, of knowing what needs to be done and who can best do it.

More on SCOTUS

2009-06-02T13:32:00.000-06:00

I found this piece in the WSJ today; it excerpts from then-Senator Obama's comments at the confirmation hearings of then-SCOTUS nominee John Roberts. What I find interesting is Obama's emphasis on the 5% of the law that is not cut-and-dried, where the idea of empathy comes into play. It is this idea that to me highlights the ideological divide between left and right, a divide that the George Will and Cal Thomas wing of conservatism have tried to use as a wedge, much to the detriment of the right.

Here's how I see it. The ability to consider the implications of a judgment on the various parties involved (to empathize, which is markedly different than sympathizing) is at the heart of judgment. Parenting has taught me that when a conflict is not clearly delineated between perpetrator and victim, wisdom lies in listening and considering carefully the ways in which justice can affect everyone involved. And sometimes blind justice (the metaphor that so many conservative pundits have tried to contrast with the idea of empathy) is simply mistaken.

I see another connection in how disciplinary action is carried out in the Church. The purpose of a disciplinary council is not some cold hard justice or retribution for an infraction. Rather, the council intends always to bless the lives of everyone involved, both transgressor and any parties affected by the transgression. Mercy certainly rules in these councils, and the guiding principle is that of helping people move on with their lives.

In discussion of welfare, we often talk of how government systems ought to emulate the Church's welfare program. I think a similar principle would work well in the courts. If the justice system were more empathetic--not less--and more focused on helping people rebuild their lives, instead of the vindictive and retributive nature of contemporary American justice, I believe we would have a much more perfect union.

Judicious

2009-05-31T20:54:00.000-06:00

The fun is back in national politics, as the right grapples with the first big moment of the Obama administration--the nomination of Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. She's a great pick in terms of both qualifications and political savvy, and it's been interesting (and, I would say, enlightening) to watch the debate of how the confirmation process will go. But I've also enjoyed listening to the old debates about the judiciary, and my hope is that the confirmation hearings will highlight this issue more.

For me, the most interesting piece on this came from the Wall Street Journal online. Titled, "Republicans, Let's Grow Up," this editorial calls for a thoughtful and articulate conservative critique of Sotomayor. The argument is that this is an opportunity for Republicans to ask important questions about the role of the judicial branch, an argument the WSJ believes that the GOP can win.

I find this fascinating, in part because it stands in such stark contrast to my experience with the Republican party. I have known the party of Gingrich and Limbaugh and Cheney, the bucolic, loud, angry old white men who seem to view government as some sort of bogeyman that wants nothing more than to take away their assault rifles, abort babies indiscriminately, and take all of their wealth in the form of taxation. I have never known a thoughtful, articulate conservatism.

In particular, the use of the phrase "judicial activism" has always bothered me. So too has "legislating from the bench." Both of these strike me as hollow rhetoric meant to demonize an entire (and vital) branch of American democracy. In my mind, a judiciary must be activist, because anytime a law is overturned or ruled unconstitutional, action has been taken. and if a court cannot make those sorts of decisions, then the courts are of no use.

For example, let's assume that a group of states in a particular region of the country wanted to keep a large group of people from voting, attending schools with the majority group, or patronizing certain establishments, the legislative and executive bodies of those states would pass and enforce discriminatory laws aimed at alienating those citizens. This would leave the only recourse for justice in that hands of the court. Thus, Brown v. Board of Education came to be.

An of course conservatives believe in judicial activism. They've been working for decades to overturn Roe v. Wade, which is only possible through a judicial reinterpretation of that decision and the overturning of precedent (admittedly, a constitutional amendment would do the trick, but the founders made that process intentionally difficult, so a revision to the foundational document of the nation banning a rare medical procedure is, shall we say, unlikely). But it would take a very activist judge to find any state's restrictive abortion ban constitutional.

Likewise, any time a court strikes down a municipal or state gun-control law as being overly restrictive of second amendment rights, that court is being activist, but you don't hear the right-wing demagogues shouting down such decisions. Truly, "activism" is a relative and meaningless term.

So, let's hear the arguments. What is the role of the judiciary, and how should judges interpret the constitution?

From Dad

2009-04-21T23:23:00.000-06:00

My father sent me this email on Monday, and, with his permission, I share it here, hopefully for a good laugh. If it offends you greatly, it's his fault...

MEN ARE JUST HAPPIER PEOPLE

NICKNAMES
If Laura, Kate and Sarah go out for lunch, they will call each other Laura, Kate and Sarah.
If Mike, Dave and John go out, they will affectionately refer to each other as Fat Boy, Godzilla and Four-eyes.
EATING OUT
When the bill arrives, Mike, Dave and John will each throw in $20, even though it's only for $32..50. None of them will have anything smaller and none will actually admit they want change back.
When the girls get their bill, out come the pocket calculators.
MONEY
A man will pay $2 for a $1 item he needs.
A woman will pay $1 for a $2 item that she doesn't need but it's on sale.
BATHROOMS
A man has six items in his bathroom: toothbrush and toothpaste, shaving cream, razor, a bar of soap, and a towel .
The average number of items in the typical woman's bathroom is 337. A man would not be able to identify more than 20 of these items.
ARGUMENTS
A woman has the last word in any argument.
Anything a man says after that is the beginning of a new argument.
FUTURE
A woman worries about the future until she gets a husband.
A man never worries about the future until he gets a wife.
SUCCESS
A successful man is one who makes more money than his wife can spend.
A successful woman is one who can find such a man.
MARRIAGE
A woman marries a man expecting he will change, but he doesn't.
A man marries a woman expecting that she won't change, but she does.
DRESSING UP
A woman will dress up to go shopping, water the plants, empty the trash, answer the phone, read a book, and get the mail.
A man will dress up for weddings and funerals.
NATURAL
Men wake up as good-looking as they went to bed.
Women somehow deteriorate during the night.
OFFSPRING
Ah, children. A woman knows all about her children. She knows about dentist appointments and romances, best friends, favorite foods, secret fears and hopes and dreams.
A man is vaguely aware of some short people living in the house.
THOUGHT FOR THE DAY A married man should forget his mistakes. There's no use in two people remembering the same thing!

(My favorite part is the one about kids--vaguely aware of short people in the house! I'm always tripping over them and wondering who left them lying around.)

A Couple of Baseball Pieces

2009-04-20T09:54:00.000-06:00

Here are two things I've found online recently related to the national pastime. First, on Slate, a contest to describe the great game in 150 words or less. I'm busy working on my own piece, and hope to post it here soon. Feel free to write your own and add it as a comment.

Second, an article from ESPN's Rick Reilly (whom I typically disdain)on the Arizona Diamondbacks' scholarship program. It's a feel-good story about a big business doing something positive for the community. And while season tickets are not nearly as crucial as food and shelter, they sure trump a lot of other things. I'd take season tickets to a big-league team (or even the local 'Topes) over a second car, cell phone, cable TV, or faster Internet connection. As luxuries go, it makes the top of my list...

Free-Range: It's Not Just For Poultry

2009-04-08T08:08:00.000-06:00

Here's an interesting blog that I found recently. Free-Range Kids, run by columnist and mother Lenore Skenazy, operates under the assumption that those of us who are parents today were raised with the freedom to explore the world unsupervised, and that many of our safety-obsessed parenting methods limit that freedom and, ultimately, hurt our kids and their ability to grow into confident, capable adults.

In some ways, this takes me back to my most recent entry here and the idea of stepping back from my micromanaging parenting. If I were to not only allow my children a bit of sloppiness, but also encourage them in exploring the world around them, would they become more savvy and able to negotiate the world?

Taking this farther and into my professional life, I wonder if a lot of the young students I see—the ones who make poor decisions in their personal and academic lives, the ones who are surrounded by “helicopter parents,” the ones with severely stunted interpersonal skills–are the result of the kind of parenting Skenazy denounces. And is her argument validated by college students and young adults who don't leave home, go to college, get jobs, get married, start families, etc.?

This could also apply to the phenomenon of the “boomerang kids,” those young adults who, having left home for college or to start a career, return to their parents' home after graduation or at some sort of personal crisis and move into their old bedrooms and routines. I don't know if this trend has become more pronounced during the current recession (during the housing boom it happened why a new grad couldn't afford a house), but I would not be surprised if this is becoming even more common.

(As an aside, I realize there are many situations in which living with your parents for a short period is the right thing to do, and that everyone's situation is different, but the sheer scope of this is what troubles me. My generation's general fear of commitment appears to extend to committing to being grown-up and making the sacrifices involved in moving out and moving on.)

Finally, I am interested in the spiritual implications of this theory. In my efforts to teach my children and keep them from making the big mistakes that can ruin their lives, do I too often get overzealous and limit their ability to learn from the smaller mistakes? It seems I’ve heard of the approach that would ensure that everyone only made good decisions and never messed up, and I think I remember that plan being a bit of a failure…But I distinctly remember making a lot of miscues and saying and doing a lot of stupid, foolish, and reckless things in my formative years, and I often learned more from those experiences than I did from the (few) times when I did things right.

And while I think there is some validity to the argument that the world in which our children live is more complicated and (at least potentially) more dangerous than the one in which we grew up, I wonder to what extent that is a creation of mass media and a culture of shock and scandal. The threats our children face are in many ways the same as always, and those risks that are more pronounced may in fact necessitate the kind of street smarts that Free-Range Kids believes can be fostered through a more independence-minded approach to parenting.

Why Focus On It?

2009-03-30T10:49:00.000-06:00

I like to read Slate, even though it is often full of boring political pieces I don't care about or cultural reviews of movies/albums/TV shows I'm not interested in. But Slate will occasionally hit a home run with an article I find thought-provoking and insightful. This is an example of that.

In this article on parenting, "The Messy Room Dilemma," the authors discuss the tendency we have as parents to make a big deal of our children's annoying habits. This piqued my interest immediately, as I am well aware that my parenting revolves primarily around getting my children to stop doing things that bug me, often in ways that are illogical and out of proportion to the offense being committed.

What interested me the most from the article (it's on page 2 of the sing-page view) is the question asked by the authors: Why should I focus on it? The argument is that most of the annoying habits children have will go away with time (and, though the authors don't say it, perhaps razzing from their peers has to be part of it--ever see a school-aged kid who still sucks his thumb?), and that sometimes we as parents just need to ride out the storm.

I like this question, and I think that when I'm at my best as a parent (read: when I do what Summer suggests I do) it's because I step back, take a breath, get some perspective, and stop worrying about how this thing annoys me.

I see a similar thing in my work. When a student's cell phone goes off in class, instead of reprimanding, I tend to pause enough to make the offender feel embarrassed or joke it away (my favorite is when the ring tone is some hip-hop song and I say, with an appropriate intonation, "Who'd have though that we would have the same ring tone?"). When we're working in the computer classroom I'm perfectly fine with students listening to their music (a student asked me one day if he could "bump his pod," which is apparently slang for listen to music on one's iPod--cool, huh?).

So, the question is: if I can smile and let it slide with my students, why can't I do the same with my kids? Clearly something to work on. And while I am not encouraging permissiveness in parenting (a common problem among many parents), I think the question of why should I focus on this gets at the heart of parenting. My goal is for my children to grow up happy and capable, able to make good decisions, and my habitual nitpicking is often detrimental to that goal, limiting their ability to make decisions. Here' to more flexibility and understanding in my parenting, and to a few more messes and mistakes. It'll be fun...right?

A Bit From the Corners of the Blogosphere

2009-03-13T12:10:00.000-06:00

First, a disclaimer. I tend to avoid what some have called the “bloggernacle,“ that online space in which LDS folks like myself (you know, young, smart, a bit smarmy, and, of course, humble) blog about topics related to church doctrine, Mormon culture, politics vis-à-vis Mormonism, and, only occasionally, the truths of the gospel. It seems a bit of a navel-gazing world in which motes are dissected while beams are ignored, or, to paraphrase another New Testament passage, the weightier matters of the law get short shrift.

But yesterday I found this entry on By Common Consent (you can read my comment here), in which the author explores the relationship between the housing bubble and the rapid temple construction of the 1990s and the first part of the current decade. Wondering if the church engaged in an over-reaching akin to that of homebuyers who took on irresponsible mortgage, the entry sets out some interesting--but ultimately inconclusive--data. What I find is interesting here is how the analysis of the data assumes that the 1990 status quo was somehow right, and that a period of disproportionate temple-building was anomalous.

I think about this at times when I go to the temple here and find a party of 10 or so for a session. This is certainly a far cry from the experience of temple worship in Provo, but it’s disingenuous to think that one experience is somehow better than the other. There’s something very personal about attending the temple here that is lost in a place like Salt Lake or Los Angeles (pre-Newport Beach and Redlands--LA might be less busy now).

The other thing the BCC author neglects--either intentionally or incidentally--is the simple belief that prophets of God, who ultimately make the decision to build a temple in a certain place at a certain time, enjoy a sense of perspective that we typically miss out on. I wonder to what extent the 128 temples we have today are a groundwork for future growth. I agree with the basic premise that temple building has accelerated beyond the rate of conversion or retention during my adult life, but I don’t see that as being a problem; instead, I find great hope in that fact.

For example, the announcement of a temple in Rome--news that I received with great emotion--seems to me to be less a questionable move, based on the current strength of the church in Italy, than an indicator that something big is afoot there. I don’t delude myself into anticipating huge exponential increases in convert baptisms the day after the dedication, but I see the presence of a temple as a commitment by the church, an investment in the future of the church in a community.

In ABQ, for example, the youth in our ward are able to attend the temple every 6 weeks or so, which is much more frequently than I was able to go on temple trips as a teenager. The simple logistics of a 30-minute (versus 2+ hour) drive makes a difference. And this sort of regular, consistent temple attendance among youth has to make a difference long-term. Not only are these young people more likely to remain active, but the sense of dedication to the gospel will permeate their experience and worldview, making them better member-missionaries, better full-time missionaries, and better parents. And while there is value to the idea of great sacrifice in traveling long distances to attend the temple, proximity has its rewards too.

A New Toy

2009-03-08T15:21:00.000-06:00

So I finally did it. After a lot of hemming and hawing, I decided to buy netbook. While we were out Friday, I stopped by a few places and looked at various models, but to no avail. But ever the persistent one, I decided to try again Saturday.

Thus Ryan and I left the house yesterday morning to go on an expedition. A quick stop to Staples and WalMart left me unimpressed. Staples only had the HP mini with 512 MB of RAM and 8 GB hard drive; it was only $299, but I wanted more RAM for sure and more hard drive if possible. WalMart carried an older model of the Acer One (the 120 GB hard drive model), reviews of which were not always positive. The most fruitful stop was Radio Shack, where a helpful salesman showed me the Acer One, with 1 GB RAM and 160 hard drive, for $350. The $350 was a bit high; I was hoping for closer to $300. Not liking any of these options, we drove on.

We stopped by another WalMart and Staples, but it was all the same story there. Ryan and I had a good chat about why I wanted to spend $300 on a computer (“That’s a lot of money,” said he) and why I didn’t actually have $300 in my pocket at the time. He then asked, when I explained that I would simply use the check card, how the bank knew which money was ours. Quite the mind that kids has.

In desperation, our time running short (it was now 10 am, and we needed to be home by 11 so Summer could pack up for a cookie booth), we decided to make one more stop. Skipping Best Buy, we pulled up to Office Max. There we found it. The same Acer model we had looked at earlier at Radio Shack, but for $299. It was the final day of that sale price and, as I found out after checking out, the last one they had in stock. Rejoicing, we went home with a new toy.

So here’s the final verdict. The machine is small (8.9" screen), light (2.4 lbs), and fast. I’ve got enough hard drive to use the hibernation feature, which saves battery power when I shut the lid and starts back up in about two seconds. I’ve loaded some new programs on, and I think I’ll install Open Office to take care of my word processing and presentation needs. I may also see if I can install the software I use on my PDA for the scriptures. I used the new toy today in bishopric and welfare meetings to take notes, and it’s going well.

The Interpretation of Dreams

2009-02-20T13:09:00.000-07:00

I don't often have memorable dreams. Or, rather, I have such a lousy memory and as such don't remember what my brain was up to at night. But Wednesday night was different. And fear not, this is all G rated...

In my dream, we as a bishopric learned that some mega church in town was offering free health insurance to members of its congregation, and, for some reason, we wanted to find out more about this. So we set up appointments for each of us to meet with some of their big wigs to find out more.

However, in our desire to be efficient, we set separate appointments, and I was to meet with the #3 at this church, sort of the business head of the operation. I don't know who the other two members of the bishopric were meeting with; they vanished from the dream at this point.

After arriving at the high-rise where this church was headquartered, I waited in the lobby for my appointment. The fellow I met with was pretty dismissive of my inquiries about their program, and sent me packing hastily. So I sat in the lobby waiting for the others.

While I waited, I did what I typically do when I wait--I got out my PDA and tried to connect to a nearby wireless network to go online. (By the way, in my dream, my old Dell Axim was replaced by some fancy piece of equipment--I referred to it as "James Bond's PDA" when relating this dream to Summer yesterday.)

The network I connected to wound up being this church's network, and I suddenly found myself perusing their files. For some reason this seemed perfectly normal to me, and not at all ethically problematic. I found some files about this health insurance plan and exulted in my cleverness.

Until the guy I had met with earlier came storming out of his office and demanded to know what I was doing hacking into their secure network. I explained that I had connected unintentionally (but neglected to mention finding the files), and he took the device from my hand and tossed it to the ground. When it didn't break, he picked it up and threw it down again.

I picked up my PDA and walked out, a bit embarrassed, but mainly upset at this behavior. Walking to the parking lot, I found my car (in this dream I, ever the eco-friendly guy, drove a Smart Car) pushed up onto the sidewalk. Apparently throwing my handheld device on the ground wasn't enough for this bully, who had at some point gotten his heavies to move my car. So, I pushed my tiny car back on the pavement, got in, and drove off.

This dream raises several questions for me. Do I see other churches as competitors to ours? (I also saw a flyer in their headquarters for an upcoming lecture: "Destroying Mormonism From the Inside") Do I covet other people's fancy gadgets and fuel efficient cars? Do I secretly want to be a cyber-thief or spy of some sort? Do I empathize with the plight of the newly-unemployed and uninsured to the point that I want the church to investigate ways to provide insurance for them? Had I simply spent too much time at the meetinghouse Wednesday night? What would Freud say?

It's That Time of Year Again, Or, Another Nerdy Plan

2009-02-13T18:07:00.000-07:00

Every year around this time I get two hankerings. The first is to go to baseball games. Winter is clearly on its way out; in just over a month I’ll be in Phoenix for a weekend of spring training baseball and general guy-bonding with dad and Nathan. And just next week UNM home games start, so I’m about ready to get my fix.

The second yen that I get is to buy stuff. You see, in early February we sit down and do our taxes and get all giddy about our return. The child tax credit is a wonderful thing. But this year, instead of wishing for a scooter, I have more practical plans.

So does Summer, who wants to start canning. We found a starter set, which comes with a 21-quart pot, jars, and various utensils, at amazon.com. Along the same lines, Summer and I did a search for home flour mills yesterday, finally agreeing that we like the products by Kitchen Resources.

My goals are nerdier. You see, here’s my dilemma. I’m very organized in my virtual spaces. My folders are well-arranged, my work blogs are humming nicely, I even upload and file documents well at scribd. But when I’m forced to use paper, I’m a mess. And church stuff typically involves lots of paper.

When I served as ward clerk, I would routinely take my laptop to meetings and keep notes there. But a full-size laptop is a bit unwieldy for a three-hour block with a host of unpredictable events and meetings. But the PDA, while portable, is not practical for taking a lot of notes, and the small screen and memory keep it from being completely versatile. So I’m considering (and have Summer’s blessing to buy) a netbook.

My plan is to tote the 2.3 lb piece (about the same size as a hardback book, and certainly smaller than the binder and folder I’m currently using) around, break it out to take notes and organize myself using my new favorite tool, Freemind. I can also load up my scriptures and other books and have access to an entire library.

The are definite drawbacks. I’d still be using a screen-based technology in a largely print-based world. And the resistance from the more retrograde members of the ward might sink the plan. But if I can get things done more consistently and effectively, it’s at least a try.

And since the low-end machines I’m looking at (like this Dell mini) are in the $300 range, it’s not a huge gamble. If I find after two weeks that the experiment is a failure, the netbook goes to the kids as a second at-home computer, or Summer and I can use it and the desktop to work simultaneously. I could leave my laptop at work more often and lug less stuff around (I dream of leaving for work and coming home again with nothing more than my PDA, iPod, and flash drive).

So, does anyone out there have experience with netbooks, or suggestions regarding especially good values? I want small—a 9” screen is the biggest I’d consider, and I even like the 7” ones I’ve seen. The idea of a linux-based machine is interesting, but I’m so embedded in Windows that I fear compatibility issues when I move files back and forth. And, since I’m famously cheap, I want to spend less than $350. Actually, I’d like to spend less than $250, but that’s not very likely.

Headline Idiocy

2009-02-03T16:29:00.000-07:00

Actually, it's the sub-title. A commentary piece in today's local paper on the Michael Phelps marijuana photo (it's by Jo-Ann Barnas of the Detroit Free Press, if you want the citation) carried this title: "Young Fans Hurt By Phelps' Actions." Fine so far.

But here's the aformentioned sub-title: "Parents Now Must Talk to Their Kids." (In my most sarcastic voice) "Heaven forbid you have to talk to your kids. Oh no! What's next--spending time with them? Dear me!"

As an added bonus, the article included this line: "Parents of school-age swimmers know they must have yet another heart-to-heart with their children." (More sarcasm) "Not another heart-to-heart. That's two in the past 5 years. Oh my!"

Hearing Voices

2009-01-27T20:36:00.000-07:00

Actually, one voice. Here's the scoop. This morning as I was walking to the bus stop, I listened to President Obama's inaugural address on my iPod (I was in class at the time last week and had never gotten around to listening to the audio). I'll spare you my commentary on the speech, but, to be succinct, I found it inspiring and hopeful, if a bit wonky.

After I got to the bus, I turned to my daily scripture study (I read a few chapters from my PDA on the commute to work each day--now I just need a good system to consistently study over the weekend and on break). But having listened to the President's particular cadences and intonations, drawn as they are from a rich rhetorical tradition (think Martin Luther King and the oratory style of the black church), I found myself hearing 2 Nephi chapter 2 in Barack Obama's voice, complete with his characteristic pauses and inflections. And it worked pretty well. The literary style of that chapter in particular--and Lehi's words in general--fit the kind of patterns used by our new President in his speeches.

So now I'm just waiting for the audio recording of Barack Obama reading the whole Book of Mormon. Should I make that suggestion at the new and improved White House web site? Or do Mormons for Obama have that in their business plan already?

Good Eats

2009-01-24T14:15:00.000-07:00

This entry has two themes. First, some good eats in our home this past week. On Wednesday I came home and encountered an unexpected aroma. It was blueberry pie, made from scratch that day by Summer using some blueberries she bought at the store a few days earlier. The berries were nearing their end that day, so my provident wife made use and made a great bit of pie.

Then yesterday, in celebration of National Pie Day, she made a cherry pie (canned berries and a store-bought crust this time, but it was a busy day). With some vanilla bean ice cream, it has made a yummy treat. Few things in life are as good as homemade pie.

Next, I'm still plugging away at Animal, Vegetable, Miracle, and it's--no pun intended--growing on me. As the memoir progresses, Kingsolver seems less pious about her family's experiment and more grateful for the bounty they reap from their labors. the text is at its best when it's personal and narrative instead of didactic and preachy.

Right now it's August in the book and the tomatoes are in full force. July was zucchini season, and both of those chapters have reminded me of the garden Mom & Dad had at the farm house when I was growing up. It was a real blessing to be able to wander out and pick fresh tomatoes and peppers for a stir fry. I hope in 15 years or so I can be half the gardener they are.

In the meantime, with full-on spring not too far off, it's time to think about what to plant. We got some nice tomatoes last year, but the peppers never amounted to anything. In the past we've pulled off pumpkins, squash, zucchini, and cantaloupe. Any suggestions from the readership?

Finally, here are some links from the AVM website:

Slow Food, a movement away from processed, frozen, premade food
Local Harvest, with information about and links to local growers nationwide
Sunstone Herb Farm, a relatively new operation in the South Valley--I'll check it out one of these days

Pursuing Happiness

2009-01-13T20:01:00.000-07:00

I've found some interesting stuff online over the past week or so, and they've gotten me thinking. While there's a lot of despair over economic woe and wars (and rumors of war, to coin a phrase), there seems to be an interesting counter-cultural movement afoot online. Here are some things I've run across of late.

The first is a blog called "1000 Awesome Things." It's been around for a few months, but I just discovered it the other day. The premise is to create a list of 1000 things that bring simple joy into one's life--stuff like "When you’re really tired and about to fall asleep and someone throws a blanket on you," or "The first scoop out of a jar of peanut butter." They're all small things, and, while some of them make me go, "meh," a daily dose of awesomeness is pretty nice.

The second site I found recently is Gretchen Rubin's "The Happiness Project," which has been around for a few years, but which I just found today on its new Slate blog. Rubin's project, part of a book she is working on, is to explore the things that make us happy and identify commonalities among sources of happiness. A bit less concrete than the 100 things blog, and certainly rather academic in tone and nature, this blog gives some interesting insights into happiness.

All of this gets me thinking that it would be fun (and probably good for me) to post my own small pleasures, those little things that I often overlook. Stuff like getting to the bus stop right before the bus pulls up, or when Evan doesn't throw his snack on the floor. Here's to a happier year in 2009!

Yellowstone--There's Nothing Greater

2009-01-06T18:53:00.000-07:00

When I as growing up in Evanston, Wyoming, my parents would gather us up a few times a year and make the drive north to Yellowstone National Park. We frequently stayed in the Old Faithful Inn, although I also have memories of the Lake Lodge and trips to Mammoth at the north end of the park.

When I was 8, Dad and I got up early one morning and started hiking. We set off around the hot springs of the Old faithful geyser basin, tromped through forests and along streams, and scaled up and down all day. Eight hours and 20 miles later, we met up with Mom and my sisters and went back to the lodging, pleased with an epic day of hiking, one that would leave my young leg aching for weeks to come.

Later, as a teenager after we moved to Pennsylvania, Yellowstone became a central part of any good trip West. I vividly recall sitting on the porch at the Old Faithful Inn, reading and waiting for the next eruption, as the sun slowly set behind me.

A few years ago, when Isaac was a baby, we joined my parents for a trip to Yellowstone. We stayed in the cabins at Canyon and hiked down to the Lower Falls several times. It was my first--and, to date, only--trip to the park as an adult and parent, so my memories are a bit heavy on making sure Ryan didn’t fall into the geysers and braking quickly as bison crossed the road a few feet in front of our Hyundai in Hayden Valley.

I am currently reading Travels in the Greater Yellowstone by the tastefully-named Jack Turner, a series of essays about the ecology and geology of the ecosystem of the Greater Yellowstone area. Turner’s writing is clear and poignant as he reflects on a half-century of hiking, climbing, fishing, and fighting among the mountains, valleys, meadows, forests, rivers, and towns of northwestern Wyoming and southwestern Montana.

At the same time, there is a strangeness to the book, which leaves me with a bitter taste in the back of my mouth. Turner decries--as should any responsible lover of this wild land--the environmental degradation of the Great American West at the hands of unchecked mining and drilling, urban sprawl that reaches even places like Cody and Bozeman, poorly-managed tourism, and global climate change, which he details with the technical knowledge of the scientist and the remembrance of the old-timer who has seen Spring coming earlier and Summer growing warmer.

But that’s not what bothers me. It’s the hypocrisy I find in Turner’s attitude. The argument is, much like it is in Edward Abbey, that wild places need fewer visitors, fewer roads, more solitude and isolation. I agree, but it’s hard to make that claim when you live in a cabin in Jackson Hole and make your living as a mountain guide (i.e. dependent on a certain kind of tourist), as Turner does. I find it hard to say “amen” when the preacher says “Do as I say, not as I do.”

Or, more to the point, the preacher is saying “Here is something wonderful--this soul-enriching wilderness--but it is only for some, those who, by my standards, respect and understand it, who get it.” It’s the same attitude that looks down on middle-class, suburban tourists like the family Turner describes in his chapter on fishing the Firehole River: “While I set up my tent, four kids--my neighbors--stamp on every ant in sight. Their parents are figuring out how to erect their tent, a contraption nearly as large as our cabin. In its present state the tent looks like it was struck by a tornado. After watching me set up my tent--one pole, eight stakes, no floor--they glance hopefully in my direction. I ignore them but decide the kids need a sermon on food-chain dynamics.”

As an often-hapless father of small children whom I wish to expose to wild places, and who at times act irresponsibly once we get there, I’ve gotten those looks (more often at the Rio Grande Nature Center State Park in town when one of the little ones shatters the serenity of a hike by chasing after a roadrunner). And I’ve seen the attitude that Turner embodies here--the condescension of the wilderness-sage-in-his-own-mind who has to share his turf with a less-committed hiker or camper.

(As an aside, this is the real weakness of the environmental movement. Forget “tree hugging;” to me the shortcoming is in the environmentalist who looks at anyone who lives on the grid, shops at Wal-Mart, or uses the Internet regularly as a monolithic mass of resource-wasters and ecosystem-destroyers. It’s a good way to alienate potential allies in a quixotic appeal to absolutism.)

However, I find Turner’s expertise in the land he loves, as well as its flora, fauna, topology, and climate, to be enlightening and intoxicating. He’s also a word nerd; he spends time in a chapter on alpine tundra connection etymologically the words “wonder,” “wander,” and “wild.” And his prose captures the power and mystery, the allure and awe, of a landscape I wish I knew more intimately, one that is rooted in my memory and that I hope to instill in my children’s sense of self.

And, in the end, I find the persona that Turner embodies, for all its flaws, to be intriguing. In a chapter on the reintroduction of wolves into the Greater Yellowstone area (a project that Turner views ambivalently), he describes accompanying a female colleague to a meeting in Dubois with ranchers and hunters who oppose wolf reintroduction. She was nervous, so he comes along: "I left a loaded, sawed-off .12 gauge shotgun in the front seat and walked into the lecture hall armed with a 9 mm semi-automatic , extra magazines, and a snub-nosed .357 magnum in a small of the back holster. Not everyone in the environmental movement is a tree-hugging pacifist." (While I don't like guns, this is Wyoming he's talking about; I do wear sunscreen in New Mexico.) A pretty cool guy, this Turner fellow, all thing considered.

Laundry

2008-12-18T17:52:00.000-07:00

I'm officially on vacation, and Summer's been studying for a final exam, so I found myself doing a lot of household stuff this week. This includes laundry, which I find tedious but a step above cleaning the kitchen. But I do have a few rants on this chore.

First, I like my laundry simple. Cotton fibers that are machine dry. I hate all these fancy shirts that Summer (and, increasingly, Allyson) wears that are lay flat to dry or line dry. The other day Summer put a shirt in the laundry basket and, since it's a relatively new shirt, checked the instructions. "Machine wash cold, tumble dry low." My six favorite words. That and "Would you like some more pie?"

Second, we wear a lot of fleece. The load of darks yesterday was 80% fleece--kids' pjs, sweats, etc. A few weeks back I washed a full load of nothing but fleece. It's like a low-rent version of George Castanza's dream of being enveloped in velvet.

Roy Rants

Philadelphia Temple

NPR, APM, PRI...These are some of my favorite things

A Church within a Church

On Family Home Evening

D&C 59

Alma 58

On Affliction

Elder Oaks, U2, and D&C 4

D&C 58

More Moroni 10

Moroni 10 Reexamined

Enos 1:18

General Conference Notes

Pioneer Trek

Humility and Other Stuff

Thoughts on Reactivation and Baptism

Thoughts in the Temple Part 1

Activation Efforts

2011

Standing in Holy Places

1 Nephi 3

Not That Book of Revelation...

General Conference Reflections, Part 5

General Conference Reflections, Part 4

General Conference Reflections, Part 3

General Conference Reflections, Part 2

General Conference Reflections, Part 1

On Conversion

On Spiritual Strength

The First in an On-Going Discussion of Faith

Paradigms of Conversion

On Temple Covenants

More on Gospel Teaching

On Mormon Guilt

A Special Musical Post

On Gospel Teaching

2 Nephi Chapter 11

2 Nephi chapter 9, Part II

2 Nephi 9, Part I

On Spiritual Gifts---A Talk

More Old Testament Fun

Walking to Church

Moroni, Pahoran and erroneous revelation

Fast & Testimony, Part 2

Fast & Testimony

The Thesis Statement of the Book of Mormon

More Moroni 10

Differences in 1 Nephi 8 & 11

A Pleasant Passage from the Old Testament

More Moroni 10

Moroni 10, Part 1

"I Know Their Faith"

Happiness

Duty to God

Ezekiel 47

A New Way of Ranting

On Hate and Ignorance

On Being Messy

Bibliophilia

A Real Man

Not Even a Real Rant

A (Kind of) Conservative Rant For a Change

How Big a Tent?

Government

Back to the Ranting

Postcolonialism and Religious Discourse

Education

On Self-Reliance

On the Loyal Opposition

Reflections on Independence Day

To Do Lists

Freedom

On Expectations & Doctrines

We Believe in Meetings

More on SCOTUS

Judicious

More Good Reads--Travel Version

From Dad

A Couple of Baseball Pieces