Parley Pratt

I heard that a judge has approved exhuming what they believe to be Pratt grave in Arkansas. The plan is to move him to Utah per his last wishes. The only problem is that the evidence for exactly where Pratt is buried is a little foggy. With a few other people buried in the same grave the judge wanted assurances that no one else will get exhumed accidently. Apparently he got his assurances and the Pratt family is ready to procede. Mrs Froggie is a Pratt descendant.

Lady J
Isn't Pratt the guy who converted our first "church member" ancestor? I remember reading that somewhere.
Friday April 4, 2008 - 07:02pm (PDT)

Richard Bushman at Weber State

I just read a speech Richard Bushman gave at Weber State earlier this month (March 5th). In it he shares some good thoughts.
First the reason Mitt Romney failed was because he didn't understand that although Mormons are respected as good people, they are not trusted because their beliefs are too preposterous. Anyone that really believes that Mormon stuff can't really be trusted to have good judgement.
Second, we are trying too hard to be accepted into the fold of traditional Christianity. We are different. And the difference is what we should be proud of. No, we are not Christian in the same way that evangelicals are Christian, but we still believe in Jesus Christ. We are, of course, Christian in ways they will never be, but there is no need to be impolite and point that out. In his book Bushman pointed out that Joseph's revelations never tried to prove themselves. They simply stated what they were with the assumption of authenticity. We should stand on our own merits, and not whine that "they won't let us in their club".
Third, if we want to get to the point where our beliefs are accepted as legitimate (see the first thought), we need to work on how we present ourselves (see the second thought), and of course develop a patina on our faith that only time can produce.
Lastly, we need to understand what we have to offer to the world that non converts can take and use. We look around at the rest of the world and we see things we can borrow all over. Our prophets had said that we accept truth wherever we find it. So what truth can we offer to the outside world that doesn't require conversion in order to accept.
What do you think?

New Book

I started a new Mormon history book. It is Jospeh Smith: Rough Rolling Stone by Richard Bushman. It is a examination of the cultural environment in which Joseph grew up, and how it prepared him for the various rolls he took on through his life. It also looks at how Joseph differed from the other visionaries from the same period. For example, the common path to prophethood was to preach, and gather a following. Joseph's path did not include any preaching. He wasn't really that good at it, until later in his life. At the founding meeting of the Mormon church there wasn't even a sermon delivered.
Another example was The First Vision. The account described in the Pearl of Great Price was not the only version. The story changed over time. Bushman deftly explains this by the change in meaning it had based on the rolls Joseph took on through out his life. When he was very young, the primary purpose of the first vision was for the forgiveness of sins. Later, as he came to understand that he was to be a prohet, he saw the first vision in a different light (no pun intended). He saw it as the begining of his roll as visionary. So his explanation of the event changed. If I were to explain a pivotal moment in my life I'm sure the description might change as I grew to understand ultimate results of my choices.
The tone of the book is generally sympathetic. But the understanding of the book does not require acceptance of his claims, only an acceptance that he made the claims and that people believed him.
Bushman is the Chair of Mormon studies at Claremont University in southern California.

Iron Rod or Liahona

I read a talk written by Richard D Poll in 1967 entitled "What the church means to people like me". In it he compares two common approaches people have toward membership in the Mormon church. He describes them using Book of Mormon imagery; Iron Rod Mormons and Liahona Mormons. The terms were new to me. But the talk has been circulated for many years.
The general idea is that the Iron Rod represents strict adherance to the Gospel. Doing so will lead you like a handrail to eternal life. The Liahona represents an indication of the direction we need to go like a compass, so long as we have faith in God and keep his commandments.
Iron Rod Mormons tend to know the church is true, favor literal interpretations of scripture, and view the world in terms of absolutes. Liahona Mormons tend to have faith that the church is true, have many unaswered questions, but accept that there are many things yet be be revealed pertaining to the kingdom of God.
Of course I feel few people are one or the other. They are usually a mixture. But that may just be my aversion to viewing the world in absolutes. Extremes of each group lead to apostasy. Iron Rod Mormons are a careful step away from Fundamentalism. Liahona Mormons can quickly find themselve questioning every aspect of church authority.
You can read the article for yourself at the link below.
http://www.zionsbest.com/people.html

Lady J
Thats really cool.My mother and I always had a different opinion on how to approch the church. Guess it's normal to be different than your parents
Thursday March 6, 2008 - 12:35am (PST)

Mr Froggie
That is normal as a young adult. But I'm actually surprised how similar my attitudes toward many things (includng religion) have become more similar to my parents as I have gotten older.
Thursday March 6, 2008 - 11:50am (CST)

Mormon by choice

When I was in high school, I was confronted with the existence of temple garments by a friend who wasn’t Mormon. Quite honestly I had never heard of them before and dismissed the whole notion as nonsense. Of course, I was later surprised to learn she was right.
Around the same time our ward planned an activity for the youth which involved explaining the events around Mountain Meadows. The idea was to present the proven facts so that we would not be caught off guard by the speculation of anti-Mormons. I remember the discussion to this day.
There was a time when all things like this were just not discussed. Unless it is "faith promoting", we didn't talk about it. If it has to do with the temple we didn't discuss it. It is starting to change, But I still encounter it from time to time. Based on the difference between the two events I described above, I would prefer to learn about them before I am surprised by them. How can I use my agency if I don’t know about the choice? How can I have faith it is true if it is presented in a way that does not require that leap of faith?

Lady J
My parents were good at explaining those church things you do not learn in primary. I learned about garments early on and I always understood how special they were. The Mountian Medows Massacer (as I learned what it was called) I didn't hear about until I was 17. and it shocked me. and I had no idea how to defend the actions I had learned about. I would mostly say "we are human and subject to mistake. not many condem the catholic church for thier countless acts of murder" and "no one really knows what truly happened out there that day." and so on. But of course I read it in the book "lies my teacher told me". so should I trust the facts given by a guy who prides himself on research or the church? I bet the facts given are the same. Anyhow, I would also rather hear about things as soon as I can process the info. Which is why you have to do your own scripture search and church study or you won't get all the info availible to you. Church is good but even sacremnt meeting feels like it is at a primary level compared to the knowlage out there. (and I think it is done that way on purpose so those not ready to hear the deep "dark" or "confusing" things are not shocked) I read a talk given by-i can't remember who-at a conference years ago where they guy was talking about something I don't remember. But what stood out is he said "heavenly Father and his Wives". I asked my mom abotu it and she looked at it and said "huh, yep I guess that says wives. I never noticed that before." and continued with what she was doing. infact I think that she was the one who printed it out so she could use a different part of the talk to quote for a lesson or talk she was giving. anyhow, I brought up the quote in my class a few weeks later and it really angered the teacher and some students. I guess some people just aren't ready to hear some things. Which is why the sentence it's self was not the subject of the talk given by the General Authority. I'm rambling aren't I?
Monday February 25, 2008 - 04:32pm (PST)

Mormon History

I have always had an interst in Mormon history. My earliest recollections of that interest are of a book my father had describing Mormon villages from a sociology/land use view (the photo is from the web and is not of my father's copy. Dad do you still have it?). I remember reading randomly through pages picking up ideas, most of which I'm sure I didn't really understand. But I can clearly recall my fascination.
There is an analogy that fish, were they to become self aware, would probably discover water last. The idea is that they were so accustomed to its always being there, that they wouldn't even notice it. I wondered what else there was about Mormonism that we don't see because it is all around.
Up untill recently that interest was sporadic. I would visit historic sites and read some articles. Some of the family histories my brother collects and sends along had peices that were great. Even reading the Andrew Jackson biography last year was wonderful because the events were contemporary. But recently I rewatched the Frontline peice on Mormonism from last year, and I realized how much I still didn't know. So I have decided I need to brush up on some details. Not as a theologian, but as a historian. I'm starting with a bibliography suggested at the Mormon History Association. If anyone has suggestions feel free.

Judy Harper
There is a guy in our ward that loves church history. He asked me to search for and purchased some books written by Juanita Brooks. She's done several. You might find them interesting.
Wednesday February 20, 2008 - 08:56am (PST)

Mr Froggie
Yes, she was shunned, but not excommunicated, for the one she wrote on Mountain Meadows. Her work has been subsequently validated.
Wednesday February 20, 2008 - 01:32pm (CST)

Lady J
mormons do shunning?
Friday February 22, 2008 - 12:09am (PST)

Mr Froggie
Not formally. Ostracism may be the better word, but in essence, yes. You must keep in mind she lived in a rural, predominantly mormon, community in the 1950s!
Friday February 22, 2008 - 08:45am (CST)

Quintessential

I have heard it said by many that Mormonism is a quintessential American religion. Like a fool I repeated this to someone who rightly asked “how?” I stumbled through some vague comparisons, but I realized that although I agreed with the idea, I didn’t understand it. Having had some time to consider it I pose this explanation to you.

• America, at least New England, was founded largely on the desire for religious freedom. The Puritans saw themselves as the new Israelites escaping the English “Egypt” to worship god as they saw fit. Mormons identify with this, even, celebrate how they too escaped to the west for religious freedom.


• The idea that individuals can decide for themselves, with divine inspiration, which church they should join is far more like American democracy than the theology that we must defer to the authority of the Bible.


• Agency is pivotal in Mormon doctrine. We are defined by the choices we make. There is no place in Mormon theology for concepts like Original Sin and the inherit sinfulness of mankind. The American social system counts on the idea that people are basically good and guarantees the right to be treated as innocent until proven otherwise.


• Mormon scripture describes America as a land of promise. Nephite colonization of the new world parallels European colonization of America and American colonization of the west. In this way Book of Mormon events become types for American life today.


• Mormon families produce law abiding, highly patriotic youths that serve in the military, civic societies and politics, in disproportionate numbers.


• Mormons venerate the U.S. Constitution. They consider it a document inspired by God. And that saving it from destruction is the Mormon destiny. In fact some Mormons view the U.S. was created so that God could have a place where his church could be restored.


• America is the land of opportunity. We are limited only by what we reach for. The Mormon concept of exultation takes this idea into the afterlife.

Why do you think people have called Mormonism a quintessential American religion?

Mormon Diaspora

My parents were born and grew up in Salt Lake City. My father did his best to remedy that fact, taking a job, and my mother, away from Utah. He seldom visits, and when he does, it is for two days at the most. They raised 5 children away from Deseret. But in the end all five of us attended a university in Utah. None of us live there, but we feel the pull. Pride in our heritage? The longing for extended family?
A religion professor of mine, Jospeh Fielding McKonkie, described it as another scattering of Israel. "Get out of Utah" he would say leaving no doubt of his feelings on the matter. I didn't choose the military like my father did, but I didn't stay where my parents ended up either. I lived in Maryland for 14 years after I met my wife. But I still consider myself a part of the scattered.
The Chinese expression for it is 原籍 yuán jí, ancestral home. You don't have to have lived there, but you are from there nontheless. Taiwanese passports until the 1990s would list your ancestral home even if you were not born there and could never visit.
I just moved to Tennessee. When I meet someone new, the question is always the same. Where are you from? What they really want to know is who I am. Sometimes I say Maryland. Other times California. Sometimes I even admit to being born in Wisconsin, with the caveat that I have never been back. The most curious, or perhaps just those who really need me to fit into their preconceived notion of the world, arn't satisfied until I explain that my parents were born and raised in Salt Lake City, Utah. And with a silent nod, they change the subject.

Judy Harper
Oh, yes! I thought I was the only one the experience this. It's nice that it has a name. :)
Monday November 12, 2007 - 10:22pm (PST)

Andrew Jackson

Last year I read a biography of Andrew Jackson. I had borrowed it from a friend so I can't remember the title, but I enjoyed it thoroughly. He was president when the Mormon Church was formed and knowing my church history put many of the events in context with other events. For example, when Joseph Smith had problems in Kirtland with money, the cause was partially because of a fight between Andrew Jackson and the Second Bank of the United States. This kind of secular detail is never discussed in seminary, and schools don't tie Mormon events into secular history. I found it facinating.
So here I am a year later moving to Nashville, home of Andrew Jackson. I looking forward to seeing some of the places described in the biography.

Judy Harper
hmmm. very interesting. :)
Thursday October 11, 2007 - 09:58pm (PDT)

Lady J
indeed.
Friday October 12, 2007 - 02:22pm (PDT)

Talk in Church

Today I spoke in church. I also gave the lesson in the Elders quorum and set up a Eagle board of review.
Faith and Moving Mountains
President Hinckley spoke of the Faith to Move Mountains in his Sunday morning address last general conference. As I listened and later read his comments I was touched by the stories of faith. There were no tales of removed mountains. But there were, however, tales of saints enduring the trials of mortality because of their faith in Jesus Christ. And when they endured them well, the received their promised blessings. In some cases, prophets of the Lord overcame mountainous obstacles to further the kingdom of God. Faith in our savior makes it possible for us to do what may otherwise seem impossible.
Mormon quoted the Savior in Moroni 7:33 “If ye will have faith in me ye shall have power to do whatsoever thing is expedient in me.”
When I was very young, I thought that if I believed hard enough I could walk on water. My failure, and I assure you I did fail, I deduced was because my faith wasn't strong enough. I have since learned that Faith like every other principle of the gospel is built in steps. I can not have the faith to walk on water, move mountains, or raise the dead, until I first learn faith to serve a mission, pay my tithing, keep the fast, and do my home teaching. As we exercise our faith and do the things he has asked, his spirit will abide with us. In D&C 46:30 Joseph Smith taught that “He that asketh in the Spirit asketh according to the will of God; wherefore it is done even as he asketh.”
Faith vs Proof
I consider myself a man of faith. This is sometimes juxtaposed against being a man of science, as if the two were incompatable. But I have been educated as a man of science. I have studied Chemistry, Statistics, I have a Masters in Technology Management. Like many of you my education trained me to trust in only what can be proven. In my job I am often asked to provide such proof Recently I was asked “Will setting aside a hospital wing just for neurosurgery patients bring in more business?” “Prove it”, my boss says, “and then we'll decide whether to do it.” This is not the gospel pattern. Moroni teaches us in Ether 12:6 that we receive “no witness until after the trial of [our] faith.” Today, just as in ages past, there have been men who claim that they have proven that what we believe is false. This is the pattern. Without the opposition of doubt there can be no faith. We need faith because we do not know, because there is doubt. If we had no doubt, then we would know and we would no longer need faith. In Ether 3:19 we read how the Brother of Jared saw the finger of Jesus and “had faith no longer, for he knew, nothing doubting.”
As it has been since the gospel was revealed to Adam, the saints will be ridiculed for their beliefs. And we will not always know how to answer their scorn. But all the men of science have lost sight of what is truly being tested here. They see the existence of God and the validity of his church as being on trial. But it is not God who needs to prove himself to us. It is we who must prove ourselves to God. To this end he has set the pattern. In Abraham 3:25 the Lord says “And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them;”
Faith and Service
One of the things he has asked of us is to help those in need. President Hinckley spoke of the Willie and Martin handcart companies and the Hunt and Hodgett wagon companies which accompanied them. They had the faith to come to Zion. They endured privation to follow the Lords commandments. Their rescuers had the faith to drive their wagon away from their homes into the storms in which their fellow saints were caught. They did so with the faith that it was the right thing to do. The saints in Utah could have said. They brought this on themselves. They should not have left so late in the season. If they had faith they would have been warned to to go. There may have been some who thought this we don't know. We do know that Brigham Young taught otherwise. The Faithful contributed horses, wagons, food, supplies, and themselves to help those in need.
Brothers and sisters. What are we willing to do in faith?Are we miserly with our time, talents, and means. We are not all called to drive the wagons out to meet those stranded on the plains. We are called to do some part. Some donated flour, others horses, wagons, blankets. May we each have the faith to listen to the spirit of the Lord, to learn what he would have us do. And may we have the faith to do it.


Judy Harper
Amen Brother!
Sunday November 12, 2006 - 08:41pm (PST)