I Am No Devil For There Is None

Let me be clear: I don’t believe in the devil. I’ll give you a little background on my experiences with old Lucifer. Until a couple years ago, I spent my whole life believing that at every moment there was a boogie man named Satan out to get me. I believed that anytime I would try to do something good, he would be there on my other shoulder whispering naughty things in my ear. So when I did things that were “bad” (whether they were actually bad or not), not only could I feel bad and blame myself, but I got to blame him as well. The idea of an adversary makes sense if you read 2 Nephi 2 in the Book of Mormon. Just as Sir Isaac Newton taught us that for every force there is an equal and opposite force, so did Lehi teach his children about opposition in all things. God tells us to be good, Satan tells us to be bad. But just as we are learning that Newtonian physics aren’t 100% applicable to all natural phenomena, Lehi’s ideas about the adversary probably need some finessing as well.

I recently learned that Judaism sees the Devil in a very different way than Christianity does. In the Christian religion, he is the adversary, an enemy to God; he opposes and attempts to thwart good. In Judaism, he is an agent of God who merely provides challenges or opposition. So maybe Lehi was on the right track but 19th-century Christian ideas about Satan got him stuck on Lucifer’s sulfurous scent. I think that both points of view merit consideration and further study.

It would seem that Satan exists as a way to explain why bad things happen to good people. We can also end up blaming him when we make bad choices. It gives us a word, a name, for all that is evil in this world and it gives us an enemy we can cry out against. But what if we, ourselves, are really the enemy we fear so much? It’s a scary idea to think that the all of your anger, hate and lust is a product of your own brain chemistry. It may be comforting to blame it on the red dude with the pitchfork. But I have found that losing my belief in Beelzebub has made it easier to me to take responsibility for my own choices. When I do something that wasn’t a good idea, I have to look at why I made that choice. I don’t waste any time figuring out how the Devil was able to hack my radio waves with his evil messages. So if there is a Devil, I would prefer to think of him as a vestigial structure, part of the primitive brain that exists to ensure survival of the species. I suppose that’s one explanation for why I have a sweet tooth for Devil’s food.

Throughout my years as a Mormon, I have often gotten the feeling that most other Mormons go through life thinking that Satan is out and about, working his job like a political lobbyist. He tells those gosh-darn liberals to push their evil social agendas in an effort to weaken the family and abase traditional values and traditional marriage. I can understand that point of view. But I have a different world view that is much more charitable to our fellow human beings. I would like to think it is more inclusive as well. I think that as a species, mankind has come a really long way in the past couple billion years. While we still behave like animals a lot of the time, we have developed our evolutionary need for community to better serve the world and value those who are different. While many Mormons think the world is getting worse and worse, I think that in a lot of ways, the world is getting better. Hunger and poverty have been decreased dramatically since industrialization. Technology has made it much easier for countries all over the world to work together for the common good. While we are definitely not taking very good care of the environment, we have the knowledge and the potential to do it. I think the world can become the most amazing place we can imagine. I think we can and should strive for heaven on earth. Instead of waiting for the world to get so bad that Jesus can toast all of Satan’s minions, what if the world became so good that Jesus would have to come live with us? Anybody remember the city of Enoch? I may be a doubting Thomas when it comes to certain aspects of Mormonism, but I have high hopes and faith in mankind. And so far I think Mormons could do more to get Jesus to come back without any kind of destructive cleansing. Armageddon seems more like the kind of thing Satan would be interested in, don’t you think?

Levels of Evidence

As a freshman dental student, the faculty obligated me to take a course on evidence-based scientific methodology. This matters because health care professionals need to know what they know and also what they don’t know. As research continues, the community increases in knowledge every day. Scientists need a way to determine the reliability of an experiment or a study. The ultimate validation for an experiment is that your colleagues can consistently reproduce your results. The trickier part is figuring out what an experiment or a study really means. If you put a fish in your diet coke and he dies, how do you know if the diet coke killed him? Maybe he just got scared after being transplanted from his fish bowl to a cocktail of carcinogenic caramel coloring and aspartame.

As a health care professional, I need to be able to figure out whether a journal article is good evidence for what it claims to prove or not. Most of all, I have to always be open to new information. Sometimes the best evidence leads us to incorrect conclusions. A scientist should not be ashamed about being wrong, but rather rejoice in getting closer to the truth. Opponents of scientific methodology deny its usefulness because faulty theories from the past have been replaced over and over again. But this doesn’t necessarily mean that the methodology was wrong. It probably just meant that we learned one critical bit of information that we didn’t have before. Science is generally pretty good at leaving false ideas in the textbooks of yesterday. Dogma, on the other hand, rejects the opportunity to grow in knowledge and replace bad ideas with better ones. So I will have to apologize to the anti-vaxxers out there. While I am sorry for parents of autistic children, the truth is that the best evidence gives no indication whatsoever that getting routine vaccinations increase a child’s likelihood of becoming autistic. And while I love Jim Carrey as a comedian, he is a better comedian than he is a scientist, and that goes for his former Playboy bunny partner in crime as well.

The irony is that while Mormonism has a hard time making changes in doctrine or ideology, the correlation department of the church has shed no tears about silently disavowing weird things that Brigham Young and others taught. So even Mormonism has some kind of system to eliminating teachings and public statements that are problematic. I just wish that sound methodology was applied more systematically in Mormonism. But I guess that’s what faith is for, right? I say that in all seriousness. I also think correlation is somewhat corrupt. But that’s another story.

Let me get back on topic. What makes evidence strong? We already covered the idea that your findings should be reproducible. What else? The gold standard for scientific evidence is when the authors collect all the data on a subject and analyze all of it together, summarizing the findings. This is called a systematic review or a meta-analysis. If the vast majority of the literature shows no connection between vaccination and autism, then it is probably true that vaccines do not cause autism. But what about the evidence that suggests a link between vaccination and autism? In this particular case, the evidence suggesting the connection was retratcted by the journal that published it and later on the author confessed to falsifying data. So if someone asks you about the evidence that vaccines cause autism, the right question would be “what evidence?”

It is difficult to assess levels of evidence in spiritual matters. Nonetheless, principles from scientific methodology can prove quite useful. I’ll apply these ideas to a prototypical Mormon testimony, or a solemn declaration of faith. A Mormon might say “I know the Mormon church is true.” This statement is actually incorrect, since the speaker has no way to prove this point to any reasonable standard. But what does he or she actually mean by saying this? The solemn declaration represents a conclusion the speaker has arrived at based on his or her experience. This individual might elaborate by telling the congregation that her life was awful before becoming a member of the church and that by following the standards of the church, he or she has become much happier. This is more reasonable, but it still has some problems. All of the perceived good changes in this person’s life could be a coincidence. Conversely, if the church standards really are what resulted in a better life for her, how can we say for sure if following similar standards in another faith tradition would not have yielded the same result? Maybe those standards had nothing to do with it. Maybe she became a happier person because of increased social interactions from going to church.

It might seem like I’m splitting hairs, but I want to demonstrate is that it’s difficult to establish a true cause and effect relationship. The best way to do this is by looking at factors that might confound your results and seeing how reliably you can reproduce your results. A common problem in Mormonism is the idea that if you pray to God and ask him if something is true, that he will give you a good feeling if this is true. I am not completely opposed to this methodology, but one should approach it with caution. Sometimes our feelings are manufactured and they are likely to lead us to act emotionally instead of rationally. In short, I don’t think that emotion is enough to establish the “truth of all things”. I think it is completely reasonable for a Mormon to say: “The more I participate in Mormonism, the happier I am. When I neglect the teachings of the church, I feel empty and unhappy. Being a Mormon makes me happy.” This is a reasonable conclusion derived from reasonable evidence. It is a fallacy to infer that the same pattern of life will invariably yield the same pattern of happiness for everyone. And just because one teaching from one church leader yielded a good result for one person when he or she followed it does not mean that invariably following whatever any church leader says is the right thing to do for every single person in the world.

Using reasonable standards for evidence, what can I say about Mormonism in my life? I enjoy my social interactions in the church. I enjoy serving in the church. I have found that some church teachings are incorrect or even toxic, but overall Mormonism creates an effective community that does a lot of good. While I do not believe that the church is “true” (that everything the church does or says is 100% correct, and therefore from God) but it is a good church that does good things. And most important of all, it is my church and my community. And that is enough evidence for me to press forward as a conflicted Mormon.

A Reason For Religion

Have you ever wondered how mankind began to worship deity in an organized way? Going to church is something that our species has been doing for a long time. In Mormonism, the storybooks say that Adam, the first man, led his family in worship from the earliest days of our race. He didn’t really know what he was doing at first, but from time to time messengers visited him and set him straight. Why did Adam and his family need religion, anyway? Mormonism will tell you that for as long as man was on the earth, the devil was there, too, trying to get the sons of Adam and the daughters of Eve to make poor choices. Religion, it seems, is God’s way of organizing his children so that they make good choices that will bring them back into his presence after this life. It’s clear that one purpose of religion is to try and change behavior. Certainly, religion plays this role in the lives of many religious folks. Mormons don’t drink or smoke because the church says it is bad. Yet there are plenty of people who choose not to drink or smoke because these behaviors can be detrimental to your health. So do we need religion to tell us what to do? Maybe it depends on the specific person.

The other important reason for organized religion is community. For some people like myself, this may be the only reason compelling religious activity at all. I’m a big boy and I make my own choices, but I know that I am limited in what I can do as an individual. In a community, I have opportunities to do good to others and make myself useful. I also have that community support when I need it. Unfortunately, in religions like Mormonism, it is easy to get sucked in to the point that there is no true community outside the church. This may not be representative of the majority, but it does happen. On the other hand, I happen to be an introvert so going to church gives me a community when I might not otherwise really have social interactions. So community is a huge selling point for me.

Another reason I think religion is important for folks is that it often offers answers to some of life’s big questions. Mormons take comfort in their concept of life before birth, a purpose for this life and ideas about what life will be like after death. They count on getting specific results (happiness in this life and the next) from following Mormonism’s recipe for a good life. It really used to be that simple for me. But I’ve figured out now that I can get superior results (with some caveats) from modifying the recipe. But I still haven’t replaced the value of the Mormon community in my life and I’m not sure I ever will. I’m not sure I want to. For me, Mormonism is a community, first and foremost. I feel blessed that I have been able to distance myself from the dogma while still playing a meaningful role within my congregation. I hope that pattern can continue. That is reason enough for me to be a Mormon.

Covering the G’s in Quantico

Some Mormons are upset that a new TV show will feature a character who plays a Mormon FBI recruit in nothing but his garments. This surprises me because the church put out a video showing off Mormon underclothes almost a year ago. Honestly, the show and tell video made me uncomfortable, but many of my more faithul friends thought it was great. Maybe they had one too many awkward conversations about magical rubber underwear. The real issue might be that the show portrays the Mormon recruit engaging in behavior not becoming of a Latter-day Saint during one of his FBI missions. I can imagine that faithful Mormons don’t want people who are unfamiliar with Mormonism to think that good Mormons can get away with sinning just because it was a secret mission and it was for the sake of national security. I think that’s where faithful Mormons can step in and explain the way things are supposed to be in the church.

There is a saying in Mormonism that “All publicity is good publicity.” That may not really be true, but I like the idea. In an ideal world, Mormons want everybody to get baptized into the church. That means spreading the Mormon gospel to every creature. No matter what anybody says about the church, Mormons can take the opportunity to correct false information and tell people what Mormonism is really about. Could it be that publicizing some parts of Mormonism could make some Mormons ashamed? It’s interesting for me to note recollect that talking about Mormonism when I wasn’t a missionary frequently made me uncomfortable. Was it because I didn’t really believe? Maybe. I think that in spite of my belief, I knew how odd and often dogmatic Mormonism seems to outsiders. While I used to believe all of it, I completely understand why anybody would have a hard time accepting Mormonism. The truth is that all is not well in Zion. And I think very few people who convert to the church are really excited about throwing their old underwear away when they go through the temple. But the gospel truth is that having a forever family requires changing your underwear at least once in your lifetime.

My point is not to put faithful Mormons down or to belittle cherished beliefs. But I think Mormonism could do a lot more to appeal to the mainstream. I suspect that the fellas in Salt Lake would consider my ideas a corruption of true Mormonism. There’s a number of things that could create a more palatable flavor of Mormonism. What makes me the most uncomfortable about Mormonism is the unabashed belief that Mormonism is right and everybody is (at least partially) wrong. If the church can’t recognize its own faults then how do they expect anyone to take them seriously? That is the danger of absolute truth claims, my friends. If you can never be wrong, you will be wrong much more often than our atheist friends who are ready, willing and completely happy to be wrong and receive correction.

Fortunately, there is a chance that they will refilm the pilot since one cast member for Quantico left the show to do something else. I doubt they will change anything with the Mormon agent, but it’s at least possible. I hope that offended Mormons will take it easy, especially when you consider that the agent portrayed in the show can’t possibly be guilty of anything Joseph Smith hadn’t already done. At least the FBI agent was wearing his garments. Joseph seemed to have forgotten to think it was OK to take them off if it gets hot. At the very least I’m glad that the cotton/polyester blend breathes better than what they wore back then.

Gospel Contentment

I’ve wondered if this day would ever come. Yesterday, the bishop’s first counselor asked me to accept the call to serve as the official organist for our congregation. I couldn’t be happier with my new responsibility. If you’ve been reading my blog, you know that it’s been hard for me to attend church for the last year. Yesterday, I felt like I was beginning a new chapter in my journey within Mormonism; and this chapter is characterized by contentment. I recently read a talk on the subject, and those ideas have inspired me to share my own thoughts.

I think it is worth mentioning that in order to be content in any faith tradition, the adherent should have some level of faith. Faith in what? Excellent question. Let’s chew on that idea for a little bit. In the talk I read, the author discussed the idea of true faith. He defined it as believing in things that are, in reality, true. This struck me as odd. If you are supposed to believe in it, that suggests that you aren’t sure if it is true or not. But if you are sure the idea really is true, then you don’t need faith since you know it’s true, right? I’ll replace this idea with my own. For a doubter like me, I think I benefit from having faith in my fellow Mormons. While it’s reasonable for me to expect good things from them as Christians, it’s not a guarantee- especially when they are privy to the knowledge that I am truly a heretic. I benefit from having faith that participating in my church community will benefit my life and that I will be able to benefit others. While it’s reasonable for me to take that for granted, it’s still not a guarantee. And plenty of people don’t get anything out of church. Having a responsibility at church has enabled me with increased faith in Mormonism; for the first time in a year, I really, truly can see myself being a happy Mormon for more than one Sunday at a time.

Second, the author suggested that part of true faith is accepting that God knows better than we do. I confess, I have trouble with this. A week ago I was telling God that he had better let me play the organ at church or else. Fortunately, I lucked out and it seems that he agreed with me. I have entertained the idea that maybe God isn’t our father at all. Maybe he’s just the master of the universe. Maybe he’s not perfect. Maybe he’s really detached and most of the time he just wants to let us to our own thing. Maybe. But then there are other times when we don’t know what to do and miracles happen and we can’t do anything but praise God when it’s all said and done. So maybe God knows better than we do. Sometimes. Maybe sometimes he’s just as lost as we are. Maybe. Sometimes.

Perhaps the most interesting part of the talk was where the author talked about the need to accept that some questions in this life will go unanswered. While I agree with the general idea, I absolutely disagree on the specifics. The author couples this idea with sticky historical issues in Mormon history. I think this idea applies more to the realm of science. For example, today it is not 100% crystal clear how viruses cause disease. I have faith that someday that will become clearer, but I can accept that there are things we do know about viruses and there are things we don’t. As for historical issues in Mormonism, the author believes that it is better to avoid going down the rabbit hole at all than to risk testimony damage. The truth is that there are honest, factual answers to a lot of historical questions in Mormonism. Why did Joseph Smith institute polygamy? Because he thought it was a good idea. Was it God’s idea? Probably not, since polygamy is what got Joseph killed. Why did the Mormon church ban priesthood ordination for blacks? Racism, plain and simple. Why did the first presidency of the church get a law firm to help them write The Family: A Proclamation to the World? To combat marriage equality in Hawaii. It is not surprising that the Baptists and the Catholics released similar statements (albeit much more sexist than the Mormon Proclamation) during the ’90s. While some of these questions are clear-cut and simple to answer, others deal with incomplete historical records and sketchy evidence. Maybe I have to exercise faith to believe that Joseph Smith didn’t translate the Book of Mormon. But you also have to exercise faith to believe that he did translate it.

My favorite part of the talk was where the author stated that true faith can make us whole. I think faith can really be beautiful. There is something to be said for people who have that sense of inner peace amidst trials and tribulations. There is certainly a time and a place to reserve judgment and just have faith in a person or in an idea. I guess you can say that Steve Jobs had faith in his vision for Apple. But that vision was also coupled with a lot of hard work. I have seen the power of faith in the lives of those I associate with. Maybe that’s part of my attraction to Mormonism. Mormons are people of faith. They have always and will always believe that God will deliver so long as they do what’s right. And sometimes he delivers the captive even when he may not deserve it. Some believe that faith and doubt cannot coexist. I think that assertion is way too idealistic. Is it saying that if you have faith in Jesus Christ you can’t doubt that Joseph Smith was a true prophet? When you think of it that way, it can’t be right. You can certainly believe in Mohammad while doubting the divinity of Christ. So they can coexist! Maybe it’s saying that you can’t doubt that Jesus Christ was divine while having doubts about his divinity. That seems more reasonable, but I’m not sure that’s right, either. I believe that it is possible he was divine. So maybe I have a little bit of faith that Jesus was God’s son. I definitely have faith in his core teachings about how we should treat each other. But I have legitimate reasons for not being certain of his divinity. You might call them doubts. I think doubt is good, since it leads us to really figure out what is true. But sometimes it’s nice to suspend disbelief and just have faith. I can definitely work on exercising faith appropriately in my life.

Lastly, the author compares and contrasts contentment and self-satisfaction. I think that the latter is a healthy part of the former. There are differing definitions for self-satisfaction. I think of it in the way described by Sylvester in one of my favorite Christmas films, The Bishop’s Wife. It is the feeling that you did something right and it makes you feel happy and content with your choice. I feel self-satisfaction when I play the organ at church. Even if I disagree with parts of the messages presented during Sunday School, I have faith that I am bringing something valuable to the table when I show up to church every Sunday, and I have faith that I will be uplifted by those I associate with at church. While it would be nice if everyone could find find a simple recipe for contentment within their faith tradition, I am just grateful that I have found it at all. I wondered for a long time if I could ever feel content as a doubting Mormon. While real, abiding peace is hard to find, it’s worth the waiting, the wondering, the wanting and the wishing.

America, Mormonism and Me

I may have mentioned that I just love realistic American TV shows like Law & Order and The West Wing. The reason I love these types of shows is because the creative powers behind them represent the characters and the scenarios in a way that is completely believable. When I watch The X-Files or even Criminal Minds, I have to suspend disbelief in order to enjoy the show. There’s not necessarily anything wrong with a good fantasy, but it’s nice to watch something that seems real once in a while. Maybe that explains why I was never much for reading fiction.

What impresses me the most about watching shows these type of realistic shows is that I have a hard time imagining that anybody would take a job working in the white house unless they absolutely believed in America. Why else would someone sacrifice most of the personal life, among other things, to show up every day to be used and abused for the good of the American people? Maybe this point of view is short-sighted. Whether it is or not, it makes sense to me. Let me put it this way. Police officers don’t enroll in the academy to make a lot of money, right? Last time I checked most cops were driving cheap American cars, not Mercedes or Lexus.

I bring all of this up because this last Sunday I had a good day at church. This comes as a surprise to me since yesterday was testimony meeting when everybody gets up and says that they know that the Mormon church is the best in the world, the only true church and et cetera and et cetera. The first thing that made it a good experience for me is that my kids were at home sleeping so I didn’t spend the whole time chasing after them. Also, I got to play the organ. I got to use my talents to do something that was of benefit to everybody there. I felt important. It’s hard to want to be involved when you feel like nobody cares if you’re there or not. Secondly, and more importantly, I think I caught a glimpse of what Mormonism means to most members of the church, and certainly to me. Mormonism is what happens when a community works together to become better. As I heard the testimonies, I was convinced that Mormonism has done a lot of good in the lives of all of us who were there. That doesn’t mean that Mormonism is perfect; if you’ve spent any amount of time reading this blog then you know that I have some major complaints. But Mormonism is centered around doing good in the community and in the family. I hope and pray that my fellow Mormons will allow me the privilege to worship who, where and what I may, embracing those parts of Mormonism that are worthy and eschewing those parts of the religion that I am still evaluating.

In the same way, I believe in America. I believe in democracy and in the idea that in a capitalist society, you can make it if you work hard, have determination and at least a little bit of talent (that part might not even be necessary if you have enough determination!). I know America has its problems. I know that our government has made mistakes and continues to make them every day. But there no other country I would rather call my home. Happy (belated) Independence Day, everyone.

Adios, BKP

Last week I found out that Boyd Packer, the former president of the quorum of the twelve apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, had passed away. I never liked the guy, even when I had a fervent testimony of the church. Mostly, I have felt bad for him over the last 10 years or so. His health has been poor and he has delivered most of his speeches sitting down. My heart goes out to his family and I wish them peace and comfort as they mourn his loss.

Boyd K. Packer was well-known in his Mormon ministry for his concerns about sex. Perhaps the most well-known token of his ministry was his speech that was later converted into a pamphlet, the infamous To Young Men Only. For those of you who are not familiar with it, Brother Packer likens the male reproductive system to a “little factory” that should never be tampered with. It is a pseudo-scientific treatise condemning masturbation and encouraging young men to think good thoughts so they won’t always have to be thinking about sex. If your faith tradition condemns masturbation, then maybe pamphlet is for you. The trouble is that as a result of Mormondom’s harsh stance on the issue, many guilty young men spent years feeling horrible about themselves and their inability to live up to what was expected of them. Many young men report trying to quit, only to slip up a few weeks later. Then to self-medicate their feelings of worthlessness, they just went right back to the old habit. While I praise the virtue of self-control, masturbation is an issue that I think the church just needs to leave alone. It is not the great evil they have painted it to be and I think the whole world would be better off it Mormon leaders swept Packer’s pamphlet under the rug and moved on. In fact, it would seem that they have already moved in that direction. Suffice it to say that I pity any young man in the church who has to deal with what Boyd had to say about sex. It wasn’t and isn’t helpful to the youth of the church.

Elder Packer seemed to focus a lot of his energy as a church leader on sex. Perhaps as much as 50% of his speeches dealt with the subject. In particular, he had a big problem with homosexuality. LGBTQ individuals and allies both have taken issue with some of the more inflammatory things he has said about gays. In fact, one of his more recent speeches was edited after the fact because Mr. Packer suggested that being gay was an illusion, that no one was “born that way”. In his own words: “Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone?” Brother Packer lived through the days when BYU was using electroshock therapy to make gay men straight. He also believed in “praying the gay away”. Some of Elder Packer’s opponents have suggested that living to see SCOTUS legalize gay marriage nationwide is what finally led to his death. Since even before I began to question church teachings, I have wished the Lord would just let Elder Packer pass on peacefully. I feel badly that he had to live through June 26, 2015 because I’m sure it was one of the worst days of his life. In his own words: “Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone?” Now that he has passed on, I hope he has some answers to questions like that.

Although I never liked him, I am trying my best to understand the generation that Boyd Packer was born into. Born in 1924, he was part of what many Americans have called the greatest generation: those who lived through the depressions, fought in World War II and lived to see the end of one millenia and the beginning of a new one. I believe that Boyd K. Packer’s world view resulted in large part from the sorts of ideas that he great up with. There is nothing wrong with being a fuddy-dud or even being a prude, so long as you can self-identify with that label. My biggest bone to pick with Boyd K. Packer is his defense of historical revisionism and suppressing facts in order to paint a more favorable picture of Mormon history. “The truth is not uplifting. It destroys” and “not everything that is true is useful” are the sort of statements Elder Packer made to berate honest, truth-loving historians like D. Michael Quinn. This all makes sense, knowing that he was one of the men selected to implement correlation back in the ’60s. With the evidence before me, it seems like Boyd K. Packer believed in promoting faith in what he believed was right to be the ultimate good. With that in mind, I find Elder Packer no better than the Wizard of Oz, fumbling with his gadgets behind the curtain.

I would be remiss if I failed to mention that Boyd K. Packer considered himself an authority with regards to music in the church. This irritates me since I am a professional musician with a degree in music. Nevermind the fact that he had no credentials whatsoever as a musician, he saw fit to dictate what music was appropriate for church and what instruments were appropriate to play it. I am happy that his influence will no longer impede the saints in making a joyful noise as the spirit directs them instead of deferring to the oldest and crankiest leader of the church.

It’s clear to me that today’s world, and maybe even the church, have both outgrown Elder Packer. I don’t want to ignore the good things Elder Packer did, but I think the church as a whole has the chance to really grow into the 21st century now that we will have a new president of the quorum of the twelve. I just hope whoever takes over is less of a fuddy-dud than Boyd K. Packer.

Charity Never Faileth

Yesterday, Fox news informed its readers that the LDS church made a first time donation of $2500 to the Utah Pride Center. This is no surprise since the organization had applied for a grant from the LDS Bishop’s Storehouse. I’m still trying to figure out how I will ultimately perceive this act of charity. At first glance, this is a wonderful example of loving your enemies. On second thought, it might just be a PR stunt for the church to show America that Mormons don’t hate gays. But the fact is that they applied for a grant and they got one. It is, however, more than a little ironic that that the grant was approved less than a week after the SCOTUS decision.

Charitable giving in Mormonism is something I struggle to embrace whole-heartedly. Most Mormons pay tithing and at least from the IRS standpoint make a significant donation to charity each year. It’s tough to judge the motive in charitable giving. For most Mormons, tithing is first and foremost a commandment; it’s the way you pay your club membership for the temple. When the young man asked Jesus what he should inherit the Father’s kingdom, Jesus answered and said he should sell everything he had and follow Him. But this made the guy sad since he was filthy rich. Perhaps this is the origin for the phrase “Give ’till it hurts.” My question is if the LDS church is willing to give ’till it hurts, especially when they are giving to a group of people that many Mormons perceive as the enemy.

What was the real cost of approving the Utah Pride Center’s grant for the Bishop’s Storehouse? The storehouse is operated by volunteers and the food costs are covered by charitable donations from the members of the church. So from a financial standpoint, the cost for the church to approve the grant was negligible. What’s more, it sounds like this grant is a one-time credit in a relatively small amount. If you use an average of how much SNAP applicants can get per month, then $2500 is about enough to comfortably feed a couple for a year. What would have impressed me was a standing donation, like $2500 per month or $10,000 per year. If you ask me, this donation is not impressive at all except that it is an example of “lov[ing] your enemies”.

Most Mormons will probably praise this charitable act. Most critics will accuse the church of simply doing it to look good. I’m somewhere in between. Overall, I think charitable giving in Mormonism is plagued by the obligatory 10% offering required of members of the church. I have had my most meaningful experiences with charity as a non-tithe payer. Those experiences have been either as a missionary (which really doesn’t count since it was my job to do as much good as I could every day) or after I chose to stop paying tithing and fast offerings. Does the LDS church even really need tithing to keep going? The church makes plenty of money from other sources. Yet members are called upon to do more and more as Salt Lake takes away our janitors and people like Elder Bednar tell us that someday we may need to pay more than 10% tithing if the church is going to keep growing in the USA. Let the church do what they will do. As for me, I’m trying to work on giving ’till it hurts.

Marriage And Religious Freedomg

June 26, 2015 was an historical day. First of all, it was my 5-year wedding anniversary. It is also the day that the United States Supreme court decided that gay marriage should immediately be legal in all 50 states. While I think making marriage available to all couples in our country, I think that this was the wrong approach. It seems to me that all of the states were going to legalize gay marriage themselves given enough time to realize it was the right thing to do. So why did the Supreme Court deny the individual states that chance? Outlawing slavery over 150 years ago clearly wasn’t enough to stop racism. Legalizing gay marriage nationwide is only one step in combating discrimination against folks who aren’t straight.

This story reminds me of a chapter in Mormon history involving polygamy. This chapter began in the Midwest when Joseph Smith started taking plural wives in secret. Eventually, Joseph’s associate William Law had enough and told Joseph that he opposed polygamy. Joseph removed William from his position in the church, defamed him and thought that it was game over for Brother Law. But when the Nauvoo Expositor published an expose about Joseph’s secret relationships with other women, Joseph knew that he was in deep trouble. And that’s how Joseph Smith ended up getting killed by a mob in Illinois. Unfortunately, polygamy persisted in Mormonism for another 70 years or so. Brigham Young and other Mormon leaders took polygamous wives in order to provide for widows. What’s even more interesting is that many Mormon leaders believed that polygamy was a more celestial form of marriage than monogamy. They preached the idea that monogamy made a man weak; they believed that such a man would have far less glory in the Father’s kingdom than a man who had sired many children with many women. Eventually, the federal government told Brigham that he and the Mormons would have to stop practicing polygamy. So they hid from the feds until everything quieted down and then kept on practicing polygamy. When things got worse, Wilford Woodruff (Brigham’s successor) made a public statement to the church that they had to stop practicing polygamy. But polygamous unions were still performed in secret and prominent church leaders had multiple wives through until 1925. Mormon polygamy wanted to survive.

The point I’m trying to make is that people and organizations can’t change their ways or their world view in an instant. These things take time. While most Mormons today view polygamy as an abomination, Mormons a hundred years ago likely considered themselves an oppressed people being kept from the higher celestial law only because the feds said they couldn’t be a state if they had too many women for every man. So I have sympathy for my pioneer ancestors who practiced polygamy in the West. I have sympathy for those states that had not yet legalized gay marriage and feel like SCOTUS has squashed their right to decide. I feel bad for the Southern states that simply couldn’t afford to rip slavery out of their economy all at once, only to have the North say “Do what we say or else” and then destroy their lives and their economy.

I’m a huge fan of the Benjamin Franklin approach to presenting ideas that those around us may not agree with. Instead of saying “you’re wrong” or “the facts are on my side” or “this is what’s gonna happen whether you like it or not”, present your idea as a possibility of something they might think about. Give them options. Present good and true ideas and people who are honest and good will eventually agree with you. I like to believe that the majority of people are honest and good. I guess you could say that I have faith in mankind. I don’t think mankind is evil, and I don’t think there is a devil or a boogie man out to get us or to try and make us slip up. I am convinced that as humans we make mistakes. As highly evolved animals, we instinctually view those who are different as a threat. As animals, it is all too easy to organize ourselves into groups like “us” and “them”; there are the Sneetches with stars and those without stars upon thars. Sometimes there are schismatics, like the star salesman in Seuss’s story. Sometimes we ourselves are the ones creating divisions. I’m not interested in everybody thinking or believing the same thing. Should we agree that facts are facts? Absolutely. But each of us should listen to our neighbors and hear why he or she thinks they are right. And we will probably learn something we didn’t know. I hope that I am better today at hearing and understanding ideas that I may not agree with. And most of all I hope that the recent SCOTUS decision will help those on both sides of the issue to listen to their perceived enemies and at least have the desire to understand why we disagree.