FAIR

Blog

Mormon Fair-cast 244: FairMormon Conference 2014

by

Podcast: Download (18.0MB)

Subscribe: RSS

33480_1612609000660_2667876_nDanPetersonMartin Tanner who is the host of “Religion Today” on KSL FM 102.7 and AM 1160 interviews Steve Densley who is the executive vice-president of FairMormon and Daniel Peterson, Ph.D. who is a prominent Mormon apologist and professor of Islamic Studies and Arabic in the Department of Asian and Near Eastern Languages at Brigham Young University about the upcoming FairMormon conference that will be held in Provo Utah on the 7th and 8th of August this year. Tickets can be purchased here.

This broadcast originally aired on the 6th of July 2014.

The views and opinions expressed in this podcast may not represent those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that of FairMormon.

 

What is God Thinking? Reflections on Mormon Women and the Priesthood

by

Sister Missionaries serving in Berlin Germany. (Photo from LDS.org.)
Sister missionaries serving in the Germany Berlin Mission. (Photo from LDS.org.)

[This is a guest post from Deborah Rowley, a Latter-day Saint woman sharing her perspective on the subject of women and the priesthood. These comments are Deborah’s alone, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of FairMormon or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints..]

I am a woman. I am also a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I am aware of the events surrounding Kate Kelly, her excommunication, and the Ordain Woman movement. Many people both inside and outside the Church have been asking questions like, “What are the leaders of the church thinking?” or “What is Kate Kelly’s bishop thinking?” Those on the other side of the controversy are asking, “What is Kate Kelly thinking?” or “What are the members of Ordain Women thinking?” While these are good questions, I think they’re the wrong ones. No one in the swirling social media frenzy surrounding this situation is asking the right question.

Here is the right question, “What is God thinking?” I know how that must sound. Just stay with me for a second. Let’s just assume that the priesthood leaders at the head of the Church are telling the truth. They have said that only God makes this decision about who holds the priesthood. And they have told us that God said, “Not women.” That answer may change in the future but for now, the answer is no. You may not believe that those men are speaking for God and that is your right. But I do. My faith depends on it. Otherwise the leaders of my church are lying. If they are lying, why would I want to be part of their organization or hold the priesthood anyway? Let’s just assume for the sake of argument that they are telling the truth and that God said no. That is where my question comes in.

The right question is, “What is God thinking?” Einstein famously said that he wanted to know God’s thoughts. I am no Einstein but I think I know my Heavenly Father well enough to know what he is not thinking. He is not thinking that his daughters are undeserving or unworthy. He is not thinking that his daughters couldn’t do the job as well as his sons. He is not thinking that he loves his daughters less than his sons or that he values their growth and development less than that of his sons. He is not thinking that he wants to drive women away from his church or hold them down or keep them subservient. I am confident that God is not thinking those things.

So what could be God thinking? I don’t want to be struck by lightning for the presumption of thinking like God or for God, but I really like that question. As I’ve pondered that question sincerely, I’ve come up with several answers that make sense to me. They may not make sense to you, but below are three possible reasons that I came up with. (God is not in the habit of letting me read his mind so feel free to take this with a grain of salt if you want.)

I started my thought process by acknowledging that God thinks in the big picture. He looks at the long term and can see perfectly how thumping that one domino will set in motion a stream of events that we cannot even begin to see. God knows the consequences down the road that are hidden to us with our limited perspective. Can he see that what seems like one positive to us right now would result in even bigger negatives in the long run? What could those negatives be?

First, perhaps God is saying no because he is protecting his youngest and most innocent children and wants to safeguard a mother’s very limited time in the home. Second, perhaps God is saying no because he is concerned about the growing distortion in our understanding of men and women’s unique roles. Perhaps giving the priesthood to women would further blur the distinction between men and women and jeopardize our Father’s plan for all his children. Third, perhaps God is saying no because he is aware of negative consequences to his sons.

Many boys are struggling in a world of violence, pornography and fatherless families. Perhaps this decision would further marginalize boys which in turn would negatively impact their wives, mothers, sisters, and daughters. You may agree or disagree with my three points and that is just fine. I am not trying to argue my points as definitive answers because I don’t know what God thinks. But I think it is very probable that he has different purposes and reasons that I wouldn’t even understand if he were to try to verbalize them to me. Nevertheless, it has helped me to think of some reasons that make sense to me. You could do the same. Why do you think God would be saying no?

Whatever the reason, I trust God. I trust that he has my best interests at heart, that he loves me and is thinking continually of my needs. He knows what those needs are and how to fulfill them far better than I do. He knows how to fulfill them better than a group of women activists or a group of priesthood leaders. I do believe that God is behind this decision and I trust him. I believe that conscientious leaders have prayed to him to know if now is the time and God said no. I don’t speak for God, but his prophets do. You don’t get too far in reading the Bible before realizing that the prophets’ words are never popular. Why should that change in our modern day?

The unpopularity of their teachings should confirm rather than discount their validity. I do not see denying women the priesthood as hurtful to women. I do not see this decision as holding women back. Why would a loving God purposefully hurt his daughters? From where I sit, I see women in the church thriving and continuing to grow and progress without the priesthood. I see powerful women who lead with strength and purpose, who express their views openly and honestly. I have never been asked to shut up or sit down. Quite the contrary. I have been asked time and time again to step up and speak up. I feel nothing but respect from my priesthood leaders and I admire and respect them in return.

I will continue to give my all to the religion that I believe in. I love being a woman in the Church. I believe it is the place where I can reach my fullest and highest potential and where I can most fully develop a relationship with God and with his Son Jesus Christ. One day I will know God’s thoughts and I will see how this decision fits into his eternal plan. For now, I will not tell God what to think or what to do. I will trust him and exercise my faith.

Mormon Fair-Cast 243: Barry R. Bickmore, “Restoring the Ancient Church”

by

Podcast: Download (17.2MB)

Subscribe: RSS

Barry R. BickmoreBarry R. Bickmore Restoring the Ancient Church 2nd EditionMartin Tanner who is the host of “Religion Today” on KSL FM 102.7 and AM 1160 interviews  Barry R. Bickmore  about his book “Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity.”  In this interview brother Bickmore relates how the teachings of the early Church are reflected in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Professor Bickmore will be appearing at this year’s FairMormon Conference on August 7 & 8 at the Utah Valley Convention Center in Provo, Utah. For more information and to purchase tickets, click here.

In the second half of his show Martin Tanner interviews Craig Foster about his second book on Mormon polygamy.  “The Persistence of Polygamy: From Joseph Smith Martyrdom to the First Manifesto, 1844 – 1890.

Both book are available from the FairMormon Bookstore:

Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity.

The Persistence of Polygamy From Joseph Smith Martyrdom to the First Manifesto 1844 – 1890

This broadcast originally aired on the 2nd of March 2014.

The views and opinions expressed in this podcast may not represent those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that of FairMormon.

Fair Issues 59: To Arabs, valleys, not mountains, the symbol of permanence

by

Podcast: Download (7.9MB)

Subscribe: RSS

MAAs we discussed in the last installment of this series the Lehites’ first semi permanent encampment was called the river of “Laman” and the valley of “Lemuel.”  In this podcast Michael Ash explains how the terms used to describe these locations are in keeping with tradition at the time they took place.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

Brother Ash is author of the book Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, as well as the book, of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith. Both books are available for purchase online through the FairMormon Bookstore. Tell your friends about the Mormon Fair-Cast. Share a link on your Facebook page and help increase the popularity of the Mormon Fair-Cast by subscribing to this podcast in iTunes, and by rating it and writing a review.

The views and opinions expressed in the podcast may not reflect those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that of FairMormo

 

Faith and Reason 10: Evidence That The Book of Mormon Was Dictated

by

Podcast: Download (15.9MB)

Subscribe: RSS

 

From the book: Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith

By Michael Ash

Although the method Joseph Smith used to translate the The Book of Mormon has been described in church history and literature, some members seem taken aback when they find that their perceptions about the translation mechanics employed by Joseph don’t conform to what they previously envisioned. Some members are surprised because they had been taught that Joseph Smith translated the plates by way of the Urim and Thummim. This is true. What most members don’t realize however, is that Urim and Thummim was the name given both to the Nephite Interpreters that were included in the stone box with the plates, as well as the seer stone that Joseph owned and later used to received revelations.

Michael R. Ash is the author of: Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting The Prophet Joseph Smith. He is the owner and operator of MormonFortress.com and is on the management team for FairMormon. He has been published in Sunstone, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, the Maxwell Institute’s FARMS Review, and is the author of Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt. He and his wife live in Ogden, Utah, and have three daughters.

Julianne Dehlin Hatton  is a broadcast journalist living in Louisville, Kentucky. She has worked as a News Director at an NPR affiliate, Radio and Television Host, and Airborne Traffic Reporter. She graduated with an MSSc from the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University in 2008. Julianne and her husband Thomas are the parents of four children.

Music for Faith and Reason is provided by Arthur Hatton.

The People’s Democratic Church of Jesus Christ

by

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints entertain a belief that our leaders are human. We expect them to speak for a perfect God and to deliver a perfect doctrine yesterday, today and forever. We are perfectly fine with that. But we still claim to believe that our leaders are human. This only gets complicated when they do something human. Or when they don’t. Or when we’re not sure.

Since ancient times those who have led the Lord’s church have been stretched between the Lord’s high hopes for his children and the children’s lesser goals for themselves. The leaders have a generally fine record with this balancing act, but it has caused some curious adaptations. Consider some of the theological detritus: “curse of Cain,” the occasional extermination of several villages, polygamy, withholding “gentiles” from the fold; all the ‘weird’ things from the past.

Even a casual reading of the Scriptures shows that our un-changing God changes quite often. This should not greatly disturb those whose spiritual foundation is rock solid. The tectonic changes are too slow in most cases to be perceptible. But sometimes there is a tremor; and sometimes it is earth-shaking. Founded on our faith, we try to hang on.

There are two ways to fall off a rock: forward or backward. Either the Church has lost all credibility because of some change and we slide fundamentally off the back of the rock, or the Church has failed to change with the reality of the times, and we leap forward, liberating ourselves from that stodgy stumbling stone. It doesn’t matter which way one leaves–––the net result is the same.

A firm testimony of the divine direction of the Church sustains the member in the Church; it also helps the member sustain the leader in the Church. A weaker testimony causes fibrillation of faith. A member might reason: “God (or God’s appointed leader) has changed things in the past, so this-or-that issue may change today.” But this is a dangerous bit of reasoning. Whereas we are required to put our shoulder to the wheel and push along, those who anxiously forecast the divine vicissitudes are often the first to steady the ark against all those who have not yet heard the latest social buzz phrase, and are still “pushing along.” If we did not have social activists in the Church, then how would the Lord know what the issue-du-jour is?

I will refer to these collective (but, for now undefined) social doctrines as the Gospel New Age Theologies, or gnats, if you can swallow such a bad pun. They buzz about. They annoy. In large groups they can make an irritating noise. But pretending to strain at their issues is often just bad acting.

Some things have changed in this dispensation. When I was young (way back in the middle of the former century), there was a socially awkward practice of withholding the priesthood to those men of African heritage. But we were consistently consoled with a promise that the day would come when that restriction would be lifted. We knew that this was a practice that would change. Then in 1978 it changed and we were happy.

I have yet to hear any leader of the Church say that we can someday expect radical change to certain other issues-du-jour. No one has said that the Lord has promised to fill the Elders Quorum with our Sisters at some point in the future, so why are some members anxiously prognosticating? No one has prophesied that the restriction contra gay marriage/sealing in the temple will one day be lifted, so why do some members call out publicly to the Lord, trying to awaken him to this issue? We knew some things were going to change, but we have no reason to extrapolate any other type of change. And we have no authority to bug the Lord for any change we think appropriate for our modern age.

Some things change. Some things have changed back and forth. Some things have never changed. Some things probably never will. But then, who am I to know? After all, it’s not my Church. So I continue to sustain our perfect leader, and his imperfect emissaries.

Articles of Faith 8: LDS Church Disciplinary Councils

by

Podcast: Download (53.8MB)

Subscribe: RSS

This is a special episode of Articles of Faith. It is special because, our normal focus with the show is on articles written in scholarly journals such as The Interpreter, Square Two, and we have some being lined up to include BYU Studies as well. In this episode we are featuring two articles written on blogs, chosen because of their firsthand experience with church disciplinary councils; one article from the perspective of a person who went through one such council, and the other from the perspective of one who was in a variety of callings that involved being a part of disciplinary councils.

This episode will feature two interviews, one with Barbie Berg, who wrote the article The Truth about an LDS Disciplinary Council. The other is by Allen Wyatt, with his article simply entitled Excommunication. This episode is, in some ways, a response to the events and discourse surrounding the very public church discipline hearing for Kate Kelly.

At the time of these interviews, Kate Kelly has been formally excommunicated for “conduct contrary to the laws and order of the church” and that she “persisted in an aggressive effort to persuade other Church members to your point of view and that your course of action has threatened to erode the faith of others.” Kate Kelly has since declared that she intends to appeal her excommunication. John Dehlin has not yet attended a formal council regarding his possible excommunication.

While an overwhelming majority of church disciplinary councils are not made public, because of the attention that these two have received, largely due to the efforts of Kate Kelly and John Dehlin themselves, we find many asking questions and seeking answers, while others make incorrect, incomplete, or un-Christlike declarations about what disciplinary hearings are, what they mean, how they come to be and how they are to be conducted.

Both of these articles and authors were chosen because, over the course of the weeks surrounding the public announcement of Kelly’s forthcoming church disciplinary council and Dehlin’s possible council, there has been a lot of commentary regarding their circumstances. It is my opinion that much of what was said fell short of the true nature, spirit, and purpose of church disciplinary councils, and I felt it was important to re-align the discourse. It also my opinion that these two articles share a valuable perspective that should be taken into consideration when absorbing and discussing all church disciplinary councils, not just the Kate Kelly scenario.

Barbie Berg: Article – The Truth about an LDS Disciplinary Council

http://barbieannlove.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-truth-about-lds-disciplinary-council.html?m=1

Based on her personal experience with going through a disciplinary council as a younger female as well as her testimony of the spirit that accompanies these councils.

Allen Wyatt: Article – Excommunication

http://www.allenwyatt.com/blog/excommunication

Allen served as a bishop from February 2006 until October 2012. He also served as a branch president, as a counselor in at least three different bishoprics, as a stake executive secretary, and on a high council. In all those positions Allen had the opportunity to sit in on disciplinary councils.

He wrote his article because he was seeing so much vitriol directed against the bishops and stake presidents involved in these matters that he felt someone needed to stand up and say, “no, this is the way it really is.” His article describes just one of the councils that happened to involve the excommunication of a sister.

Fair Issues 57: Lehi’s ancient Arabic poetry

by

Podcast: Download (6.6MB)

Subscribe: RSS

MAIn this podcast brother Ash discusses how in Lehi’s world it was customary among Arabs to rename any new territory they encountered with their own names.  It was therefore appropriate for Lehi to name a river and a valley after his two eldest sons.  This form of culture was unknown during the days of Jacksonian-era Americans like Joseph Smith.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

Brother Ash is author of the book Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, as well as the book, of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith. Both books are available for purchase online through the FairMormon Bookstore. Tell your friends about the Mormon Fair-Cast. Share a link on your Facebook page and help increase the popularity of the Mormon Fair-Cast by subscribing to this podcast in iTunes, and by rating it and writing a review.

The views and opinions expressed in the podcast may not reflect those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that of FairMormo

 

Faith and Reason 9: Textual Consistency of The Book of Mormon

by

Podcast: Download (14.9MB)

Subscribe: RSS

 

From the book: Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith

by Michael R. Ash

More than a few critics seem to think that it would be easy to produce a work like the Book of Mormon. Are the critics right?

If so, then why hasn’t any critic attempted to produce something like it? Not only does the book incorporate profound doctrinal insights, but it also discusses politics, war, geography, and migrations, and includes various sermons and a variety of specific events involving distinct individuals.

The original manuscript was not polished or revised by Joseph Smith. His wife Emma, who served as a scribe for a time, said that when Joseph “stopped for any purpose at any time he would, when he commenced again, begin where he left off without any hesitation”. Witnesses also claimed that Joseph translated without notes, manuscripts, or reference books.

If the Book of Mormon is a work of fiction, there would be mistakes in chronology and the inter-connectivity of the many multiple events –based on Joseph’s method of translation. Yet those who have studied the Book of Mormon find that it is a complete and amazingly consistent text.

Michael R. Ash is the author of: Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting The Prophet Joseph Smith. He is the owner and operator of MormonFortress.com and is on the management team for FairMormon. He has been published in Sunstone, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, the Maxwell Institute’s FARMS Review, and is the author of Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt. He and his wife live in Ogden, Utah, and have three daughters.

Julianne Dehlin Hatton  is a broadcast journalist living in Louisville, Kentucky. She has worked as a News Director at an NPR affiliate, Radio and Television Host, and Airborne Traffic Reporter. She graduated with an MSSc from the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University in 2008. Julianne and her husband Thomas are the parents of four children.

Music for Faith and Reason is provided by Arthur Hatton.

Faith, community, excommunication, and Sister Kelly

by

To begin with, we offer our love to Sister Kelly. It is a hard, and sad, and sobering thing to lose a member of the church. The power of fellowship and universal opportunity to serve is central to the experience of being Mormon, and the loss of one is a loss to all.

Excommunication is not an extreme practice or unique to the LDS church; most Christian denominations and some non-Christian traditions have long-standing provisions for formalizing a discordant relationship between an individual and the church. Throughout Christian history, the aim of excommunication has been not to punish or cause pointless suffering, but to spur reconciliation.

Catholicism has lately suffered its own turmoil over the propriety of excommunication; Pope Francis recently reaffirmed that individuals who encourage abortion and euthanasia should not receive communion, despite ongoing criticism from some Catholics as well as some non-Catholics.

Religious language like “apostasy” is very loaded in our culture; it can bring to mind caricatures of pitchforks, torches, and witch-burnings. Most Mormons don’t see it that way in this case; apostasy would be better expressed as breaking faith with the community of members. Personal opinions and hopes regarding church doctrine and practice vary widely in the church, and expressing and exploring disagreement is acceptable. But it crosses the line to act and teach in ways that will threaten others’ faith in the church and its leadership.

This is a crucial point. Sister Kelly has said that she fervently believes in the church’s basic truth claims, and I am happy to take her at her word. But even if she feels secure in her own belief, her actions and teachings have led others to reject those beliefs. One cannot teach that church leaders are unable or unwilling to seek the Lord’s will on a crucial matter, without expecting that some who hear will conclude the leaders are not inspired and not even basically decent people in important ways. Her actions have broken faith with the community of members by encouraging disunity and threatening the spiritual welfare of those whose beliefs are less firm.

Seeking and questioning is central to religious faith; public accusation and fomenting disaffection is not. Sister Kelly has allied herself with others who have made blatantly untrue, flawed, and biased accusations against the church under the guise of benign “questioning.” She is part of a movement that may offer commiseration to struggling members but also feeds a false narrative that the church and its leaders’ actions can best be understood through the lens of cynical politics, and that God does not guide the church, if indeed He exists.

For all this, Sister Kelly’s leaders expressed as kindly as possible their conviction that excommunication is necessary. Their letter made it clear that she is not being cast out or shunned or forbidden from the church. The letter forthrightly invites her to continue to attend church, and practically begs her to return to full fellowship.

A faith community bound by loyalty to an inspired organization and leadership can reasonably conclude that loud public antagonism, destructive to that loyalty, requires discipline to preserve the overall health of the community. We hope that sorrowing church members and outside observers can understand that truth. Above all, we hope that regardless of present pain, friends at first will one day be friends again at last.

Filed Under: Uncategorized