The Gospel According to Jeffrey

In the past few weeks, there has been a lot of talk about “gender equality” in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. While so-called “Mormon feminists” have been around since at least the 1970s, the current renewed focus seems to have started with a Facebook group encouraging women to wear pants to Church on Sunday, 16 December 2012, in contrast to the prevailing culture which encourages them to wear skirts or dresses. (The Church, for its part, does not have any position on pants vs. skirts. As Church spokesman Scott Trotter stated in response to the proposed action, “Generally church members are encouraged to wear their best clothing as a sign of respect for the Savior, but we don’t counsel people beyond that.”) As for my ward of the Church, my perception was that “Pants Sunday” was an utter failure. As far as I could tell, most people had no idea it was even happening. My wife and I saw a grand total of two women that seemed to be participating, but one of them alway

In the midst of my constant blogging about interesting things in my life and giving other people suggestions, I’ve got a bit of a switch-up, tonight: I could really use some help, here. About two months ago, my five-year-old son, David, suddenly became terrified of the dark, of going upstairs by himself, and of going to bed by himself. (He’s our only living son, so he’s been going to bed by himself since he was an infant.) At first, he was afraid of zombies; these days, he’s just plain afraid, ostensibly without the ability to articulate just what it is that scares him. Either way, the problem is the same: we have a lot of trouble getting him to go to bed. We’ve tried talking to him, assuring him that zombies aren’t real ( CDC page notwithstanding). We’ve helped him look out the window, to let him see that there’s nothing out there. We leave his lights on all night, so he’s not afraid of the darkness. We bought him a dream catcher, to help “keep the nightmares away.” I taught him

A few months back, I happened across a video on YouTube, from the HBO show Big Love . The clip depicts one of the show’s characters, a fictional plural wife, appearing before an equally fictitious Church disciplinary council. Suffice to say: while people are people and even Church leaders are extremely human, the depiction is very unflattering and completely at odds with the way such disciplinary councils should be carried out ( i.e. with Christian love for the accused). I commented on this, at the time, saying that if any real Priesthood leader were to act the way these fictional ones did, said Priesthood leader would probably also be called up for a disciplinary council. Since that time, I have not returned to the video nor its thread. A few days ago, woman named Anne replied to my posted with an honest question: out of curiosity, what is a priesthood leader and what is censure? Not a mormon just curious. Are any of these guys priesthood holders or can any mormon man be one? A

Back when I joined the Church, in 1991—and for several years after—every session of LDS General Conference was preceded by a countdown timer superimposed over videos of happy people from around the world, presumably to evoke the worldwide reach of the Church of Jesus Christ. As the timer counted down and the scenes continued in predictable order, there was a scene of a small, arched foot bridge over a peaceful stream, which gave way to an old, Asian-looking man and an equally Asian-looking girl of about five years of age. The old man was holding out his ostensible granddaughter’s hand as a nearby bird—a hummingbird, if I remember correctly—came ever closer to lighting upon it. Then, right at the “one minute left” mark, the scene would fade as their feathered friend suddenly, for no apparent reason, stopped flapping its wings and plummeted toward and off the bottom of the screen. Does anyone out there know where I can find the footage of this apparently narcoleptic hummingbird? I

It’s time, once again, for everybody’s favorite column, Slam the Press! Honestly, this isn’t going to be so much of a slam as a series of corrections that is much, much too long for the comments, so I figured I’d post them here. The article in question is from the Humboldt County, California,  Journal article The Mormon Moment , by Scottie Lee Myers. Overall, it’s a pretty good article, and it left me feeling very good about both the missionaries and the reporter himself. However, there are a few significant errors throughout the peace, along with a several more minor ones that could also stand a fix. So as usual, let’s take them one at a time. “In 1827 [future Church President Joseph] Smith was a 25-year-old New Yorker who made a living using psychic powers to find treasure.” First of all, a minor historical point: Smith was born in December 1805, so in September 1827, he would have been 21. This is actually quite significant, because when he was 25, he was serving as President

So here we are again: Pioneer Day weekend. And once again, I won’t be celebrating. Before I continue, let me give some background for the uninitiated: in the 1830s, Latter-day Saints were a persecuted minority (whereas now, everybody loves us, right? Right? [crickets chirping]). Seriously, though, the Latter-day Saints were intent on building a Zion society—not a Utopia per se , but about as close as we fallible humans can get. Anyone was welcome to join the Saints in this endeavor, regardless of religious persuasion. However, the non-LdS takers were few, indubitably because of the stigma associated with the Church of Christ and its much-maligned members. About a year after the Church was organized in 1830, Church leaders moved its headquarters from the Palmyra, New York, area to Kirtland, Ohio. Shortly thereafter, the Church set up a second center in Jackson county, Missouri. But within just a few years, mob violence had become so significant that the Saints were driven out of Oh

Before I start, I want to emphasize that I am not equating the two terms found in the title. It is certainly possible to be anti-Romney and pro-Christ, and it is equally possible to be pro-Romney and anti-Christ. However, I have placed them in close proximity to address a specific argument that I saw, this morning, which is equal amounts of each. The argument in question is part of a graphic going around Facebook. The text, for those who can’t see the graphic, is as follows: “[Mitt] Romney’s Mormon [sic] ancestors flee to Mexico to avoid anti polygamy [sic] laws imposed on them in 1892. “Pro Vietnam War [sic] Mitt Romney flees to France as Mormon [sic] missionaryto [sic] avoid military service in 1968. “Mitt Romney makes millions of dollars exporting American jobs to China and other low wage [sic] countries. “Mitt Romney parks his personal wealth in overseas banks to avoid USA taxes. “Now we are told he is a patriot who should be elected President? Seriously are [sic] we tha

One of the most beautiful practices of The Church of Jesus Christ  is that of performing ordinances for the deceased, by proxy. Latter-day Saints believe that baptism is essential to salvation, and that other temple ordinances ( e.g. endowment , sealing , etc.) are essential to exaltation. We also believe that, since God is just, absolutely everyone will have the opportunity to accept those ordinances. A just God, for example, would not damn one of His beloved children just because that child was unlucky enough to be born in, say, eighth-century China, and go his entire life without even hearing the name of Jesus Christ. Because this practice is so beautiful to us, it confuses us to no end when people react so adversely to it. An extreme example of this occurred in the late 20th century, when a Holocaust-survivors group objected to somebody having submitted the names of hundreds of thousands of Holocaust victims for proxy baptism. The Church’s response was to issue an official apo

In recent days, my beloved wife, Anna, has been conversing with a friend who has left The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I don’t think she’s actually had her baptism invalidated or anything, but the point is that she’s no longer attending Church and is identifying herself as an “ex-Mormon.” The saddest part is that when asked why she left the Church, this friend consistently cites a so-called “doctrine” that is actually diametrically opposed to what the Church teaches, but that she has somehow gotten into her head as the end-all and be-all of so-called “Mormonism.” I’ve actually interacted with plenty of self-described “exmos,” over the years, and as said interactions have forced me to study my own faith in greater depth, I have been somewhat bruised and battered along the way, but am ultimately much stronger for the experience. What has never ceased to amaze me, though, is how similar almost all of their stories are. Regardless of the specific issues they cite (which

A woman on Twitter just referred me to page called Difficult Questions for Mormons to Answer . I thought the page was so concurrently sad and funny, I just had to post the questions (and my responses) here. Enjoy. If the Book of Mormon is true, why do Indians fail to turn white when they become Mormons? (2 Nephi 30:6, prior to the 1981 revision). The Book of Mormon isn’t about Indians; it’s about the descendants of a Bedouin sheik. You’ll notice that the Lamanites whose skin became “white” are not all those who joined the Church, but those who actually amalgamated themselves into Nephite *society*. This is completely consistent with Bedouin culture, which regards city dwellers as “white-skinned” and nomads as “dark-skinned,” presumably at least in part because of the dirtier lifestyle of the latter. If the Book of Mormon is true, then why has the Mormon church changed it? Examples are: 1 Nephi 11:21; 19:20; 20:1 and Alma 29:4. Compare these with the original Book of Mormon. (Ge