The Posts of My House

Bar Exam Imposed Blogging Hiatus (with Reruns)

2012-01-16T11:04:00.000-08:00

The bar exam (take two) is in six weeks. Plus, being the crazy person that I am, I'm also working full time and teaching an English class. So, blogging is going to be a little more sparse than usual around here.

I'm going to take a cue from television and do reruns. I've set up auto publishing of reprints of some of my old posts, with a little bit of commentary on what I think of them now. They'll publish on Wednesdays and Sundays, and I'll return to regular blogging at the end of February or beginning of March. (And if something comes up that I feel the need to blog about, I'll pop in before then.)

I'll try to check the moderation queue at least once per week to release comments. I wish there were a way to turn moderation on for specific posts, but my choices are no moderation, moderation for posts older than X days, or moderation for everything. I usually set X to equal 60, but until my temple post gets that old, I'm having to make X a smaller number. So there will likely be moderation on posts that don't need it for a few more weeks. Thanks for being understanding.

See you on the other side!

The House of the Lord

2012-01-05T10:05:00.000-08:00

But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it. And many nations shall come, and say, 'Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths:' for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
Micah 4:1-2

I know that God views men and women equally. I know that the scriptures support this. I have received witness from the Holy Spirit that I can do anything a man can do, and that one day through the power of the Atonement, all of the remaining pieces of patriarchy will be done away with and women will take their rightful place as full equals in all aspects of society. For this reason, I have struggled for many years with some portions of the endowment ceremony which seem to be incompatible with this truth.

We are taught that the temple is the apex of our religious experience and that great truths are taught therein. We are taught that it is a glimpse of what heaven is like. So, when certain aspects seem less than heavenly, it causes a great deal of cognitive dissonance. This is what happened to me. While there are multiple parts of the endowment ceremony that have caused concern for some feminists, the only part that concerned me was the hearken covenant.

At first, I dismissed it as irrelevant to my life because I'm not married. But then I realized that since I do plan on marrying someday, I need to deal with it. For the longest time, I dealt with it by not dealing with it. Sitting through an endowment ceremony became too spiritually painful, so I simply didn't go. I would participate in baptisms, confirmations, initiatories, and sealings, but I would avoid the endowment like the plague.

A few months ago, I started to think that maybe I should give it another chance, that maybe I would gain some new insight that would make it ok. Perhaps there was a reinterpretation that would redeem the ceremony for me. Just as I was setting out to become a mental gymnast, Spunky posted a fabulous post at The Exponent that gave me hope. It's entitled Hearken: The Symbolism of the Bride, the Bridegroom and the Marriage. She posited that the hearken covenant has nothing to do with the relationship between men and women, and everything to do with the relationship between Christ and the church. The Bible is filled with symbolic language where Christ is viewed as the husband and the church is viewed as the wife. So, since the temple is symbolic, what is really going on is that the Church must listen to Christ. Although I'm still not thrilled with the use of female imagery to denote subordination, I can live with it because it's infinitely better than the typical interpretation.

I decided, as part of my New Year's resolutions, to give the endowment ceremony another try. After discussing my concerns with a few like-minded friends, I decided to go to the temple after work yesterday. I poured out my heart to God about everything that was on my mind and told Him I wasn't leaving until I got some answers.

I had planned on attending the 6:00 PM session (sessions are on the hour). Traffic was kind to me, and I arrived at 5:05. I decided to take some pictures of the grounds, since the lighting was good. I got a particularly lovely picture of the temple itself. Unfortunately, because the sun was setting, I was unable to get a photo of my favorite part - the inscription on the front of every temple: "Holiness to the Lord. The House of the Lord."

Then, with some trepidation, I went inside. I had a long time to sit in the chapel and meditate. As I was trying to think, some ordinance workers just outside the chapel struck up a rather loud conversation about bronchitis. I tried to ignore them and continue my meditation, but to no avail. Then I stewed for a few minutes. Then, finally, I realized that if I wanted some peace and quiet, I would have to say something. I poked my head out of the chapel and politely asked them to lower their voices. Then I glanced up at the nametag of the offender and realized I had just shushed the shift coordinator. He looked a bit sheepish and apologized. Then I sat back down and reveled in the blissful silence.

A short while later, the shift coordinator tiptoed into the chapel and thanked me for letting him know he had been too loud and told me I did the right thing. The lesson I drew from this is that if there are things that are hurtful going on in the church (even in the temple), they are due to human mistakes, not some divine conspiracy to make things miserable. And, if something is causing problems, it's perfectly acceptable to politely raise the issue, even if the offender is someone in authority.

The session began. There were a total of 9 people (12 if you count the ordinance workers). At this point, it's almost as if I became an observer, not a participant. I heard the words, but they just washed over me. Two things stood out to me. The first is that there is a difference between the endowment and the presentation of the endowment. The second thing derives from the Brigham Young quote at the beginning of the ceremony describing what the endowment (i.e. the thing itself, not its presentation) is. Boiled down to its elements, the endowment is the knowledge that we can speak directly to God and enter into His presence. Nothing more, nothing less.

So, the entire ceremony is window dressing. It doesn't really speak to me, but the deeper truth does resonate. The pinnacle of the ceremony is when we speak to God and are invited into His presence. None of the rest of it is essential.

Nerd alert here - I'm going to draw an analogy to Star Trek. (I'll italicize my discussion of Star Trek so that it will be easy to identify when I'm talking about the temple again.) There's an absolutely wonderful episode of Star Trek: Voyager entitled "Sacred Ground". Ever since I first saw that episode, I felt that it was teaching a great spiritual truth, but I couldn't quite grasp what it was. In the episode, a crew member is critically injured while visiting an alien shrine. Captain Janeway pleads for medical information to save the crewmember's life and is told that the ancestral spirits are the only ones who can heal her. Janeway receives permission to embark on the most sacred rite of their faith in order to talk with the ancestral spirits.

She studied the anthropological database to get an idea of what other religious quests are like so she could have some idea what to expect. As the ritual begins, she is shown into a room where three people are sitting down. The people said "We're waiting." She asks them how long they've been waiting and they don't have an answer. She reasons that this is some sort of test of her sincerity and she pounds on the door proclaiming that she's ready for her quest. The next several scenes show her going through difficult physical tasks, feats of strength, etc. All the while, her guide keeps saying "Everything you're going through is meaningless." At the conclusion of the rite, she leaves, believing that she has what she needs. As it turns out, she didn't have what she needed, so she returned to try again. When she began again, she entered the first room, and the three individuals once again said, "We're waiting." Realization suddenly dawned on her that these were the ancestral spirits, and she begins talking to them. The spirits told her that the quest she went on was meaningless, but that she needed it in order to feel like she had accomplished something. Then Janeway asks the spirits for the knowledge necessary to save her crewmember, and she is given what she needs.

So, the temple is like this. We, as humans, need ritual in order to comprehend the divine. Otherwise we might walk right on by while God sits there waiting. The ritual itself isn't what is important, though. It's the communion with God that matters. So, while I haven't suddenly fallen in love with the endowment ceremony, I am now at peace with it because I understand that it's not about the ceremony at all.

I still prefer other temple ordinances, and I still prefer to commune with God in nature. And that's ok. That's what works for me, so that's what I'm going to do. But at least I've now gotten to the point where I can attend an endowment session when it's socially expected (like when family members or friends receive their endowment) without it doing harm to my soul. And that is a miracle.

--
Because the temple is a sacred topic to many, I'm turning on comment moderation for this post. Comments that quote lengthy excerpts from the temple ceremony or otherwise treat sacred things lightly will not be posted. Comments that violate the comment policy will not be posted. Please be patient in waiting for your comment to appear; moderation takes time.

Merry Christmas

2011-12-24T21:53:00.000-08:00

For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given:. . .and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Isaiah 9:6

Merry Christmas everyone! I hope you have a great one.

If the Savior Stood Beside Me

2011-12-13T10:45:00.000-08:00

There's a relatively new primary song entitled If the Savior Stood Beside Me. The song starts out "If the Savior stood beside me, would I do the things I do?" The point of this song, I'm sure, is a thought experiment wherein if the answer to that question is no, then we shouldn't be doing it at all. I engaged in that thought experiment this morning while getting ready for work, and the answer to the question is, in nearly all cases, no. But that doesn't mean I shouldn't be doing what I'm doing.

If the Savior stood beside me, I wouldn't clean my apartment. I wouldn't cook dinner. I wouldn't go to work or run errands. I wouldn't even read my scriptures. I would sit down, be quiet, and listen to what He has to say to me. The many worthy pursuits of my life would pause for something more important, but that doesn't mean that I should stop going to work, taking care of the necessities of life, or reading my scriptures. It means we should be mindful of the appropriate time and place for doing the various activities in life. After all, "to everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven." Ecclesiastes 3:1

A Bloggernacle Rant

2011-12-09T08:15:00.000-08:00

And I also cast my eyes round about, and beheld, on the other side of the river of water, a great and spacious building... And it was filled with people ... and they were in the attitude of mocking and pointing their fingers towards those who had come at and were partaking of the fruit.
1 Nephi 8:26-27

I suppose I should start out by saying that for the most part, the Bloggernacle has been a positive force in my life. However, what follows is a rant about the one thing that really upsets me about a general attitude among some Bloggernacle participants.

Many Bloggernacle participants (myself included) experience tension with the prevailing culture of the church. Several participants (myself not included) either do not believe the theological claims of the church or do not participate in the church. So far, so good.

My issue comes when some of those who don't believe in or participate in the church act superior to those who do - as if they're more "enlightened" than those of us who do. The biggest example that comes to mind is regarding the law of chastity. (For my non-LDS readers, the law of chastity is the commandment to abstain from premarital sex and to be completely faithful to one's spouse.)

There doesn't seem to be much disagreement on the subject of adultery. We all appear to be in agreement that a person shouldn't cheat on his/her spouse. The disagreement comes on the subject of premarital sex.

It's certainly fair game to discuss what Alma was really saying to Corianton on the subject. It's fair game to discuss how serious a sin premarital sex is (or if it's even really a sin). It's fair game to discuss whether the church teaches the subject in a constructive manner, and whether there are any unintended consequences of those teachings. But what isn't fair game is to belittle those people who, despite its difficulty, are true and faithful to their temple covenants.

There are numerous posts where commenters have mentioned that it's stupid to avoid premarital sex. Others have said it's impossible. Others have said that people who obey the law of chastity are repressed. I was listening to an old podcast yesterday that basically said that no unmarried member of the church over a certain age is really keeping the law of chastity.

Well, I'm sick of it. I'm not stupid, I'm not repressed, and I do exist. I made a solemn promise to God in the temple and I have kept and intend to continue keeping that promise. There are other Bloggernacle participants in the same boat. So, seriously, get out of the great and spacious building and leave us alone!

Locust-eaten Years

2011-11-21T08:42:00.000-08:00

I got my bar exam results, and it turns out I'm in the same boat as several prominent and successful individuals. Which is to say, I failed the bar. The CA bar is notoriously difficult, and only about 45-55% of people pass it. (So it's not really too embarrassing to fail the CA bar. The dean of Stanford's law school failed the CA bar while she was the dean and after she had been a prominent lawyer in other jurisdictions for years. If I had failed one of the bar exams with a 97% pass rate, then I would be embarrassed. Right now, I'm more disappointed and annoyed than anything.)

I really wish I could finally have gotten a break in this whole law school ordeal. I mean, something should go right for once! But no, I always have to do things the hard way. If everything had gone according to my original plan, I would have graduated from law school in May 2007 (instead of May 2011). I would have been admitted to the bar in November 2007. Now, best case scenario, assuming I pass the bar in February, I'll be admitted to the bar in May 2012. That's a full 4 1/2 years later than I planned. People are supposed to have their act together by their mid-20's. I'm going to be 30 before I get admitted to the bar. Then there are still the itinerant years before I land my tenure track job. I'll probably be 35 before I'm stable.

But I take comfort in one of my favorite Old Testament scriptures.

And I will restore to you the years that the locust hath eaten...And ye shall eat in plenty, and be satisfied, and praise the name of the Lord your God, that hath dealt wondrously with you: and my people shall never be ashamed. And ye shall know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am the Lord your God, and none else: and my people shall never be ashamed.
Joel 2:25-27

God has my back. And what's even better, He'll give me back my lost time. I can't go back in time 10 years and do things differently, but God can fix it so that the lost time will have no lasting negative effects on my life. Whatever was in God's plan for my life before this delay will still be possible after this delay. I just need to hang in there.

Living Water

2011-10-10T09:28:00.000-07:00

In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
John 7:38

After yesterday's downer, I promised a more upbeat post on the fantastic Saturday session of the mid-singles conference. So, here it is.

I arrived and mingled for a while. I met a guy who is in his last semester of law school, so we talked about law school for a bit. (There's something about the legal profession that creates an instant kinship when two people meet. I don't know why, but there it is.) I gave him a pep talk about the bar exam because he's a bit worried about it. Then we exchanged business cards. Then I ran into one of my friends who I hadn't seen in a while, and we took a seat in preparation for the keynote address.

Patrick Kearon (1st Quorum of the Seventy) gave the keynote. His talk was fantastic. He shared several personal stories, but the one that stood out to me was a story he shared about when he was a child growing up in Saudi Arabia. He talked about how he and his parents went on a road trip deep into the desert for a vacation. After they had been traveling for a few days, they saw an oasis off in the distance. As they got closer, they saw that there was a vertical pipe in the ground, and out of the pipe flowed pure, clear water in great abundance. He explained that it was an artesian well. Artesian wells are wells that are drilled down deep into the earth until an underground aquifer is found. Then the water springs forth under its own pressure through the well.

He used the artesian well as a metaphor for our lives. It takes a lot of work to drill the well, and it takes trial and error to find it unless we know where it is. But, once we find it, it sustains life. I totally needed this message, because I've been feeling like I'm stuck in a desert lately, exhausted and devoid of water. This reminded me that somewhere deep within myself I have that life-giving force, and I need to find it and be refreshed. I don't know where my personal artesian well is, but God does, and He can tell me where to drill to access it.

Then we had breakout sessions with speakers drawn from the local membership of the church. I attended a few and they were interesting. One of the speakers talked about theoretical physics and its relationship to the gospel. It was a fascinating talk, even if the argument was a bit circular in places. Another speaker talked about market forecasting and the changing information economy. He said that the world needs more philosophy majors. (I minored in philosophy, and I was only 2 classes short of a double major, so I totally appreciated the shout-out to philosophers.)

Then there was a closing keynote by Clayton Christensen (Harvard business professor and former area authority Seventy). His talk was about sacrifice. He said that the church requires much less sacrifice from its members than in the past. He then quoted Doctrine and Covenants 58:7, and reminded us that we need to be anxiously engaged in a good cause. Because the church demands less of our time, we are free to use that time to determine our personal ministry.

Then he shifted gears and addressed the demographic elephant in the room. He said that something had been weighing on his mind, and that it concerned him greatly. He said that statistically speaking, half the women in the room, who were righteous and doing everything right, wouldn't be able to have a temple marriage because there weren't enough men. Then he gave some counsel to those of us gathered, and in my opinion, he knocked it out of the park. First, he talked to the men and said that they need to go out and reactivate their inactive brothers. Then he talked to the women and said that there are 200,000 single men in the area, and we should be member missionaries.

I love that he didn't provide platitudes about things being better in the afterlife. I love that he treated women as agents instead of just objects to be acted upon. I love that he provided suggestions for solutions. Even if reactivation and missionary efforts don't magically end the demographic imbalance, people's lives will be blessed by the gospel as a result. This is the first time I've heard this problem acknowledged and dealt with over the pulpit in a constructive manner. Way to go Elder Christensen!

I spoke with him after the meeting to thank him for his talk. He asked me my name, asked me what my career was, and when I told him I was waiting for bar exam results and wanted to be a law professor, he wished me the best. I only spoke to him for about 45 seconds, but I could tell that he cared. He radiated charity.

All singles conferences should be this good. The speakers talked to us as fellow saints, preaching Christ-centered messages. We weren't talked to as "singles", we were talked to as people walking the path through life. It was refreshing.

One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism

2011-10-09T14:28:00.000-07:00

[There is] one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
Ephesians 4:5-6

I attended a mid-singles conference this weekend in the Bay Area. It spanned three days, with social activities on Friday night, spiritual/educational lectures on Saturday, and a church service on Sunday. Saturday was fantastic, and my report on that can be found here. Today's church service, however, wounded my soul deeply.

The keynote speaker for today's service was Julie Beck, the general president of the Relief Society. When President Beck got up to speak, I was hoping that what had been a wonderful Christ centered conference would be concluded with yet another message focusing on the Savior. Sadly, this was not the case.

She began by sharing a story about how she and her husband don't have much in common in the way of interests or entertainment choices, but they're both devoted to the Gospel, so their marriage has a strong foundation. Then she said that the general authorities prayed for the singles regularly and that it is their hope that instead of dwelling on our singleness, we grow firmer in our faith in Christ. So far, so good.

Then the talk took a nosedive. She shared her belief that as long as a man and a woman are committed to the gospel, they can make a marriage work. Then she lectured us on the plan of salvation, told us that our unborn children were waiting to be born and that we're letting Satan delay the Second Coming by not marrying and having those children, and said that we need to go to the temple and pray, and then we'll be able to get married.

As harsh and unkind as that all sounded, I could tell that she was speaking with the utmost concern, so I was able to brush all of that off as someone who married young and doesn't quite understand that it takes more than two temple recommends and some prayer to have a marriage. (I was reminded of Sister Dew's quote to the effect that if all it took to find a husband was prayer, fasting, and temple attendance, she would have Nephis lined up at her door.)

But the talk got worse. In her exhortation for us to all just get with the program and get married already, she mentioned that she didn't want the single people to be like (some group in the Book of Mormon, but I didn't catch who), and be a separate church. So we need to get married already so we won't be a separate church.

That's right. The general president of the Relief Society just said that single people aren't a part of her church. [1] If you want to know why the singles are leaving the church in droves, I can tell you. It's because of remarks like that. It's because we're told that there's something fundamentally wrong with us and that marriage is the only thing that can make us worthy to worship with the rest of the saints.

God doesn't put those qualifications on His fellowship, though.

Yea, if they will come, they may, and partake of the waters of life freely. Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church.
Doctrine and Covenants 10:66-67

So, it doesn't matter if you're single, married, old, young, gay, straight, black, white, etc., as long as you come to Christ, you're a part of His church. And you're absolutely welcome in mine.

------------------
[1] I recognize that President Beck isn't the most gifted public speaker and that she probably meant it another way (though I can't fathom what she could have meant that wouldn't be so deeply hurtful). But I still left the meeting in tears.

As we are, God once was

2011-10-07T09:45:00.000-07:00

There's a poetic couplet in the church (by Lorenzo Snow, I think) that I heard a lot as a teenager but that I don't hear much now. It goes "As man is, God once was; as God is, man may become."

Its applicability/accuracy has been questioned. [1] But, as a thought experiment, I'm going to take it and see where it goes.

As a teenager, I picked up the implication that the couplet referred to our Father in Heaven. After all, at church, when we say God, we almost always are referring to the Father. I think, however, that the couplet takes on a more enlightening meaning if we interpret it instead to refer to Jesus Christ.

The scriptures suddenly made more sense to me when I had the epiphany about 10 years ago that "God" is not the name of the Father. It is a title that is properly applied to either the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit. For example, Matthew refers to Christ as "God with us" when writing about the birth of Christ [2], and Christ refers to Himself as God when discussing His sufferings for our sins. [3]

So, since Christ can properly be referred to as God, the couplet can be interpreted as follows:

As man is, God once was;

Jesus was born as an infant. He grew into a child, then a man. He lived as one of us, subject to the pains and sorrows of life. He had friends and family. He had enemies. He wept. And finally, He died.

As God is, man may become.

Christ was risen from the dead, never to die again. He dwells in a glorious realm, free from toil and strife. He can be forever with His loved ones. This can be our eternal reward as well.

---
[1] When Gordon B. Hinckley was interviewed on Larry King Live and asked about that couplet, he downplayed its doctrinal significance.
[2] Matthew 1:23 "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us."
[3] Doctrine and Covenants 19:16-18 "For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent...Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore..."

Timing

2011-10-04T06:30:00.000-07:00

Every now and then I feel like I've taken too long to get started on my life. (I know that most of why my start on life was delayed was due to forces outside my control and the rest of the delay was because I served a mission, but melancholy doesn't respond to logic.) When my parents were my age, they owned a house and had two kids, my dad was established in his career, and the only debt they had was their mortgage. I just barely finished school, I'm in limbo in a dead-end job because nobody is hiring lawyers, I still rent, and I have massive student loan debt.

I had an epiphany last weekend, though. One of the speakers at General Conference (I don't remember who) was talking about the life of Christ. The thought came to me that Jesus didn't start His ministry until He was 30. So, the next time my melancholy or some busybody gives me grief for not being with the program, I'll just say that I'm following the example of the Savior!

Recap of General Conference

2011-10-03T08:30:00.000-07:00

This past weekend was General Conference. If you want to watch or listen to it, you can go here. If you want to read a good summary and commentary, visit By Common Consent.

I did massive housework while listening to conference. Sadly, I only got halfway done with my fall cleaning. (I try to do spring cleaning, but law school got in the way this year, so now that I don't have that excuse, it's fall cleaning.) So now my apartment looks worse than it did before I started. But my kitchen sparkles. I'll take care of the clutter in my living room this week.

And in other news, I now have a second cat. My neighbor moved last week, and she had an outdoor cat that she couldn't take with her. I offered to take him in, and I introduced him to my cat a few weeks ago. After two meetings, it became clear that this wasn't going to work. The cats hated each other and were constantly hissing. So my neighbor found another neighbor to feed him.

On Saturday, my neighbor came by to check on Kitty. He had been sad and moping all week, but when she showed up, he perked right up. The manager walked by and said that she was going to call the pound because he had been abandoned. (Which was totally not true.) So after the manager left, I said I would take Kitty.

I brought him inside and miraculously the two cats are tolerating one another. They still hiss at each other, but they're learning to share the food and litter box. I'm hoping they'll become friends soon. Kitty stares longingly outside. I feel bad for keeping him in, but I know if the manager sees him outside again, she'll take him to the pound. (And she's so unpleasant that I'm sure she would remove his collar first so that the pound wouldn't know to call me to come get him.)

Matching Dishes

2011-09-16T10:40:00.000-07:00

When I moved out of my parents' house and into my own apartment several years ago, I bought all of my dishes, pots, pans, etc. from the thrift store. They were serviceable items, though they weren't that nice and they didn't match. My mom tried to comfort me by saying that when I get married, I can register for matching dishes. I didn't really care that my dishes didn't match because I was just so excited to be a real grown up with a real apartment.

Well, the coating on my thrift store pans has flaked off, my plates are chipping, my set of 5 pairs of chopsticks is down to 1 1/2, and my last bowl split in half. So, I decided it was time to replace them.

I headed to the thrift store to see if I could find new stuff. The stuff that was there wasn't in good condition, so I passed on it. Then I ordered some cookware off the internet. But I still didn't have plates and bowls. I had to run to the drugstore for some other stuff, and while I was there, I saw a sale on dishes. I bought a beautiful service for four consisting of dinner plates, salad plates, and bowls.

So, now I have brand new cookware and matching dishes. It's my graduation/remission present to myself. But in a way, it's also my non-wedding present to myself. While I certainly would like to find someone to share my life with, I'm ok if I don't. I have a happy and full life; I'm not stuck in some pseudo-adult limbo. And I don't need to wait for a man in order to have matching dishes.

Who are the sons of perdition?

2011-09-14T10:00:00.000-07:00

...and are there any daughters of perdition?

I was reading section 76 of the Doctrine and Covenants recently and a few questions occurred to me. I was always taught that the telestial kingdom is where all the bad people go, but that it's still a kingdom of glory and a pretty good place (just not as good as the others). I was also taught that those who go to outer darkness would be very few. Speculation abounded as to just what would be required to go there, and most people seemed to think that the only thing that would qualify is having a sure knowledge (like a personal visitation or something) of the Savior and then completely turning against that knowledge.

That definition was comforting on one hand, removing much of the fear of ever messing up so badly as to end up in eternal torment. On the other hand, it always sat wrong with me that basically that definition would mean that someone as totally evil as Hitler would end up with the same eternal fate as a liar or thief. I mean, yeah, they're both sinners, but there's a huge chasm in the magnitude of those sins.

As I was reading the definition of those in the telestial kingdom, I was struck by something. The people who go there are the unrepentant liars and adulterers, etc. Murderers aren't listed among those who inherit telestial glory. So, where do unrepentant murderers go?[1]

From verses 31-38, we get a description of those who go to outer darkness:

31: Thus saith the Lord concerning all those who know my power, and have been made partakers thereof, and suffered themselves through the power of the devil to be overcome, and to deny the truth and defy my power—
32: They are they who are the sons of perdition, of whom I say that it had been better for them never to have been born;
33: For they are vessels of wrath, doomed to suffer the wrath of God, with the devil and his angels in eternity;
34: Concerning whom I have said there is no forgiveness in this world nor in the world to come—
35: Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame.
36: These are they who shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the devil and his angels—
37: And the only ones on whom the second death shall have any power;
38: Yea, verily, the only ones who shall not be redeemed in the due time of the Lord, after the sufferings of his wrath.

A few questions stood out to me:
What does it mean to have been made a partaker of God's power?
What does it mean to have received the Holy Spirit? What does it mean to have denied the Holy Spirit?
What does it mean to have denied Christ?
What does it mean to have crucified Him unto oneself?

God's power is often equated with the priesthood in church discourse. Does that mean that only priesthood holders can go to outer darkness? I'm not sure that's a correct interpretation. In the temple, we are told that we're endowed with power from on high. So, I think those who have received the endowment who nonetheless have not been ordained to the priesthood are also partakers of God's power.[2] Are there other ways to partake of God's power? I looked in the topical guide under the heading "God - Power of" to see what I could find. Most of the scriptures referred to resurrection. So, is anyone who will be resurrected (meaning anyone who ever lived on the earth) a partaker of God's power? That seems like a really broad definition, but it's possible.

When we are confirmed a member of the church, we're told to "receive the Holy Ghost". So, does confirmation trigger this element? I'm not convinced that it does. It is of note that the ordinance of confirmation does not confer the Holy Spirit on a person; the ordinance commands the person to receive the Holy Spirit. So, receiving the Holy Spirit is a personal event not mediated by priesthood ordinances. Someone who is not a member of the church could nonetheless receive the Holy Spirit, and someone who is a member of the church may not have.

Another interesting wrinkle in this question is how the interconnectedness of the Godhead plays into what it means to receive the Holy Spirit. The scriptures repeatedly affirm that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one. So, receiving any member of the Godhead would count as receiving the Holy Spirit. Additionally, we find that whoever receives God's servants receives God.[3] So, presumably, anyone who accepts any of the prophets (or other of God's servants) has received the Holy Spirit.

Since receiving any member of the Godhead counts as receiving any other member, presumably denying or rejecting any member of the Godhead counts as denying or rejecting any other. So, the element of denying the Holy Spirit and denying Christ is the same element. And how does one deny Christ? By crucifying Him unto oneself and putting Him to an open shame.

So, what does it mean to crucify Christ unto oneself? Crucifixion was the manner of His death. So, causing His death would qualify. [4] How does one cause the death of a being who has already died and been resurrected? Christ taught that whatever we do to others, it is as if we did it to Him. [5] So, murder would qualify as crucifying Christ unto oneself.

Putting this all together, it would appear that in at least some circumstances, an unrepentant murderer would qualify as a son or daughter of perdition. That said, I'm going to leave to God the judgment of the eternal fate of the souls of others.

---
[1] I'm avoiding the question for now as to whether murder is a forgivable sin upon sincere repentance. There appears to be authority on both sides of that question, so I'm focusing on the unrepentant in this post. I am also only focusing on murder, not on other forms of homicide, such as death caused by negligence or in self defense.
[2] While I support women's ordination to the priesthood, I don't think the endowment confers the priesthood on women.
[3] Doctrine and Covenants 84:36
[4] By this, I'm not referring to the fact that Christ died to pay for our sins. That was His choice, and while we should be eternally grateful, we didn't cause His death.
[5] See Matthew 25:34-46

Around the Bloggernacle - Volume 10

2011-09-02T08:16:00.000-07:00

Marriage sure has been a big topic around the Bloggernacle this week.

By Common Consent has a post about the judgment that divorced members feel among ward members.

Wheat and Tares has two posts - One about ways to improve the mid-singles program, and one decrying the trend of people marrying later.

I've blogged a bit on the subject, and I don't really feel like rehashing everything I've said before. I do, however, want to bring up the point that a lot of the marriage rhetoric in the church seems to be along the lines of encouraging people to just get married to anyone with a pulse and a temple recommend. But people forget that marriage requires two people with compatible life paths to be in love with each other at the same time. Sometimes that takes a while. For those of you who found the right person at age 21, I'm happy for you. But I didn't. And I'm not some slacker just because the stars haven't aligned properly for me yet.

As we learn in song:
You can't hurry love. No, you just have to wait.

The Other Side of Missionary Life

2011-08-29T16:17:00.000-07:00

I just discovered a new blog called Both Sides Now, published by Beatrice and Galdralag. (Beatrice and Galdralag are frequent commenters at Zelophehad's Daughters, so I'm excited to see their blog.) They're off to a great start.

Beatrice wrote an excellent post about emotional abuse in missionary companionships. This is a topic that is shrouded in silence, and I'm grateful that she is shedding some light on the issue. As I have alluded to before, my trainer was emotionally abusive. What follows is an expanded version of my already lengthy comment on Beatrice's post explaining my experience.

My trainer berated me on a daily basis. I stacked the dishes incorrectly, I came from the wrong kind of background, she hated that I had a head full of long curly red hair, etc. The second week of my mission, we were asked to speak in church. I gave a talk about a principle of the gospel (faith or something like that), and it was based around the scriptures and backed up with a lot of references. The ward members came up to me afterward and told me how much they enjoyed my talk. My companion spent the whole afternoon telling me that I had done it wrong. She said that a talk must consist of exactly one scripture, one quote, one personal story, a testimony and nothing more. When I told here there were many right ways to give a talk, she accused me of being rebellious. She spread rumors about me to the other missionaries and wouldn't allow me to talk to our district leader on the phone. (He called once while she was in the shower and she yelled at me for talking to him, even though all I did was take a message that the time of district meeting had been changed.) She would make up rules and when I would ask for clarification she would berate me for thinking too hard. The most ridiculous criticism, however, was when she told me that the testimony I shared in discussions was too Christ centered.

I kept the emotional abuse to myself at first because I had been taught in the MTC that every companionship assignment was inspired and that we shouldn't complain about our companions and that if we have a problem we should just pray for more charity. I had been taught that missions were hard. So I suffered in silence.

By about the 5th week, I was ready to just go home. The stress had made me physically ill, and I was a shell of my former self. I was convinced that I was the wrong kind of person to be a missionary and that God couldn't use me in His work. (I had graduated from college before leaving on my mission, and my companion had me convinced that that fact alone was disqualifying because God only uses the simple and uneducated.) That week, I had an interview with the mission president. Usually in my mission the senior companion was interviewed before the junior companion, but for whatever reason, the mission president interviewed me first.

I muddled through the interview giving the appropriate responses, kind of like a teenager being on the receiving end of a "how was your day?" question. Then he pointedly asked me how I was getting along with my companion. I broke into tears and told him everything. I don't remember what he said, but I left feeling emotionally better, and I decided not to go home. That afternoon, my companion was really upset at me and asked me what I had told the mission president. I said that the contents of my interview were private, and she proceeded to get more upset and blame me for the chewing out she received. The next week was the most miserable week of my mission, but when transfers came around, I got transferred. She got sent home a week later.

I have spent a lot of time reflecting on that experience, and it was terrifying how fast the change in me occurred. Before my mission, I was the kind of person who wouldn't take any crap from anyone. In just a few short weeks, I was turned into someone so frightened that it took a direct question from someone I considered to be a higher authority than my abuser before I would even discuss that there was a problem. It took me a few years after my mission before I regained my self-confidence.

I definitely think church culture contributed to the abuse. I don't hold the church responsible for my companion's behavior, but I think I would have spoken up sooner if it hadn't been implicitly communicated to me that speaking up without being specifically asked for feedback was unrighteous. (i.e. "steadying the ark")

One huge challenge I faced in healing from this scar was the way that the doctrine of forgiveness is preached. I had absorbed the (erroneous) message that forgiving my trainer meant that I was no longer allowed to feel the pain that had been inflicted on me. I assumed that I had to just "get over it". About a year into my mission, I had another interview with my mission president. At the end of the interview, he asked me if something was bothering me. I told him that I was having trouble getting over what had happened to me at the beginning of my mission.

He told me that healing would take time, but that it was possible. Just that acknowledgement that it didn't have to be instantaneous helped tremendously. He also said that if he had known what was going on sooner, he would have transferred me immediately. That really stuck with me. Church leaders aren't omniscient, and if there's a problem, the person with knowledge of the problem needs to speak up or the problem will persist. I doubt I was my trainer's first victim. I wonder how many more victims she would have had if I hadn't said something.

Through further reflection and scripture study, I learned a lot about forgiveness. I learned that forgiveness doesn't mean excusing hurtful behavior. It doesn't mean pretending that the behavior didn't cause pain. It doesn't mean avoiding the processing of that pain. It doesn't mean being friends with or having any sort of relationship with the person who caused that pain.

One scripture that struck me was in Matthew 18:15-17:

Moreover if thy [sister] shall trespass against thee, go and tell [her her] fault between thee and [her] alone: if [s]he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy [sister]. But if [s]he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if [s]he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if [s]he neglect to hear the church, let [her] be unto thee as an heathen [wo]man and a publican.

The people at the time of Christ didn't associate with heathens and publicans. So, God was giving me permission to completely cut her out of my life. I'm not going to pretend that her behavior was ok. But, I've gotten to the point where I don't wish any ill will on her and she has no more power to hurt me. In my book, that's forgiveness.

Blessed Are the Pure in Heart

2011-08-26T07:10:00.000-07:00

Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
Matthew 5:8

Jesus began the Sermon on the Mount with the beatitudes - a list of nine types of people who are blessed, and what they're blessed with. While they're all great, my favorite is "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God."

I looked pure up in the dictionary, and there was one definition that stuck out to me. "Free from inappropriate elements." We all sin, so our hearts become impure. However, through the grace and mercy of Jesus Christ, we can be purified. So, even though we are not pure on our own, we can become pure in heart and we can see God.

While it's certainly possible that some people will have actual visions of deity, I think a more common fulfillment of this scripture is that those who have a pure heart will see divinity all around them.

God's fingerprints are all over creation. The tiny dandelion poking up through the cracks in the driveway, the majestic eagle flying overhead, the stars in the heavens. In addition, the Holy Spirit can be our constant companion. We can literally walk with God throughout our day.

Go see God today!

Writer's Block

2011-08-11T12:32:00.001-07:00

I have a bit of writer's block. I've started about 7 blog posts on various topics, but I can't seem to finish them. I also have a half-finished law review article awaiting my attention. I have no energy to write, or even to think about writing.

For those of you who have experienced writer's block, how did you get through it? I don't have the adrenaline inducing deadlines I had in law school, though if I want to get hired on the academic market I do need to publish. It's just that the deadlines are so nebulous.

The Bar of Judgment

2011-08-05T08:40:00.000-07:00

The scriptures often refer to judgment as the "bar of God" or talk about the "judgment bar". Well, I took the bar exam last week, and the metaphor makes so much more sense. The merits of my education were being judged and my worthiness to be an attorney was being weighed. Had I learned properly to "think like a lawyer"? Do I know enough?

There is one big difference between California's bar exam and God's bar exam, though. Grace. California's bar examiners don't care what I had to go through to get to where I am, and they're disinclined to cut anyone any slack. God, on the other hand, is merciful and loving. He bore our griefs and carried our sorrows and has power to save us. And all we have to do is come to Him.

Moroni gives a great description of this in his final chapter.

Yea, come unto Christ, and be perfected in him, and deny yourselves of all ungodliness; and if ye shall deny yourselves of all ungodliness, and love God with all your might, mind and strength, then is his grace sufficient for you, that by his grace ye may be perfect in Christ; and if by the grace of God ye are perfect in Christ, ye can in nowise deny the power of God.
And now I bid unto all, farewell. I soon go to rest in the paradise of God, until my spirit and body shall again reunite, and I am brought forth triumphant through the air, to meet you before the pleasing bar of the great Jehovah, the Eternal Judge of both quick and dead. Amen.
Moroni 10:32, 34

The judgment day is described as a good thing. Standing before God is the "pleasing bar". It's not pleasing because of our own efforts. It's pleasing because of God's grace. And God is willing to cut us a lot more slack than some anonymous bar examiner.

Jesus Wept

2011-07-17T13:36:00.000-07:00

Even people who have never cracked a Bible often are familiar with the shortest verse of scripture - Jesus wept.* Those two words contain something profound.

The setting is in the town of Bethany, a short distance from Jerusalem. Lazarus, the brother of Mary and Martha, had fallen ill, and while Jesus was en route, Lazarus died. Jesus told His disciples that He would raise Lazarus from the dead. When He arrived, Lazarus had been dead for four days.

Martha was the first to greet Him. She said, "Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.But I know, that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee." Jesus responded with one of the most beautiful verses in the New Testament. "I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die."

Next, Mary greeted Him. "Then when Mary was come where Jesus was, and saw him, she fell down at his feet, saying unto him, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died. When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled."

Mary greeted Jesus with almost the same words. But Jesus did not preach a sermon to her about resurrection. He took a different approach. When faced with her sorrow, Jesus wept.

Jesus knew that death held no power. He knew that He was going to raise Lazarus from the dead. But He also knew that His friend was in pain, and He mourned with her.

This story teaches us two things. The first is that different people need different responses. Martha needed to hear a truth about the afterlife. Mary needed someone to acknowledge and accept her emotions.

The second, and more profound, truth from this story is that God feels our pains deeply. Even though He will one day make all things right, we are entitled to our emotional responses and He feels those emotions with us. We should do likewise with those we encounter.

This is something I struggle with. When I have a problem, I usually set my emotions aside and go fix the problem. Then, since the problem has been solved, there's no need to have any negative emotions. So, when other people have problems, I try to do the same thing. I want to fix everything. This ends up offending people because they perceive me as uncaring. I do care, and I'm trying to show it by solving the problem, but sometimes people need their emotions validated before they're in a place to solve the problem.

So, the next time I'm confronted with someone who has a problem, even if I'm able to fix it, I'll remember that before solving a problem, Jesus wept.
-----
*John 11:35. The rest of the quotes come from John 11. In the interest of not breaking up the narrative, I'm not going to footnote this one.

Why Dress Modestly?

2011-06-22T15:00:00.000-07:00

There has been quite a controversy around the Bloggernacle the past few weeks about modesty of dress and how it should be taught at church.

Julie M. Smith started off at Times and Seasons with a post entitled Stop Telling the YW to Be Modest for the YM. She objects to the commonly stated view that the reason we need to teach teenage girls to dress modestly is to avoid arousing the teenage boys (and men in general). She doesn't have a problem with modest dress per se; her problem is with the way it is taught.

Geoff J posted a rebuttal at New Cool Thang entitled Please Keep Telling the YW to be Modest for the YM. He basically said that women who dress in an immodest manner are inviting sexual attention, and they need to be told that so that they will cover up and not invite that attention.

Kmillecam posted a rebuttal at The Exponent entitled Modesty: Rape Culture, Rape Apology, Young Women, Young Men. Her point was that promoting the idea that a woman's dress invites sexual attention is on the same spectrum of telling a rape victim that she was asking for it by what she wore.

I agree with Julie and Kmillecam. It is totally inappropriate to put the burden of men's sexuality on women. This model is oppressive and contrary to the teachings of Jesus Christ. It also improperly makes modesty a strictly female phenomenon. Modesty is not a strictly female phenomenon; all of God's people should be modest.

Christ specifically placed the burden of lustful thoughts on those having the thoughts.

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
Matthew 5:27-28

Note that Jesus didn't put in a caveat that said "unless she showed too much skin, then it's her fault". He didn't say that both the one lusting and the one being lusted after were guilty of committing adultery in their hearts. He placed the burden squarely on the one who lusted.

Plus, modest dress is wholly ineffective in deterring sexual objectification. I used to work and go to school in San Francisco. It gets unbelievably cold there. (I'm sure my non-California readers are laughing at my wimpiness, but whatever. Mark Twain said the coldest winter he ever spent was a summer in San Francisco. I believe him.) I would almost always be wearing long pants, a long-sleeved shirt, a scarf, and a beanie. That left only my hands and face showing. That did not stop the leering on the bus. It did not stop the catcalls while walking down the street. My manner of dress did not stop one of my professors from sexually harassing me. Covering up does not mitigate the reality of living in a female body. (And even if it did, the answer is to change the reality, not force women to cover up.)

So, this raises a few questions. The question of what the bounds of modesty are is outside the scope of this post. (For a good discussion on the meaning of the New Testament Greek surrounding modesty, see this post by Hugo Schwyzer.) The more interesting question is this: If modest dress has nothing to do with sexuality, why should we dress modestly?

As I have noted previously, I adhere to LDS standards of modest dress. I do this because of a promise God made to His people.

Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine:
And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation.
Exodus 19:5-6

If I am to be a member of a kingdom of priests, I need to dress the part. I have been clothed in the Garment of the Holy Priesthood, and it is sacred to me. Because the garment is a personal reminder of the covenants I have made, I wear clothing that covers it. It has nothing to do with those around me and everything to do with my relationship with God.

Around the Bloggernacle - Volume 9

2011-06-20T09:03:00.000-07:00

I wanted to highlight two great posts around the Bloggernacle this week. The first one is by Seraphine at Zelophehad's Daughters. It's part of her series on 30-something single members in the church. This post is about dating advice, and she shares a list of bad advice people have given her.

The second post is by Ardis Parshall at Keepapitchinin. It's a response to Seraphine's post, and Ardis talks about what it's like being a 50-something single member in the church.

Both posts highlight the point that often the church doesn't know what to do with single members. I think the first step would be for the membership to recognize that this isn't the "church of eternal families". It's the church of Jesus Christ!

One of my favorite scriptures is in Ephesians 2:19, where Paul preached to the newly converted Christians.

Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God.

Too often, single members of the church are treated as "strangers and foreigners" instead of "fellowcitizens with the saints". We can do better.

Religious Accommodation in Athletics - Updated

2011-06-17T15:30:00.000-07:00

One of my areas of academic interest is religious accommodation, both in law and in social custom. I'm interested in ways to facilitate a society in which people are free to participate in society as much as they desire while also being as religious as they desire. I think one of the best ways to achieve this is for everybody to communicate, set aside their preconceived notions about the other side, and work to reach a solution that works for everybody. (Wow, I sound like an HR person even when I'm not at work...)

The past few weeks, there have been a few stories in the news regarding religious accommodations (or lack thereof) in athletics. The typical religious accommodation in athletics stories that I hear about in the news involve people who observe a holy day and have to choose between keeping that day holy and competing in an important event. (Think Chariots of Fire.) However, the recent stories have involved religious dress requirements that have come into conflict with competition rules.

The Iranian women's soccer team was disqualified from a soccer match because the team members insisted on wearing hijab (a scarf that covers the hair and neck) while playing.
A weightlifter in Atlanta, Georgia was declared ineligible for national competition because she competes while wearing hijab. [Update: She has now successfully challenged the rule and is able to compete while wearing hijab.]
A member of Israel's women's basketball team was disqualified from a competition in Europe for wearing a t-shirt under her sleeveless jersey. (Incidentally, when she played for the University of Toledo, she was permitted to wear a shirt under her jersey.)

The first time I heard of someone having to alter an athletic outfit to satisfy religious observance was several years ago during the summer Olympics. The network was showing one of those puff pieces about the athletes. It was the story of a distance runner who was Pentecostal, and her beliefs required her to wear skirts. She started running as a teenager, and she designed a special running skirt that would allow her to run freely and still observe her beliefs. I wasn't personally religious myself at the time, but I thought it was cool that she was committed to her beliefs and that she was able to find a way to compete while still dressing the way she felt God required.

I was a ballerina when I was in college, and by this time I had become religious. As I'm sure most of my readers know, many practicing LDS adults, both men and women, wear an article of religious clothing (called the Garment of the Holy Priesthood, often shortened in conversation simply to "the garment") that goes roughly from the chest to the knees and also covers the shoulders. Women's dance leotards resemble a one-piece swimsuit and are paired with semi-sheer tights.

So, I was faced with a dilemma. Many people told me I should just forgo wearing the garment while dancing. However, I didn't find that to be an acceptable solution.[1] So, I hunted around for a leotard with sleeves, and I paired it with matching knee-length bike shorts. This allowed me to dance while wearing the garment. Once my ballet instructor knew that my alteration in standard dance attire was for religious reasons, she was completely fine with it. I was still able to fully participate in all activities. One of my classmates wore hijab while dancing, and she was also able to fully participate.

This brings me back to the three recent examples in the news. There's no reason these women can't be accommodated. If I can cover my shoulders as a ballerina, surely a basketball player can still play with covered shoulders.[2] If my classmate could be a ballerina while wearing hijab, why can't a soccer player or a weightlifter wear similar attire?

Someone shouldn't be forced to choose between athletics and religion when there is such an easy solution available.

----
[1] I'm aware that it is considered appropriate to not wear the garment while playing sports, and I'm not judging anyone who chooses not to wear it while working out. This was a personal decision for me, and whether or not my decision was objectively necessary is not the subject for this post. (And, for what it's worth, I do go swimming in a regular athletic swimsuit. Although, with how cold the ocean is around here, and how badly I sunburn, a wetsuit might be prudent for completely secular reasons.)
[2] In fact, I was on my ROTC unit's basketball team when I was in college, and our uniforms covered our shoulders. We did just fine. Bare shoulders are not essential to the playing of basketball.

Housekeeping

2011-05-26T10:51:00.000-07:00

I had to close comments on my post "Are you considering law school?" because spammers keep hitting it. It's an old post, so I hope it won't inconvenience anyone who has something to say about it.

Blogging is going to be a bit sporadic around here for the summer since I'm working full-time and studying for the bar exam. I'm not studying or working on Sundays, so I'll try to get at least one post per week up, but no guarantees. (If I get really creative, I'll write a bunch of posts on Sundays and make use of the auto-publish feature to have regular blogging throughout the week, but I certainly don't want to promise that.)

Graduation was on Saturday, and it was great. It still doesn't feel real. I think when I get sworn in as a member of the bar, that's when it will feel real.

Looking Back, Moving Forward

2011-05-18T13:05:00.000-07:00

It is quite true what philosophy says; that life must be understood backward. But then one forgets the other principle: that it must be lived forward.
Søren Kierkegaard

At times of transition in my life, I often look back and wonder what I would have done differently if I had it to do all over again. As my law school graduation approaches this weekend, I've been running in mental circles trying to figure out if I could have made these past 10 years better.

Ten years ago, in 2001, I was 19 years old. I was on top of the world, just finishing up my sophomore year in college. I was in the ROTC, and I was about to take command of the color guard. I had my life all planned out. I was going to finish college, join the Air Force, go to law school, and spend my career as a JAG officer. (I also planned on getting married, living in a house with a white picket fence with 2.4 kids and a dog. Well, a cat. I don't really like dogs.)

Life didn't happen quite like I planned. I developed some problems with my foot. My doctor said that I had the most severe case she had seen in her entire career and that she had no idea how I was still able to walk. I'll never forget the morning I had surgery. It was on September 11. I was pressured to drop out of college and enlist, but I didn't. Somehow, I think the surgery was a blessing. I might have if I hadn't had the recovery time to think long and hard about it.

Right around this time, I had fallen in love with the subject of philosophy. I felt a call to become a professor, but I ignored the call in favor of continuing on the path toward law school. I majored in political science, even though I didn't really like the subject anymore. (I started out as a poli sci major, and I figured I had gone too far down that path to change majors.) I minored in philosophy. I was 2 classes short of a double major, and I regret not taking those extra classes.

My senior year in college, I dutifully took the LSAT, and I did well. I started getting my law school applications ready. I knew I wanted to stay in the Bay Area, and I hoped to get into Stanford. As it came time to put in the applications, I couldn't bring myself to do it. I don't know why. I decided instead to go on a mission.

So, in August 2003, when my life plan said I should be going to law school, I instead headed off to North Carolina to preach the good word. I had a miserable mission. I know that's really taboo to say in LDS circles, but it's the truth. It was not anything approaching the best time of my life. To this day, I wonder if I made a mistake in going. A mission is a good thing to do, but I think I might have done it for the wrong reasons. I was running away from something. (Running away didn't work out for me any better than it worked for Jonah, but at least I didn't have to be swallowed by a fish.)

Still, I can't bring myself to say that I regret going. Because of the difficulties that I went through, I grew closer to God than I had known was possible. That relationship sustained me then, and it continues to sustain me now. I can put up with a lot of stupid stuff in the church because I know God. He is way more boundless in His love for us than we often think.

My mission was also a turning point in my feminism. Before my mission, I thought feminists were a bunch of whiners with victim complexes. I had never hit a glass ceiling, so I figured that those who claimed that they had just weren't working hard enough. Well, in Charlotte, I ran headlong into that ceiling, and the concussion was dizzying. In addition to learning of the existence of that ceiling, I learned that God is not the creator of that ceiling, even though some people in the church proclaim its divine origin.

When I got home, in December 2004, everyone told me I should work for a few months and go to law school in the fall. I decided that I wanted to jump in right away and make up for lost time. That was a huge mistake. I started law school in January 2005 at a 4th tier school that accepted 1Ls mid year. I didn't know that school rank mattered. Honestly, I didn't know anything about law school. I thought it would be like grad school - a never-ending series of interesting discussions with interesting people about big and important philosophical ideas.

Everything fell apart in mid 2006 and I spent the next two years clawing my way back. I considered on more than one occasion just abandoning the whole law school thing and going for a PhD in philosophy. I would be poor but happy. My pride wouldn't allow this, though. I had something to prove, so I went out, graduated magna cum laude from paralegal school, and then went back to law school somewhere better.

I had to start over as a 1L. That was difficult. The boredom was mind-numbing. Things got better when I could start choosing my own classes. I found that the classes I enjoyed the most were the theory oriented philosophical classes. (My favorite required classes were constitutional law and criminal procedure. I also loved most of my seminars. I took at least one per semester.) I decided that it was time to answer the call to teach. I fell in love with legal scholarship. It's hard work, but it's interesting and rewarding.

I have an uphill battle ahead of me to become a professor. But, God has promised to fight the battles of His people. Still, I wonder how things could have been different.

I think the fork in my road was back in 2003 when I decided to go on a mission instead of to law school. If I had applied to law school, I probably would have gotten into Stanford. I would have graduated in 2006, gotten a clerkship, published a few articles, and I would probably be a professor right now.

But, would I be the person I am? I don't know if I would have been ready for law school at 21. Obviously I would have been scholastically ready, but I don't know if I would have had the life experience to make such major decisions about my future. Law school is about more than accumulating knowledge; there's an element of judgment involved. The judgment centers of the brain don't finish developing until age 25.

Would I have the relationship with God that I have now? I'm not sure. Ever since I joined the church as a teenager, I've been close to God, but before my mission, my faith was simplistic and lacked nuance. I was unable to see the complexities of life. I don't know if my mission is what helped me see that, or if it's a natural part of the maturing process that happens in the early 20's.

At any rate, it's a moot point. Life is a one-way trip, and I don't get a do-over. Saturday is graduation, five years late. In the parable of the laborers, those who began their labors in the vineyard in the eleventh hour received the same reward as those who began in the first hour. Instead of spending my energy on what-ifs, I need to seize the day and live my life forward.

Graduation is often called commencement. Here's to a new beginning.

Done with law school

2011-05-16T08:45:00.000-07:00

I turned in my last paper on Saturday, so I'm now, finally, done with law school.

It's been a really long road with a lot of bumps along the way. A lot of people told me I should just give up because I couldn't make it.

Well, I'm glad I didn't listen to them. They were wrong.

The reality of it all hasn't fully sunk in yet. I'll write a better blog post when it has.

Graduation is on Saturday. I'm sure I'll be a big sobbing mess.

Reminder on the Comment Policy

2011-05-06T08:14:00.001-07:00

I operated this blog for a long time without a comment policy. A few months ago, I created one and announced it in this post here.

Nobody goes digging through the archives, so I've created a permanent page for the comment policy. It can be viewed here.

Keep coming by, and keep commenting, but keep it civil!

Thoughts on Prayer

2011-05-03T13:39:00.000-07:00

But behold, I say unto you that ye must pray always, and not faint; that ye must not perform any thing unto the Lord save in the first place ye shall pray unto the Father in the name of Christ, that he will consecrate thy performance unto thee, that thy performance may be for the welfare of thy soul.
2 Nephi 32:9

Latter-day Saints pray a lot. Recently, I was curious how often the typical practicing church member prays, so I sat down and counted it. (The number varies based on what day of the week it is and what kind of family situation the person is in.)

At a minimum, an active church member will pray in the morning upon getting up, before each meal, and in the evening before going to bed. (Assuming 3 meals per day, the running total so far is 5.)
On a day with church meetings, the number increases, since each meeting begins and ends with prayer. (Assuming it's a Sunday, that's 6 more prayers, bringing the total to 11.)
For people who are in family situations with more than one practicing church member, there is also family prayer. (I wasn't raised in the church, so I don't know how most families do family prayer. Is it morning and night, or just at night? Running total, 12 or 13.)

Plus, there's the option to approach God in prayer any time we feel a need, and we're supposed to keep a prayer in our hearts at all times. So, the answer to my initial question ranges from 5 to infinity.

With all that praying, it's really easy to fall into a pattern of just going through the motions. I know there have been times in my life where I've said prayers without actually praying. I think that's what Jesus warned against when He said to avoid "vain repetitions". (In fact, since we pray in the name of Jesus Christ, a perfunctory prayer is probably a violation of the commandment against taking the name of God in vain.)

I think the text of the Lord's Prayer is instructive on how to make prayer more meaningful. I'm going to use the version in Matthew 6:9-13 because it's the most familiar. (It's also available in Luke 11:2-4 and 3 Nephi 13:9-13.) I'm going to break it down with commentary.

After this manner therefore pray ye:

These aren't the exact words we need to use. This is simply a formatting guide.

Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.

We should begin by addressing God. I find it interesting that there are two ways of addressing God in this verse. We are to simultaneously address Him in a way that acknowledges His majesty and glory (Hallowed be thy name) and in a familiar and intimate way (Our Father). This teaches a great truth. The Supreme Being wants to have a personal relationship with each of us.

Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven.

God's will is done in heaven. It is not always done on earth. We live in a messy, broken world. Some of God's children are poor, oppressed, downtrodden, frightened, or friendless. This is not God's will. We need to pray for His will to be done on earth. (Then we need to go and do our part to fix things, but that's a subject for another post.)

Give us this day our daily bread.

God is receptive to our petitions. We can ask Him for what we need.

And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil:

In Luke, the phrase "forgive us our debts" is translated as "forgive us our sins". We need to forgive those who sin against us, and we need to ask God for forgiveness from our sins. We can also pray for strength against temptation and to be freed from evil, both ours and others'.

For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.

Prayer should end with an acknowledgment of God's sovereignty.

Imagine what the world would be like if we all prayed multiple times per day with this much sincerity and carried this prayer in our hearts. We could change the world!

On the Death of bin Laden

2011-05-02T07:44:00.000-07:00

Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy.
But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
Matthew 5:43-44

I'll admit straight up that I'm not a good enough Christian to pray for someone as evil as Osama bin Laden. I know I'm supposed to love my enemies and pray for them, but I can't.

When I heard the news of bin Laden's death, I felt several emotions simultaneously. Surprise and relief were the two biggest, followed by concern for potential repercussions. I'll state unequivocally that I think bin Laden is an evil man, that in some grand moral scheme of things, justice was served, and that he's burning in Hell.[1]

However, when I got home, I logged into Facebook and was saddened by what I saw. Many of my friends were posting joyous status updates. They were happy at his demise. Even though I knew the result was just, it still felt profoundly wrong to see people who profess to be followers of the Prince of Peace cheering at the death of a human being.

Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth.
Proverbs 24:17

I can't love my enemy, but I can at least refrain from rejoicing at his demise. I think an instructive passage can be found in the Pearl of Great Price.[2] A vision Enoch had of God is recorded, and God details the coming flood.

And it came to pass that the God of heaven looked upon the residue of the people, and he wept; and Enoch bore record of it, saying: How is it that the heavens weep, and shed forth their tears as the rain upon the mountains?
And Enoch said unto the Lord: How is it that thou canst weep, seeing thou art holy, and from all eternity to all eternity?...
The Lord said unto Enoch: Behold these thy brethren; they are the workmanship of mine own hands...
And unto thy brethren have I said, and also given commandment, that they should love one another, and that they should choose me, their Father; but behold, they are without affection, and they hate their own blood;
And the fire of mine indignation is kindled against them; and in my hot displeasure will I send in the floods upon them, for my fierce anger is kindled against them.
Moses 7:28-34

So, even as God knew He had to destroy the wicked, He still wept at their demise. How can I justify doing any less?

-----
[1] I'm aware that there's no place in official LDS theology for a burning lake of fire and brimstone as the eternal abode for the wicked. Still, I think that there are some people so evil that while they don't merit the scriptural definition of Sons of Perdition, I can't believe that a just God would send them to even the telestial kingdom. In short, I believe in Hell.
[2] The Pearl of Great Price is one of the LDS books of scripture. It is a collection of works revealed to or translated by the Prophet Joseph Smith.

A Tale of Two Dinners

2011-05-01T22:59:00.000-07:00

This weekend, I attended two separate dinners sponsored by organizations of religious members of the legal profession. On Friday evening, I attended a dinner sponsored by the J. Reuben Clark Law Society (JRCLS is the association of LDS lawyers). This evening, I attended a dinner sponsored by the Bay Area Association of Muslim Lawyers.

I have to say, this evening's dinner was way better. Everyone was friendly and welcoming. There were people of all ages, all races, and from many different parts of the country and the world. There were an equal number of men and women, and I did not feel out of place. The people were genuinely interested in me. When I arrived at the event, I only knew one other person (the professor who invited me). By the time I left, I had exchanged business cards with several lawyers and made friends with the other law students present.

Contrast this with a typical JRCLS event, where I show up surrounded by cliquish old guys from Utah. I'm almost always the only woman present, and I'm usually ignored because the lawyers assume I'm just there tagging along as the spouse of whichever man I happen to be talking to. (I always love seeing the look on their faces when I mention that I'm the vice president of the student chapter. You would think they had seen a unicorn or something.)

Honestly, I was about ready to give up on the JRCLS. What's the point? But after attending this evening's dinner with the Bay Area Association of Muslim Lawyers, I think I'm going to give the JRCLS another try because I've caught the vision of what it could be.

Maybe other chapters are different, but here in the Bay Area, the local JRCLS chapters are really insular. We do devotionals and meetings, but I've never seen any community outreach. (The only exception I'm aware of is the SCU student chapter co-sponsored a faith and the law panel with several other student organizations. It was a great panel.) I would love to see a push for pro bono work in the community. I would love for the organization to be more welcoming to non-LDS attorneys (without attempting to convert them). I would love to partner with other associations of lawyers on issues of mutual concern.

We could be such a force for good in the world if we just go out there and act. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus tells us

Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.
Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.
Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.
Matthew 5:14-16

I'm going to stick with the JRCLS and be the change I wish to see.

------
Note 1: I'm aware that this evening's dinner was on a Sunday. I don't feel that I was breaking the Sabbath by attending. I wouldn't attend a secular networking dinner on a Sunday, but because this was religious, I think it's fine.

Note 2: I've been pretty hard on the J. Reuben Clark Law Society in this post, so I should add that I have been to some good events. In November, I went to an event where Judge Griffith of the DC Circuit spoke, and he gave one of the most spiritually uplifting talks I've heard in a long time. And he treated me with the same respect as he treated the male guests.

Making Peace with Abraham

2011-04-28T11:20:00.000-07:00

For as long as I can remember, I've had a problem with the story of Abraham being commanded to sacrifice Isaac. It has always made me supremely uncomfortable for multiple reasons.

First, I'm uncomfortable with the notion that God would command what would in any other context be a premeditated murder.
Second, I'm uncomfortable with the notion that God would command something and then basically say "just kidding" at the end. It seems like a really manipulative trick that isn't part of the character of the God I love and worship.
Third, I dislike how the story is used to justify all sorts of situational ethics. Basically, people cite the story as precedent for doing all sorts of horrible acts in the name of God.

For a while, I put this concern on the shelf. [1] Over the past few months, though, it's fallen off my shelf. I've been wrestling and struggling with the story, and I think I've come to a resolution.

I was reading in the book of Genesis a few weeks ago, and I came to the familiar story. As I was thinking, I came to the conclusion that the command to sacrifice Isaac came from somewhere other than God. (I'm not sure from where yet, but I don't think it's important to my resolution.) What is important to the resolution of this story is that Abraham thought the command came from God.

Abraham, acting in reliance on what he thought was a divine command, made preparations, took provisions, and headed off with Isaac.

And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood.
And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.
And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.
And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.
And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.
Genesis 22:9-13

I think we can learn a lot from this story about how God operates, especially in the realm of personal revelation. Personal revelation is a sticky subject. It's sometimes hard to know what comes from God, what comes from ourselves, and what comes from other sources. Abraham received what he believed to be revelation from God, and he acted on it.

God sent an angel to stop Abraham before he could do something irreparably harmful. The timing is interesting. God didn't stop Abraham right after he made the decision. He didn't stop Abraham halfway up the mountain. He didn't stop Abraham when Isaac questioned what was going on. He only stopped Abraham right as he was about to plunge the knife into Isaac. Similarly, God grants us a lot of leeway to make mistakes. He'll let us go down a wrong path, but if we're sincerely desiring to do the right thing, He will intervene before we do something disastrous.

The scriptures say in many places that we will one day be judged on the desires of our hearts. The story of Abraham illustrates this perfectly. If Abraham had gone through with the sacrifice, he would have committed a terrible act. However, his intention was to follow God, and he was rewarded for that righteous intention and is held up as an example of great faith. Similarly, if we honestly strive to do the right thing, and we end up doing the wrong thing for the right reasons, God will take that into account on judgment day.

One item has been removed from my shelf. Maybe I should do some spring cleaning and start tackling some of my other spiritual knick-knacks!

-----
[1] The shelf is a metaphor for dealing with concepts that one has difficulty with by setting them aside to be dealt with later after more perspective has been gained. A good blog post explaining the shelf concept can be found in this post at By Common Consent.

Feminist Mormon Housewives Community Spotlight

2011-04-26T13:26:00.000-07:00

I've been spotlighted over at Feminist Mormon Housewives. I'm honored to be part of such a great online community.

You can read the spotlight here. I'm closing comments on this post, so if you want to comment, please do so at fMh!

God of the Oppressed, Part 2

2011-04-26T00:01:00.000-07:00

Part 1, available here, discussed what we can learn from the story of Hagar in the desert. Today's installment will discuss what we can learn from the story of Mary Magdalene at the tomb of Jesus.

The following will be a familiar story, celebrated every Easter. Mary Magdalene arrived at the tomb of Jesus early in the morning and found the tomb empty.

But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the sepulchre,
And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.
And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him.
And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus.
Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.
Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.
Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.
John 20:11-17

There are many people Christ could have chosen to appear to first. He could have appeared to the leaders of the government or the synagogue. (Honestly, that would have been awesome. Talk about taunting them with the whole "you killed me but I came back to life" thing. But obviously, Jesus is way more humble than that and not prone to gloating.) He could have appeared to the apostles. Instead, He chose to appear to Mary Magdalene.

Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
Mark 16:9

Society at that time was heavily patriarchal, so it is definitely worth noting that Christ chose a woman to be the first person to see Him after His resurrection. I also find it interesting that Mark notes that Christ had cast seven devils out of Mary. The number seven is often used in the Bible to indicate totality or completeness. Mary had been seriously afflicted (either by demonic possession as the text indicates, or perhaps by mental illness, since people in ancient times often attributed mental illness to possession), and Christ healed her. Another interesting point, which I only noticed a few days ago, is that Christ appeared to Mary even before he went to see God the Father.

The first living being to witness the resurrection was not a king or a priest. The first living being to witness the resurrection was a humble woman who had been healed by Christ and who sought Him out early in the morning while others were presumably asleep.

God of the Oppressed, Part 1

2011-04-25T13:36:00.000-07:00

I had planned on getting this post up on Saturday, with part 2 up on Sunday for Easter, but it's been a busy weekend with family stuff and church stuff, so I'm late.

There are two big concepts in scripture that we focus on at church. The Abrahamic covenant and the Atonement of Jesus Christ. I would like to focus on two scriptural stories that discuss these concepts and what we can learn about the nature of God from these stories. The first is the story of Hagar in the desert, and the second is the story of Mary Magdalene at the tomb of Jesus.

God made the following covenant with Abraham:

And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.
And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.
Genesis 17:6-7

At church, the common interpretation of this promise is fulfilled through Isaac and then through Jacob and his sons, and then to all of us as followers of Christ who have been adopted into the house of Israel. I don't disagree with this interpretation; it's beautifully universal in that anyone who accepts the gospel becomes a partaker of this covenant.

However, I think there is more to be learned. Later in the story, after the birth of Isaac, Abraham casts Hagar and Ishmael into the desert. The desert is a harsh place, and they eventually ran out of water. Ishmael was near death, and Hagar prayed. The following occurred:

The angel of God called to Hagar out of heaven, and said unto her, What aileth thee, Hagar? fear not; for God hath heard the voice of the lad where he is.
Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him in thine hand; for I will make him a great nation.
And God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the bottle with water, and gave the lad drink.
Genesis 21:17-19

There are several things that stand out to me in this passage. This is the same covenant promised to Abraham. There is no Biblical record of Hagar having any other children, so a promise that her only son would be made a great nation is the same as a promise that she would be made a great nation.

Hagar didn't have an easy life. She was Sarah's slave. When Sarah couldn't conceive, Hagar was "given" to Abraham in order to bear his child. (Hagar does not appear to be consulted on this decision, besides, if she wasn't free, she couldn't really give meaningful consent anyway.) Then when she got pregnant, Sarah became jealous and was rather unkind. After Sarah was able to give birth to Isaac, Hagar and Ishmael were sent into the desert at Sarah's insistence.

The angel appeared in response to Hagar's earnest prayers and called her by name. Although everyone else abandoned her, God did not. God remembered her and spared her life and the life of her son. From this story, we can learn an important lesson. God does not concern Himself with rank or power or privilege. He covenants with people of any social standing and he reaches out to save those who have been oppressed.

Tomorrow I'll post part 2, the story of Mary Magdalene at the tomb of Jesus (in a rather belated Easter message).

A House of Prayer

2011-04-20T14:04:00.000-07:00

There is a room on campus in the student center that is set aside for prayer and meditation. Upon walking in, there is a sign instructing visitors to remove their shoes. There are holy books from various faith traditions that people can read. There is a fountain that creates a peaceful ambient sound, the lights are dim, and there are places to sit. I usually prefer to sit on a cushion on the floor, but there are also benches and chairs.

I visit the room when I have a need to take a breather from the hustle and bustle of law school and re-center myself. Yesterday I had some heavy things weighing on my mind, so I went there to pray.

When I entered the room, it was empty. Every time I've gone there, I've been alone. I have often wondered whether anyone else took advantage of the space. (There is a guest book near the door, and many people have written in it, so obviously others use it, just not at the same time I do.)

After I had been there for a while, I heard the door open. I glanced up and saw a man enter the room and remove his shoes. He looked to be about my age and he was carrying a book bag, so I assume that, like me, he's a grad student who lives off campus and needed a place to pray on campus.

I noticed that he placed a rug on the ground. He took care to face a certain direction (which I assume was toward Mecca), and he began his silent prayer. I hoped that my presence was not disturbing his praying. This entire observation took only a few seconds and then I returned to my silent praying.

I consider prayer to be an extremely intimate encounter with God, so I thought that it would be uncomfortable to share a prayer room with someone else. It actually ended up being a very spiritual experience.

For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
Matthew 18:20

We were each there for the same purpose - to commune with the God of Abraham. And God was there.

The other student finished his prayer and left. I noticed that he was taking extra care to put his shoes on quietly. Just as I had been concerned that I might be disturbing his praying, he appeared concerned that he might be disturbing mine.

I continued my prayer, and when I concluded, I was reminded of a scripture in Isaiah. "For mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people." (Isaiah 56:7) At a Catholic university, a room was set aside where a Mormon woman and a Muslim man prayed side by side.

Thoughts on General Conference - Updated

2011-04-04T17:03:00.000-07:00

This past weekend was General Conference. (If you missed it, you can watch it here.) I generally enjoy conference, and this one was particularly good, for the most part. So, I'll start with the one thing that bugged me, and then I'll go into a much lengthier summary of what I did like.

One thing I realized is that church leaders really have no idea what the lived experience of the single member is. Several talks chastised single members for putting off marriage, basically saying that we're being selfish and worldly for being single. I would invite them to spend some time talking to and listening to those of us out here in the mission field, where Latter-day Saints are a minority. There are only so many other church members around, so it's not like there are tons of options. It's not like in Provo, where if you aren't compatible with the people in your ward or stake, you can just go down the street and meet thousands more. Out here, if I'm not compatible with the few single LDS men in my area, I'm left with the choice of staying single or dating outside the church. It's not a matter of priorities, it's a matter of population. [Update: ks has a post at Beginnings New about the marriage talks at General Conference. She asks how we can teach the youth of the church the importance of marriage.]

As a nice transition, I really appreciated Elder Holland's remarks. I'm not normally a big fan of his talks; he's usually a bit too fire and brimstone for my tastes. However, I liked what he had to say yesterday. He said that he knows that not everyone is avoiding marriage. I'm sure most people will interpret that as an apology to the married people listening that they had to hear the single people get chastised. However, I interpreted that to mean that he knows there are plenty of people who are single and in good standing with God, and that the remarks of the prior speakers were not directed to people like me.

There was a lot more Jesus at this conference than there has been in the past. I'm quite pleased with that. Elder Grow's talk was particularly great in that regard. He talked about the cleansing power of grace, and he shared a poignant story of his brother's return to the fold. I also liked Elder Perry's talk and Elder Richards's talk. Elder Richards made the excellent point that not all of our suffering is our fault, and that Christ can heal us from the sins of others as well as forgive our own sins.

I also noticed a theme of caring for the poor and needy. President Eyring, Bishop Burton, and Sister Allred all spoke on this topic. Two things stood out to me. Bishop Burton said that caring for the poor and needy is more important than missionary work and temple work. Sister Allred said that caring for the poor and needy is pure religion. (Although she didn't quote the scripture, that comes from James 1:27.)

I've been thinking a lot more lately about prophets. During the sustaining of the church officers, I had a realization. When we raise our right hand and declare before God that we believe that the members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles are prophets, seers, and revelators, that's a big deal.

My Blogging Queue

2011-03-30T13:11:00.000-07:00

This post marks three days in a row of blogging. I'm on a roll!

I get ideas way faster than I can write them, and then I get to a point where they're bursting to get out and I feel compelled to write. I'm feeling like that this week. Unfortunately, I have way more stuff on my mind than time to write, so I have to prioritize.

I've started several blog posts but not finished them, and I have ideas for several more that I haven't started. I'm open to your thoughts on what you would like to read.

Here's what I've started but not finished:
* Why are there so many lawyers in the Bloggernacle?
I probably won't finish this one as a blog post because I have other plans for it. This one might end up as a law review article.
* God's nature vs. God's will
This one stemmed from a question in class earlier in the semester, and I've been turning it over in my brain since then.
* The Ten Commandments, Part 4
I'm about halfway through this one. I plan to finish the whole series at some point.
* Fellowcitizens with the saints
Ephesians 2:19 is a neverending source of bloggable material for me. This one also stemmed from a question in class earlier in the semester.

Here's what I'm thinking about but haven't started:
* The Euthyphro Dilemma
Is what is good commanded by God because it is good, or is it good because it is commanded by God?
* A response to Julie M. Smith's post "Authority on Her Head"
Julie's post is a Bloggernacle classic, and I would love to respond to it. (I'm mostly, but not completely, in agreement.)
* I don't believe in Heavenly Mother
The title sums up the topic. Don't take away my feminist card!
* Why do we need prophets?
What's the point of having a prophet if we can receive personal revelation?
* What does women's exclusion from the priesthood mean?
I have lots of contradictory answers to this question.
* The gifts of the Spirit.
How do they manifest themselves today?

I'm also thinking of starting a Q and A series. Sometimes people ask me questions that might make good blog posts.

What do you want to read about?

The Restoration of the Gospel

2011-03-29T08:24:00.000-07:00

One of the questions in the temple recommend interview is "Do you have a testimony of the restoration of the Gospel in the latter days?" The typical interpretation that most people have of this question is "Do you believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet?" However, I think the question is much more expansive than that.

I think the restoration is a process, not an event. The Ninth Article of Faith states "We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God." Not just a few little details - many great and important things!

What might those things be? The Articles of Faith were published in 1842. Since that time, seven sections and two official declarations have been added to the Doctrine and Covenants. The two that stand out to me as "great and important things" are D&C 138 (proxy temple work) and Official Declaration 2 (expanding the priesthood without regard to race).

I'm excited to see what other things are in store. There's one I'm definitely looking forward to.

And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:
Joel 2:28, emphasis added

In the Bible, there are female prophets. Specifically mentioned prophets are: Miriam,¹ Deborah,² Huldah,³ Anna,⁴ the four daughters of Philip,⁵ and the wife of Isaiah.⁶ I think a careful reading of scriptural text would add Eve⁷ and Hagar⁸ to that list as well.

Where are our female prophets? Since I believe in the restoration of the gospel, and since I believe that God will reveal many great and important things pertaining to His kingdom, and since I believe that in the last days our daughters shall prophesy, I anxiously await the coming of female prophets.

----
1. Exodus 15:20, Micah 6:4
2. Judges 4:4
3. 2 Chronicles 34:22
4. Luke 2:36
5. Acts 21:8-9
6. Isaiah 8:3
7. Although there isn't anything in the account in Genesis to support this, there is some evidence in the Pearl of Great Price. See Moses 5:11. However, the best support for Eve being a prophet is in the temple ceremony. A close observation will show that she gave the first prophecy, even before Adam did.
8. See Genesis 21:17-18

Why I Am a Mormon Feminist

2011-03-28T13:40:00.000-07:00

But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you.
1 Peter 3:15

I blew it today. I was given a perfect opportunity to explain how I can be both LDS and feminist, and because I was caught off-guard, I totally messed it up.

I'm taking a class this semester in Islamic Law. I really enjoy the class, and I've found it useful in providing me with interpretive models to deal with some of my own issues. Today was definitely one of those days. The topic was feminism. At one point, the professor asked whether people should use religious arguments to advance feminist causes. I said yes and alluded to my participation in the Bloggernacle. I mentioned the tension I feel - that some conservative church members find feminism to be incompatible with church affiliation, and that some secular feminists find religious affiliation to be incompatible with feminism.

He asked me for clarification on how I deal with that tension at church. I completely bungled the issue because I hadn't been prepared for the question and I was caught off guard. I made some remark about how I deal with the tension by being myself. (i.e. single way past the typical LDS marrying age, career-minded, etc.) I realized right after I said it that I gave the totally wrong impression. It's absolutely possible to be LDS, feminist, and married with children. I'm not any more feminist or any less LDS as a result of the life path God has guided me on. (Plus, I think I accidentally gave the impression that I'm opposed to marriage, which I'm not. I just haven't found the right man yet.)

Here's how I wish I had answered the question:

I'm just as LDS as the people who think feminism is destroying the church. Just like non-LDS people have misconceptions about LDS people, many church members have misconceptions about feminists. I live my life in such a way to dispel those misconceptions.

I'm not out to destroy the church. I attend services every week. I keep the Sabbath day holy. I hold a temple recommend and live by the covenants I made there. I served a mission. I was the nursery leader in my previous ward! Basically, I have LDS street cred.

I am a Mormon feminist because I believe that the Bible is the word of God.

For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Galatians 3:26-29 (emphasis added)

I am a Mormon feminist because I believe that the Book of Mormon is the word of God.

[God] inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God.
2 Nephi 26:33 (emphasis added)

I am a Mormon feminist because I covenanted in the waters of baptism to stand as a witness of God at all times and in all things and in all places. God loves His daughters as much as His sons, and by being feminist and LDS, I am standing witness to that truth. Sure, there are problems, but those problems are a function of the culture, not the doctrine. Pure doctrine, correctly understood, promotes the equality of every man, woman, and child on the face of the earth.

Best LDS Female Solo Blogger of 2010

2011-03-23T13:56:00.000-07:00

Alison Moore Smith, who blogs at Mormon Momma, held a poll for readers to vote on the best LDS female solo blogger of 2010. Congratulations to Cocoa from Chocolate on My Cranium for winning. I haven't checked out Cocoa's blog, but I'm going to head over and see what she has to say!

And, for the record, I took 23rd place! Thanks to all of my readers who put up with my law-school-induced sporadic blog posting and keep coming back for more!

Mormon Studies Conference

2011-03-14T00:03:00.001-07:00

I attended the 2011 Mormon Studies Conference at Utah Valley University this past week. The conference was entitled Mormonism and Islam: Commonality and Cooperation Between Abrahamic Faiths. I enjoyed the conference. I had a chance to talk to a lot of interesting people about a lot of interesting things. I have prepared a detailed summary of the talks here.

The Names of God

2011-03-06T22:06:00.000-08:00

For whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Romans 10:13

I've often been fascinated by the various names of God in the scriptures. They're really titles, not names, but they tell us important things about the attributes of God. My personal favorites are Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6), Comforter (John 14:26), and Advocate (see e.g. Doctrine and Covenants 48:3). I went looking for a list of all of the names of God in scripture, and I didn't find one. I found a few incomplete lists from the Old Testament, but nothing complete or comprehensive. (I was hoping that Ziff, the Bloggernacle's resident statistician, had done something, but the closest he got was an analysis of which titles for Jesus Christ were most commonly used in General Conference talks.)

So, since I have a tendency to start giant projects, I'm going to make a list of all the names of God in the scriptures. There's an element of subjectivity in this endeavor, especially in the allegorical passages, but I'm going to give it a go anyway. It's a long-term project, but I'm hoping to finish by the end of the year. (I just started today. I'm in Genesis 6.)

Here's my methodology:

I'm going to list each name once, with a notation of the first verse in which it appears. At some point, I would like to do a search to find out how often each name appears, but the search function on the new scripture site at lds.org isn't all that reliable right now. If it improves, I'll run the searches.
I'm going to make the list from the LDS standard works in English. This means that I'll be using the King James Bible (both Old and New Testaments), the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants (including the Official Declarations), and the Pearl of Great Price. I will not be using the JST, and I will not include any non-canonized documents such as the family proclamation, etc.
My list will not differentiate between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Since they constitute one God (see e.g., Doctrine and Covenants 20:28, 2 Nephi 31:21), there is no need for distinction. (i.e. Jesus Christ is a name of God, Holy Ghost is a name of God, etc.)

If anyone has ideas on how to speed this along (like, for example, a link to a reliable list from the Bible so that I can move on to the uniquely LDS scriptures), I would appreciate it. I'm not too worried about computers causing the same result as in Arthur C. Clarke's sci-fi short story The Nine Billion Names of God.

Once I'm done, I'll blog it.

Forgiveness from Sin

2011-03-03T10:10:00.000-08:00

A conversation I had the other day has been weighing on my mind. I was talking with someone, and he said that in his religion* the only way to be forgiven from sin was to suffer the punishment for that sin. Basically, in his view, the punishment purges the sin.

I asked about adultery (the punishment is death by stoning, but the adultery has to be proven by four witnesses to the actual act). I posed the hypothetical question of someone who commits adultery without any witnesses, but later feels guilty and wants forgiveness. He said that confession is a substitute for witnesses, so an adulterer could confess, receive punishment, and then be forgiven. Almost as an afterthought, and not sounding very convinced (but sounding like he wanted to be convinced), he added that maybe someone could be forgiven without suffering the punishment because God is merciful.

That was the end of the conversation, but it got me thinking about how tragic that all sounded. I was talking to a person who loves God but isn't sure that forgiveness is possible for really big sins without the sinner dying for those sins.

As I thought some more, a scripture came to mind:

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Romans 6:23

This verse shows that the idea of sins being capital offenses isn't as foreign a concept as I thought. However, there's an escape clause. God is merciful, and we can be forgiven from our sins without dying for them.

One of my favorite scriptures on this topic is found in Doctrine and Covenants 19. Verses 15-18 talk about the suffering sinners will experience in the hereafter. But, in the middle of this fire and brimstone comes the most beautiful description of divine mercy:

For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent.

Doctrine and Covenants 19:16

God Himself suffered the punishment for our sins so that we don't have to! The price for our sins is paid in full, and through God's mercy, we can be forgiven! That's the best news ever.

----
*I am leaving his religion unidentified on purpose. I have a great deal of respect for the person I had this conversation with, and I find many things about his religion to be beautiful. The point of this post is not to criticize anyone's faith. The point of this post is to express the gratitude I have for the teachings of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

As Far As It Is Translated Correctly

2011-02-16T08:35:00.000-08:00

We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly
8th Article of Faith

As a teenager, I got the impression at church that the Bible was inferior to other works of scripture. I don't recall anyone saying it outright, but I definitely picked up on that subtext. This bothered me. I have always felt the Spirit while reading the Bible, and I developed a testimony of its truth and divinity long before I joined the church.

Some people consider the phrase "as far as it is translated correctly" to be a limiting phrase, i.e. that the Bible is substandard. I see it, however, as an expanding phrase. We use the King James translation at church. I like the language in the KJV. It's beautiful in a way that other translations sometimes are not. However, other translations can offer greater clarity.

I've done translation of non-religious writing, and in the process, I realized that there is often more than one right way to render a phrase in another language. In that instance, each one is a correct translation and it comes down to an editorial decision of the translator. It works that way with the Bible, too.

Take, for example, 1 John 4:8:

"He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love." -King James Version
"He who does not love does not know God, for God is love." -New King James Version
"The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love." -New American Standard Bible
"Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love." -New International Version

They're all saying the same thing with slightly different words. So, a proper reading of the 8th Article of Faith would not say "The Bible is less the word of God than the other standard works." A proper reading would say "The KJV is the word of God, the NKJV is the word of God, the NASB is the word of God, the NIV is the word of God, the Bible in another language is the word of God, etc."

By Common Consent has a post about the use of the KJV at church.

The Parable of the Gazelle

2011-02-10T10:35:00.000-08:00

I'm still here! I have lots of thoughts that I would love to get down on paper (well, pixels, anyway), but I've been swamped. Hopefully this weekend I'll have time to say stuff.

An interesting thing happened on Tuesday. One of my friends posted a parable on her Facebook page that I had never heard before. I filed it away in my brain as something interesting and worth thinking about. Then I rushed off to work for a big meeting. At the meeting, the presenter began his lecture with the exact same story. Message received!

Here's the story:

In Africa, a gazelle wakes up in the morning knowing that in order to avoid being eaten, it must outrun the fastest lion. A lion wakes up in the morning knowing that in order to avoid starvation, it must outrun the slowest gazelle. So, it doesn't matter whether you're a gazelle or a lion, when the sun comes up, you had better be running.

I'm not sure if I'm a lion or a gazelle, but I do know that I'm a bit tired of running. Fortunately, God has a promise for the weary:

Even the youths shall faint and be weary, and the young men shall utterly fall:But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint.
Isaiah 40:30-31

The first thing that stands out to me is that it's okay to be tired. There's nothing wrong with me for feeling like life is just a bit too overwhelming right now. The next thing that stands out is that by waiting on the Lord (or as it says in other translations, having hope in the Lord), I can be strengthened. I still have to run, but I won't be weary while doing so.

Thoughts on Home Teachers

2011-01-23T21:25:00.000-08:00

I've had some really positive experiences with the home teaching program. Well, let me rephrase that. I've had some really positive experiences with being on the receiving end of the kind of love that all Christians should have, and some of these experiences were facilitated by the home teaching program.

That said, I haven't had a home teaching visit in over a year, and I'm perfectly fine with that. I go to church every week. (Well, almost every week. Sometimes I'm too sick to go.) I have a temple recommend and a testimony. Scarce home teaching resources could be better used elsewhere.

But, since I'm single, I get turned into the ward's pet project. It has been years since I've had a home teacher who acted like I was normal. He treated me like a person instead of focusing on my lack of a husband. When he got reassigned, I got a series of home teachers who acted like I have contagious single cooties or something. I started to make excuses for them not to come over, and they got the hint.

Really, there's nothing I need from home teachers that I can't get elsewhere. I have friends and family, both inside and outside the church, to help me out when I have a problem. I have friends and family members who hold the priesthood and can give me a blessing if I need one. I know how to read the First Presidency message in the Ensign.

I don't have anything against service. Last summer, one of my law school friends went through a really nasty divorce. We helped her move, helped her get settled, and provided listening ears. Basically, we did everything a home or visiting teacher would do, but we did it without being assigned. Another law school friend needed to move because the landlord was selling the house. The catch - his wife was gone for the summer on an internship on the other side of the world, so he had to pack up and move by himself with a 4 year old and a 10 month old. Once again, we pitched in to watch his kids, help him pack, and help him get settled.

I guess it's the fake assigned friend thing that doesn't sit right with me. The law school stuff happened organically as an outgrowth of friendship. The home teaching stuff feels scripted and a bit fake. I never feel the need to tidy up the apartment and hide my sister's coffee when my friends come over, but if my home teachers come over, I would.

This evening, I got an e-mail from my new home teacher. He introduced himself and asked if he could come visit next Sunday. I was polite. I thanked him for contacting me, told him that I was doing fine and that I was going to be out of town next Sunday. Then I explained that I don't really want home teachers. I said that since Sunday is my only free day between work and school, that I like to keep it free for rest and family visits. I told him that if he really feels the need to visit me that he can have 5 minutes in the foyer after church, but that's all I can give him.

If he turns into a friend, maybe I'll invite him over. If not, he'll continue to get the foyer.

(For what it's worth, I feel the same way about visiting teachers, though I generally feel guiltier about giving them the foyer treatment. The last time my visiting teacher came over, she brought her kid, who terrorized my cat and kept getting dangerously close to my knick-knacks. Foyer treatment it is!)

The Ten Commandments - Part 2

2011-01-17T08:10:00.000-08:00

This is the second in my Ten Commandments series. Part 1 can be found here. Today I'm taking on the third commandment.

Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in vain.
Exodus 20:7

The common interpretation of this commandment is to avoid using the name of God as a curse word. While this is definitely part of it, I think the commandment is more expansive than that.

There are people who do terrible things in the name of God. Using God's name this way is surely taking it in vain. On a more personal level, in the waters of baptism and each week when we take the Sacrament, we covenant to take upon ourselves the name of Christ. What are we doing with His name?

Another personal way I implement this commandment is in my decision to take affirmations instead of oaths. An oath is the typical "I solemnly swear that ... so help me God." An affirmation is "I solemnly affirm that ..." Oaths and affirmations have the same legal effect. I'm a notary, so I had to take an affirmation to uphold the Constitution, and when I become a lawyer, I will have to take another one.

My reasoning for this comes from the Sermon on the Mount.

Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.'
But I say to you, Do not take an oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God,
or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. And do not take an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. Let what you say be simply 'Yes' or 'No'; anything more than this comes from evil.
Matthew 5:33-37 (English Standard Version)

Although the text doesn't explicitly connect this command to refrain from taking oaths to the command to refrain from taking the name of God in vain, I see them as related. It seems to me that taking an oath would be an improper use of the name of God.

This is supported in the Doctrine and Covenants.

Behold, I am Alpha and Omega, even Jesus Christ.
Wherefore, let all men beware how they take my name in their lips—
For behold, verily I say, that many there be who are under this condemnation, who use the name of the Lord, and use it in vain, having not authority.
Doctrine and Covenants 63:60-62

While a notary, judge, or other government official has the secular authority to bind people to obligations, s/he does not have the spiritual authority to use the name of God in that situation. This is contrasted with the ordinances of the gospel, which are done in the name of Jesus Christ (or in the case of baptism, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) by someone who holds the priesthood, i.e. the authority to act in God's name.

What You're Searching For

2011-01-16T20:33:00.000-08:00

I've recently discovered the statistics feature in Blogger, and I'm fascinated with the interesting ways people find my blog. Usually people click on a link from some other blog that I've commented on or that links to me. Sometimes, however, people use search terms to find me.

This past week, people have used the following search terms to find The Posts of My House:

dating ethics lds - I'm assuming this person found my post Ethics and Dating in the LDS Context.
favorite old testament scripture - I'm assuming this person found my post My Favorite Scriptures.
francincense - That probably led to Gold, Francincense, and Myrrh.
god qualifies the called - I conveniently have a post with that very title.
no more strangers - I also have a post with that title.
paper sacrament cups and trays - This person probably found Paper or Plastic?
scriptures favorites - Most likely another hit for My Favorite Scriptures.
cdaph or unapei or fmh or cncph - I have no idea where this search string would have landed. I hope you found what you needed!

My Calling in Life

2011-01-12T10:00:00.000-08:00

In a recent comment, CJ asked me why I want to be a professor. Here's my (rather lengthy) response.

As a teenager, I envied people who knew what their calling in life was. I didn't know mine. My father is an engineer, my grandfather is an engineering professor, and I showed early aptitude in math and science. Naturally, everyone assumed that I would become an engineer as well. My parents never pressured me in that direction, but my extended family and teachers at school did. There was just one problem with this: I hate math!

I joined the debate team in high school and I loved it. I also joined the mock trial team and I loved that, too. I decided to major in political science and then go to law school. I figured I would be a litigator. I thought it would be fun, but I still didn't feel any sense of a calling.

When I was a senior in high school, the Army was trying to convince my boyfriend to enlist. Being the supportive girlfriend that I was, I attended the recruiting lectures with him just to listen. He was totally uninterested, but I was intrigued by the sense of higher purpose and camaraderie. However, I knew my parents would be extremely upset if I didn't go to college. The next week (completely unrelated), the Air Force Academy sent me some materials and invited me to apply. I seriously considered it, but I ultimately decided that I didn't want to leave home just yet. I got accepted to a local well-respected university, and I enrolled. I joined the ROTC and planned on becoming a JAG officer.

I liked the sense of purpose, and I began to convince myself that this was my calling. I had difficulty with the authoritarian environment. The lack of questioning really bugged me. Around this time, I took a philosophy class and fell in love with the subject. I changed my minor from music to philosophy. I also became a teaching assistant in astronomy. I found that I enjoyed teaching and I was pretty good at it.

Then 9/11 happened. The colonel in command of the ROTC unit asked us all to enlist. I didn't do it because I knew by this point in time that I loved college and did not want to drop out. I should have felt guilty about this, but I didn't. (People tried to convince me I was being selfish and immature. I was 19; I'm supposed to be selfish and immature at that age!) I stayed in ROTC for the rest of the school year, (making a total of 2 years) but then I left because I would have had to make a 4 year commitment at that point if I hadn't left.

I was walking out of a philosophy class one day. As I was headed to my next class, out of nowhere the thought occurred to me that I should consider becoming a professor. I dismissed the idea because I didn't think I was smart enough to get a PhD. (My IQ is high enough that if I wanted to, I could join Mensa, but in my late teens and early 20's, I suffered from extremely low self-esteem.) I started taking some classes on law and philosophy and law and political science. I really loved those classes, especially the Constitutional law classes. A few other times, the thought occurred to me to teach law classes, but I once again dismissed the idea.

I was approaching graduation and I decided to start applying to law school, even though I didn't feel any sense of calling. I started thinking that maybe I would like to become a judge. As I prepared my applications, I got a strong feeling that the time wasn't right. I decided to go on a mission instead. After my mission, I went to law school.

In the middle of my third semester, when the writing was on the wall that the school was getting ready to purge my class, I was trying to figure out what to do with my life. I was sitting in the foyer one day, and I remember it as clearly as if it happened yesterday. I was starting to believe the people who were telling me that I wasn't cut out for law school, and I was trying to figure out what to do. The voice of the Spirit came to me clearly telling me that I should be a professor.

I was grateful for the divine vote of confidence, but I still wanted to be a civil rights litigator. I filed all of this away, figuring I didn't have to do anything about it just yet. Then I got kicked out of law school and I became depressed. I enrolled in some classes at a local community college to shore up my science education so I could take the patent bar. I hated the science classes. I enrolled in divinity school and planned on becoming a hospital chaplain. That lasted a month. Then I figured I would become a bioethicist. I took some bioethics classes as an undergrad, and I loved them. I looked into some graduate programs in the subject, but I wasn't able to muster the enthusiasm to apply.

The ABA has a rule that if you get kicked out of law school, you have to wait 2 years before applying to another one. I got a job with a temp agency and began working, since my student loans were coming due. About a year later, I got sent to a law firm to cover for one of the mailroom staff who was out on maternity leave. I spent the spring working 12 hour days around a bunch of chronically stressed lawyers. It was miserable and it cured me of my desire to work in a large firm.

One day, a lawyer in my ward asked me if I would be interested in interviewing for an open legal assistant position at his small firm. I said yes, and I interviewed. I could tell from the interview that it was not the job for me. That weekend, everything fell into place for me to go to paralegal school. I graduated in 6 months because my law school credits transferred in. My professor wrote me a great letter of recommendation and I got accepted to two law schools.

In the fall of 2008, I started law school again, older and wiser. By this time, I realized that I really do want to be a professor. I read law review articles for fun. I really enjoy discussing theoretical concepts with anyone willing to listen. I don't have the typical law professor background (elite law school, straight A's, prestigious clerkship, etc.), but that will make me better able to relate to my students. After all, 90% of people aren't in the top 10% of the class!

What's more, I'm actually passionate about legal scholarship. For the first time, I understand what people mean when they talk about their calling in life. I truly feel that academia is my calling.

I was thinking about Jonah recently. When I was sitting in the foyer at school, I received a calling. I rebelled; I didn't want to teach, I wanted to practice law! Jonah didn't want to go to Nineveh. Those two years I spent wandering between my two law school experiences were kind of like being stuck in the belly of the whale. It was a dark and unpleasant time of my life, but I grew from it, and I'm willing (and excited) to answer the call now.

Are you considering law school?

2011-01-09T13:06:00.000-08:00

Kevin Barney at By Common Consent wrote a post entitled All About Law School. He discussed his experiences in law school and invited the commenters to do the same. As regular readers of my blog know, I've had a rather difficult and atypical law school experience. That has colored my response to the questions asked. I've reproduced my comment below.

1. The Decision to Go. I first thought about law school when I was on the mock trial team in high school. I went to college and majored in poli sci, minoring in philosophy. I wanted to be a civil rights litigator. My last year of college, I took the LSAT, did fairly well, and I started out on my applications. However, it felt like the wrong time. I went on a mission instead, and I ended up starting law school right after I got back.

2. Where to Go? I didn’t want to lose any time between coming home from my mission and starting law school, so I looked for schools that would allow me to start mid-year. (I got home from my mission in December.) At the time, I became aware of only one school that had such a program – Golden Gate University in San Francisco. I’m from the Bay Area, so this was great. I spent my P-days working on my application. I got accepted and started school 3 weeks after getting home from my mission. (GGU didn’t work out.) On my second attempt, I went to Santa Clara University. I’m now a 3L there, and I’ll be graduating in May. I’m very happy at SCU. It’s a good school with a supportive and approachable faculty.

3. The Cost. I took out loans at GGU, and at SCU, I’m working and taking out loans. I didn’t get any scholarships. I’ll graduate with about $140,000 in debt, which is atypical. This is because I lost all of my credits from GGU when I went to SCU, so I’m basically paying for 1.5 law degrees.

4. What Was It Like? I was miserable at GGU. The school got put on probation with the ABA while I was there, and it created a pretty toxic atmosphere. I also realized that my starry-eyed view of the law was not accurate. I had envisioned it as being like a continuance of a philosophy program. When GGU and I parted ways, I had abandoned my desire to be a litigator and I nearly enrolled in a PhD program in philosophy. I ended up deciding to go back to law school, but I don’t plan on practicing law. (Well, I’ll probably have to for a few years to pay back my debt.)

5. Grades. I had a bad first semester at GGU. I pulled my grades up, and I ended up getting the highest grade in the class in Constitutional Law. Anyway, by the end of my third semester, my GPA was respectable. However, the school was on probation and decided to purge my class. My Witkin Award and my disqualification letter came in the mail the same day. At SCU, I’ve been a solid B student, punctuated by a few A’s as well. I’m on a law journal. In the grand scheme of things, I’m fine with it, seeing as I’m juggling work and school at the same time, along with a chronic health condition.

6. Getting a Job. Let me get back to you on that one. I’ve decided to be a professor. I know that I’m fighting an extremely uphill battle with this one, given my grades, my false start, and given that SCU is a good school, but it isn’t Yale. I’m writing like mad, and I’m hoping that once I have a few articles to my name, somebody will take a chance on me.

7. Would I Do It Again? I don’t know. I feel very strongly that God called me to law school, so in that respect, yes. (Though I would have done it differently.) However, in the absence of an unmistakable spiritual prompting, no, I would not do it again. I would go for the PhD in philosophy.

8. What Advice Do You Have for People Considering Law School? Make sure you’ve done your research on the school you’re planning on going to before you go. Where you go can make or break your career. Also, don’t take yourself too seriously. There was a time when I didn’t know how to have a conversation that didn’t revolve around law school. Don’t lose yourself like that.

The Ten Commandments - Part 1

2011-01-05T13:07:00.000-08:00

I've decided to do a series of posts on the Ten Commandments and what they mean today. When deciding to write these posts, I was confronted with a few challenges. First, what would I have to say on the topic that's new? I mean, these words have been around for a long time. The second challenge is that there are several versions of these commandments. Do I take the list in Exodus, the list in Deuteronomy, the explanation and expansion in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew, etc.

I've decided to take the lists in both Exodus and Deuteronomy to illustrate the similarities and differences between them. I'll use other verses as appropriate to explain and expand upon them. I'll be sticking with the King James translation unless otherwise specified. Although it's not always the most clear of translations, it's the one I'm the most familiar with, and I love the beauty of the language.

With that said, on to part 1. I'll be taking the first two commandments (1. No other gods, and 2. No graven images) together in this post because they're conceptually related. It's hard to mark where one ends and the other begins. (In fact, a quick glance at Wikipedia shows that Jews, Catholics, and Lutherans view these as one commandment, not two.) For this segment, there is no meaningful difference between Exodus and Deuteronomy, so I'll just use the text of Exodus.

I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
Exodus 20:2-6

This section starts with an introduction of the speaker - God - and a reminder of what He has done for His people - freed them from slavery. Just as He freed the children of Israel from bondage in Egypt, He frees us from the bondage of sin.

At its most basic level, this is a commandment of monotheism. We are to worship God and none else. I doubt many church members have a private pantheon, so on the basic level, we're probably doing fine. However, there's much more to it than this. How many of us allow people to get between us and God? Who do we follow when the whisperings of the Spirit conflict with our ward members' express or implied cultural expectations? Are we putting money or fame or power ahead of following God? If so, those become other gods we're putting before God.

The graven images portion is less clear to me. A literal interpretation would seem to prohibit most art. It would eliminate statues, paintings, photography, etc. of people, animals, plants, and nature scenes. ("any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth") However, I think it's tempered by the following statement "Thou shalt not bow thyself down to them, nor serve them." In context, I think it's more of a prohibition of idolatry, not a prohibition of art.

As far as the part about visiting iniquity onto the third and the fourth generation, I don't think that means God actively curses innocent children for their parents' sins. That flies in the face of justice, and God is just. (see e.g. Article of Faith 2 "We believe that man will be punished for his own sins and not for Adam's transgression.") I take this portion to be a warning that the choices of parents will have an effect on their children. If children are not raised with the knowledge of God and His truth, then they will not as easily gain the blessings of the gospel.

Come, Let Us Anew!

2011-01-03T15:05:00.000-08:00

I had intended to write a new year's post on Saturday, but I've had a bit of a flare-up with my adrenal problems, and I wasn't able to muster the energy to write. I'm feeling much better today, so here it is.

I love the start of a new year. It's a new beginning and a chance to start fresh. 2010 was a really rough year for me. I started out with roommate drama that took up the first three months of the year. Getting out of that situation wiped out my savings so I had to work extra hours while juggling school. I started to get sick in May, and in July I was diagnosed with adrenal problems. The diagnosis came with a stern admonition to avoid stress. The very next day, the company I work for got acquired. I managed to keep my job, but stuff got crazy at work. Then I had the most insanely intense and busy semester of my entire education, all while working and doing an internship. I finished up my internship on New Year's Eve. So much for avoiding stress!

I'll be glad to put all that behind me. While all the craziness was going on, I let some things slide. I got out of the habit of exercising, mostly because I was too exhausted, but once I started feeling better, I still didn't work out because I was too busy. I was also too tired to stay for the full church meeting block most weeks. I would consistently go to Sacrament meeting, but Sunday School and Relief Society happened maybe twice a month. I could definitely feel that something was missing. My scripture study kind of slid, too. I used to be so consistent, but I've kind of gotten out of that habit.

So, in honor of the new year, here are my resolutions for 2011:
1. Exercise regularly. I'm going to try the Couch to 5k program. Some of my friends have reported great success with it, and I like that it's something I can squeeze in around my schedule. I've tried workout classes before, but it's hard to drag myself to another class given my time constraints.
2. Attend the entire 3 hour meeting block every week.
3. Read my scriptures every day and keep up with the Sunday School and Relief Society lessons.
4. Improve my prayers. I used to talk to God, but these days I feel like sometimes I'm just going through the motions. I've been saying my prayers, but instead, I need to pray.
5. Finish law school and pass the bar exam. I fully intend to pass on my first try.

I'm grateful for the Atonement. One of my favorite scriptures is Ether 12:27.

And if men [and women] come unto me I will show unto them their weakness. I give unto men [and women] weakness that they may be humble; and my grace is sufficient for all men [and women] that humble themselves before me; for if they humble themselves before me, and have faith in me, then will I make weak things become strong unto them.

Most people focus on weak things becoming strong, but the part that stands out to me is that the power that causes weak things to become strong is the grace of God. I can't make the needed improvements on my own and I need divine help. That help is available! Awesome news!

Happy New Year!

As a bonus, here's a guitar and vocal version of the hymn Come, Let Us Anew.

Gold, Francincense, and Myrrh

2010-12-24T07:32:00.000-08:00

And when [the wise men] were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary His mother, and fell down, and worshipped Him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto Him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh.
Matthew 2:11

Just as the wise men gave gifts to the Christ child, we too should give our Savior gifts. Gold, frankincense, and myrrh were all valuable treasures at the time, and what we give should equally be valuable.

Gold - Even today, gold is used as currency. We should give our wealth to God. One of my favorite scriptures is in Matthew 25 when Christ reminds us that when we feed and clothe the poor, we feed and clothe Him.

Frankincense - Frankincense is used as an incense. Incense represents our prayers. As we pray, we should remember that we can pour out our hearts to God.

Myrrh - Myrrh was used in Egyptian funeral practices. With death comes sadness. Christ invites us to drop our burdens at His feet so that He may bear our sorrows.

So, this Christmas, I'm going to give Christ my gold, my frankincense, and my myrrh. I will do this by helping the poor, pouring my heart out to Him, and dropping my burden at His feet.

Merry Christmas!

What do you want to read?

2010-12-22T10:43:00.000-08:00

From checking my stats, it appears that the posts I like the best and the posts that people are more interested in reading/commenting on are not the same.

When I started this blog, I had two purposes. The first was to add my voice to the Bloggernacle by blogging about my take on LDS issues, both doctrinal and cultural. The second was to have a place to work through all the law school drama I was having at the time. I'm still in law school, but the drama has passed.

So, what do you want to read about? I enjoy the doctrinal posts, though they're more work to produce than the cultural or law school posts. I don't think I'm going to eliminate any category, since they're all a part of my life, but I do want to produce content that people are interested in reading.

I have a few ideas for posts that I'm going to float around to see what kind of interest they generate:

I'm thinking of doing a series on the 10 commandments and how to apply them in modern life.
I'm also thinking of a series of posts on the articles of faith.
Next semester in school, I'm taking a class on Islamic Law. That might provide me with some bloggable material, though I won't know that for sure until a few weeks into the class.

Any thoughts? Are there topics you would like to hear my take on that I haven't mentioned?

The Eternal Implications of the Male/Female Imbalance in the Church

2010-12-19T07:38:00.000-08:00

I've been thinking about the male/female imbalance in the church and what that means for the hereafter. People have pointed to the fact that there are more active women in the church than active men, and they extrapolate that to the Celestial Kingdom, and then posit that there will be widespread polygyny as a result. There's a great post at BCC breaking down population statistics over time. The conclusion is that based on historical infant mortality rates, there will be considerably more men than women in the celestial kingdom.

Given those numbers, there are a few possibilities:

1. Those who die before age 8 will be saved, but not exalted.
2. There is no automatic exaltation. Those who die before age 8 will have to hear and accept the gospel in the spirit world and receive temple ordinances just like everyone else.
3. There will be exalted individuals who are unmarried.
4. There will be polyandry in the celestial kingdom.
5. There will be same-sex marriage in the celestial kingdom.
6. The celestial kingdom will have people from worlds other than our own, evening out the gender imbalance.

I think we can eliminate option 1 immediately. It goes against the character of God to create a plan that ensures that most of the population cannot achieve exaltation. God's work and glory is to bring to pass our eternal life. (Moses 1:39)

Option 2 makes a lot of sense. However, there is a large body of scriptural authority that cuts against it. (D&C 137, Moroni 8) On the other hand, these predate D&C 138, which revealed temple work for the dead. It is possible that D&C 138 overruled the prior pronouncements. I personally find this unlikely, because if it did, presumably prophets since that time would have said something about it.

Option 3 is problematic because of scriptures and quotes requiring marriage as a prerequisite for exaltation. However, it would provide an elegant explanation for our lack of information about a Heavenly Mother. Perhaps we don't have one.

Option 4 is compelling. It preserves male/female marriage, which is a big deal in the church. There is already precedent for non-monogamous marriage in the hereafter. A man may be sealed to any woman to whom he was married in life, and a deceased woman may be sealed to any man to whom she was married in life. It also can explain why we know so little about our Heavenly Mother. Perhaps She has several families to attend to and consequently isn't around much.

Option 5 would require the biggest change in current doctrine. While it preserves monogamy, it would require a complete change of all gender rhetoric. Men presiding by virtue of maleness would have to go. Women being constrained to domesticity by virtue of femaleness would have to go. There would be no more justification for a male only priesthood. Gender essentialism would have to go out the window. While this would be an elegant solution to the demographic imbalance, I think it's supremely unlikely. First, it would throw all gender-based doctrine into disarray. Second, given the church's political activities on the subject of same-sex marriage, it's unlikely that it's going to happen in the hereafter. On the other hand, early church leaders had some pretty negative things to say about interracial marriage, and I know several couples today whose interracial marriages have been solemnized in temples. (However, the race issue was less entrenched than the gender issue.)

Option 6 moves the problem into the realm of the unknown again, but it could work. We know God has made many worlds. Presumably, He wants all of His children to dwell with Him. That makes it likely that everyone will be in one big happy family.

I suspect that some combination of options 3, 4, and 6 is most likely. Option 6 doesn't completely solve the problem unless the ratio evens out precisely to 1:1, so some other solution is needed to deal with even a minor imbalance.

Are there any options that I didn't think of?

Comments, Spam and Otherwise

2010-12-09T13:51:00.000-08:00

I love comments. They're validation that someone is reading what I write. Plus, they help spark discussion. I operate from a philosophy of free and open discussion. The only comments I'll delete are ones that are obviously spam or are egregiously uncivil. In the nearly four years I've had this blog, I've only deleted a handful of comments, all spam. I keep moderation on for older posts to avoid hit and run spam attacks, but sometimes they happen anyway.

Unfortunately, Blogger has just ramped up their spam filter, and some legitimate comments are getting caught. I've let them all out now. I'm telling you this because if your comment gets caught, it's not my intention to keep it from seeing the light of day.

I don't check my blog every day and I don't check the e-mail I use for this blog every day. There may be waits between when I can clear out my filter. Please bear with me while I work out the bugs.

While I'm on the subject of comments, I've decided that it's time for a comment policy. This is not a reaction to anything. My blog started out in an obscure little corner of the internet and has now been noticed by the Bloggernacle. I'm getting more traffic, and I would rather have my policy in place before I need it.

So, here's the comment policy:
1. Comments are welcome. In fact, I love them.
2. No profanity. I may excuse some coarse language in an otherwise insightful comment, but I have no tolerance for the f-word. Any comment containing that word will be deleted even if the rest of it is brilliant. Unfortunately, I don't have the ability to edit comments, only delete them.
3. You are free to disagree with me or with other commenters, but no personal attacks. Saying "Poster X is wrong about issue Y because..." is fine. Saying "Poster X is stupid/apostate/going to hell/etc." is not fine.
4. I try to respond to commenters, but sometimes that's not possible due to whatever else is going on in life. Please don't take it personally; I'm not ignoring you.

More on Dating/Marriage

2010-12-07T08:19:00.000-08:00

SilverRain has an excellent post on her blog. It's entitled Singles of a Certain Age, or What I Wish Church Leadership Would Understand. She discusses the challenges that singles in the church face and the issues involved in singles' activities. She makes the excellent point that we want to be viewed as whole people and not as fundamentally broken due to our marital state. I want to give the whole post a hearty amen!

Other great singles-related blog posts:
I wrote a post about retention of YSAs in the church and a post on the ethics of dating.
Seraphine at Zelophehad's Daughters has a series of posts about being a 30-something single in the church.

A Little Housekeeping - Updated

2010-12-05T11:09:00.000-08:00

I've had this blog for nearly four years now, so it's time for me to do some housekeeping. I'm going to tag my posts to create categories. That way, if people want to read about a certain topic, it will be easier to find related posts. I'm also going to redesign my background.

The upshot is that when I go back to edit old posts to add tags, the blogging software sometimes thinks it's a new post. So, for those of you that subscribe by Google Reader or RSS, you may get a deluge of new old posts. Sorry about that!

Update: I'm finished with the tagging and re-design. Any feedback would be appreciated. Is the blog too wide? I have a widescreen monitor, so it looks great to me, but if it's too wide for people with normal monitors, I can narrow it.

Prophets

2010-12-03T11:28:00.000-08:00

Surely the Lord God does nothing unless He reveals His secret to His servants the prophets.

Amos 3:7

I've been thinking a lot about prophets lately. The belief that God continues to speak to humankind through prophets just as He did in old times is one of the beliefs that sets Latter-day Saints apart from the rest of Christianity.

When I was on my mission (in Charlotte, North Carolina), the first lesson we always taught was about how God has called prophets since the beginning of time to preach His word. We would explain that God would call a prophet to preach, the people would listen and repent, and after a while (sometimes a short time, sometimes several generations), the people would fall away. Time would pass and then God would call a new prophet. This cycle has repeated throughout human history.

Generally, this portion of the message was well-received as I went through a list of Old Testament prophets. Once I hit New Testament times, people were less convinced. By the time I explained that God still calls prophets today, few people believed what I was telling them. They said that after Jesus came, prophets were no longer necessary.

It always struck me as completely logical that since God spoke to His people in ancient times that He would speak to people today, too. That logic has led me down some interesting thought paths lately.

The church teaches of the great apostasy - the period of time from after the death of the apostles in approximately 100 AD until Joseph Smith was called as a prophet in 1820. (Technically, I think starting the apostasy at 400 AD is more accurate, since Moroni was still around until then.) With God's pattern of constantly calling prophets, why did He wait nearly 1400 years before calling another one?

Maybe He didn't. In that gap between Moroni and Joseph Smith, a lot of people lived. What if God called prophets in that time? There's precedent for people rejecting the messages of prophets, so maybe people just didn't accept what they were hearing. There's also precedent for people accepting the message but then the message getting corrupted in transmission. [1] When the whole course of human history is revealed, it would not surprise me in the slightest to find that there were failed attempts at restoring the gospel before 1820.

----
[1] Most of the New Testament is directed at this very problem. Paul wrote many letters trying to correct the errors that were creeping into the church.

Ye Visited Me Not

2010-11-29T12:45:00.000-08:00

The Bible is very easy to understand. But we Christians are a bunch of scheming swindlers. We pretend to be unable to understand it because we know very well that the minute we understand, we are obliged to act accordingly.

Søren Kierkegaard

This quote has been on my mind a lot lately as I've come to understand that being a follower of Christ requires a lot. He gave His all for us, and we must give our all for Him. Turning the other cheek is hard. Loving those who harm people is a huge challenge.

Lately, I've been trying to focus on the knowledge that everyone I meet is created in the image of God. One scripture that I keep in the forefront of my mind is in the book of Matthew, chapter 25. I normally focus on verses 31-40. Christ is prophesying His second coming, and He starts out by saying that when He returns, He will divide his followers from those who do not follow Him. His followers are welcomed into His presence because when they cared for the sick and the poor, they were caring for Him. However, I was stung by the rebuke contained in the verses that followed.

Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels . . . I was . . . in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee . . . in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

Matthew 25:41-45 (emphasis added)

I've never had a problem with feeding and clothing the poor or visiting the sick and lonely. But I have been negligent in the command to visit those in prison. I always considered those in prison to be somebody else's problem. Out of sight, out of mind, plus, they deserve to be there - they're criminals.

In June, I signed up to intern with the Northern California Innocence Project. NCIP works to secure the release of the wrongfully incarcerated. I have found the work to be extremely rewarding, and for a while, I felt like I was fulfilling the command to visit Christ in prison. It was easy for me to feel compassion for the innocent people who are stuck in prison, because they don't deserve to be there. The hard work came this semester when I took a seminar on the prison system. This is where I began to understand the need to feel compassion for the guilty who are in prison.

There are two competing purposes proposed for the criminal justice system: rehabilitation and retribution. [1] Those who subscribe to the rehabilitative model believe that the purpose of the criminal justice system is to reform criminals. Those who subscribe to the retributive model believe that the purpose is to punish criminals. The rehabilitative model lends itself to sentences such as "10 to 20 years", whereby if the criminal has made appropriate progress after 10 years, s/he may be released on parole, but if s/he hasn't made appropriate progress, s/he must remain in prison. The retributive model lends itself to sentences such as "15 years", whereby at the end of the 15 years, the criminal has paid his/her debt to society and is free to go.

Most of my classmates in the seminar seem to favor the rehabilitative model. I don't, for two main reasons. The first one is practical. The system is so horribly broken that rehabilitation is almost impossible in prison. The second reason is ideological. I don't like the idea of the government having the discretion to decide whether someone's attitude has sufficiently changed. I believe in a presumption of liberty, i.e. that a person gets to be free until s/he breaks the rules, but that thoughts are irrelevant to whether or not someone can be free.

One day in class, we were discussing indeterminate sentencing (e.g. "10 to 20 years"), and I mentioned that I didn't believe in indeterminate sentencing. The room got silent, and you could have heard a pin drop. The professor asked me why. I said that I think it's unfair. I approach criminal justice from a retributivist standpoint, and I like the idea of a convicted person having a set term, serving it, being freed, and getting on with life.

He said that I made a good point and that most people think of retributivism as being harsh and angry, but that redemption is a big part of it. He also said that redemption is the central metaphor of Christianity, which many people tend to ignore or forget about. (Discussions of religion in class are not out of place; it's a Jesuit university.)

That really stuck with me. Redemption is the central message that Jesus Christ preached, lived, died for, and was raised from the dead for. I have always valued God's justice, but I needed to be reminded of God's mercy, even for the vilest of sinners. That one brief comment in a law school seminar was worth ten sermons at church.

I'm not a social worker, a doctor, a chaplain, or a lawyer. I don't have those skills with which to benefit my brothers and sisters in prison. I am, however, a writer and budding scholar. I am a human resources professional, and I spend my days at work explaining to managers why it's good for everyone if they treat their employees well. I may not be able to personally minister to the incarcerated, but I can use those same HR skills to convince prison guards to be a little kinder.

In the seminar, I have to produce a piece of writing about the prison system that is of publishable quality. I have decided to write about religious exercise in prison, focusing on the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. It has been a really hard paper for me to write. Although you may not be able to tell from the length of my blog posts, I really struggle with writing long pieces. It often seems so pointless to blather on and on when everything can be said in fewer words.

However, I've come to realize that this seminar paper can be my contribution to visiting those in prison. While I won't physically be there, if my words convince even one prison official to be more accommodating of a prisoner's religious practices, I will have made a difference.

---
[1] I'm giving an extremely simplified explanation because it's all that's necessary for this post to make sense. I'm also ignoring the utilitarian/retributive debate because it's not relevant for these purposes.

A Follow-up On My Most Recent Post

2010-11-12T09:21:00.000-08:00

I wrote a post on LDS dating, and I received a comment from Kress that deserves its own post. He said

What was wrong with so-and-so that "nice" just wasn't enough to keep your interest? What would change your perspective from "oh gosh why would I ever spend more time with so-and-so" to "well, he's a nice chap; why don't we do something different next time and see if I find him more interesting in a different setting?"

First off, I left out several key details of why the particular men I was set up with were bad matches. I left out these details in the interest of protecting their privacy. I'm certainly not one to write somebody off just because there were no sparks flying with violins in the background on the first date. In fact, some of my most successful relationships have been with men who didn't sweep me off my feet instantly.

What makes the dates with these "nice" guys awkward is the expectation (culturally) that there's only one purpose to the encounter - a marriage interview, and that it has to happen on the accelerated LDS schedule. (You know, the stories about people meeting and then marrying within a few months.) When I express a sincere desire to be friends with these men, they assume that means that I never want to see them again. Really, what it means is that I want to be their friend. Maybe something more will happen, but maybe not. Either way, when I tell a man that I want to be friends, it's not a brush off. It means I really want to be friends.

Stephen M at Ethesis addresses much better what I was trying to get at with my fungibility comment in his post On Finding a Match.

Ethics and Dating in the LDS Context

2010-11-08T12:23:00.000-08:00

I minored in philosophy in college, and I was captivated by the study of ethics. Bioethics, legal ethics, business ethics, it didn't matter. I found it all fascinating. In fact, while I was on hiatus from law school, I almost decided to abandon a legal career altogether to become a bioethicist.

I recently read a blog post by Hugo Schwyzer discussing whether or not the "pick-up artist" phenomenon is compatible with feminism. This led me to thinking about dating ethics in general and within the LDS context specifically.

In the church, there are some specific issues surrounding dating that are different from the community as a whole. The biggest one is the doctrine of eternal marriage. The fact that we believe that families can be together forever isn't what sets us apart. The big difference is the belief that (heterosexual) marriage is necessary for exaltation.

This belief imbues relations between men and women with a certain degree of sexual tension. Instead of seeing members of the opposite sex as colleagues, friends, or acquaintances, there is a temptation only to see them as potential mates - potential tickets to the highest degree of Celestial glory.

I've seen this at singles' activities, but the biggest place I've seen it is in interactions with my fellow ward members. I've been set up on blind dates, and it's been awful. The conversation will go like this:
Well-meaning ward member: Hey, Keri, my son/nephew/grandson/cousin/landscaper is single.
Me: (knowing where this is going) Oh.
WMWM: Do you want to go out with him?
Me: What's he like?
WMWM: Well, he's single, returned missionary, goes to church every week. Oh, and did I mention that he's male and single and LDS?
Me: (against my better judgment) Sure, I guess.

Then the date happens. Usually being single, LDS, and members of the species Homo sapiens is all we have in common. It's an awkward experience for both of us. Then the date ends politely, with the two of us mutually deciding against a second date.

Then, WMWM corners me after church. The conversation goes something like this:
WMWM: How did your date with my son/nephew/grandson/cousin/landscaper go?
Me: (not wanting to have this conversation) Fine.
WMWM: Are you going to go out again?
Me: Probably not.
WMWM: Why? He's such a nice young man.
Me: Yes, he is, but we don't really have anything in common.
WMWM: What do you mean? You're both single!

I wish I were kidding. This always struck me as a bit insulting. People are not fungible! Whenever I bring up that point, WMWM will usually throw back the quote (I don't remember if it was Spencer W. Kimball or Ezra Taft Benson) that any good man and any good woman can have a decent marriage.

That quote has always bugged me, and today I figured out why. The attitude espoused by WMWM treats people as means to an end, as objects instead of subjects. Immanuel Kant, the father of modern ethics, stated in the Second Formulation of the Categorical Imperative:

Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end.

I firmly believe this. The man who WMWM was treating as fungible should not be merely a means to my end of exaltation, and I should not be a means to his. We are living, breathing children of God created in His image. We're people!

So, given that the sealing ordinance is (according to current revelation) essential to exaltation, and given that marriage and family are important parts of the LDS experience, what is to be done? How do we come up with LDS dating ethics, especially for those who are past the typical cultural marrying age?

Update: I've written a follow-up to this post that addresses the question Kress posed in the comments.

No More Strangers

2010-11-07T07:29:00.000-08:00

Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God.

~Ephesians 2:19

Last week, I went to a J. Reuben Clark Society dinner. (I hate networking, but it's the only way to get a job, and since I'm the vice president of the student chapter, I kind of have to go to these sorts of things.) It was at the end of a really long day and I had a migraine, so I really really didn't want to be there. I'm so glad I went, though.

The guest of honor was Judge Thomas Griffith, a judge on the D.C. Circuit. After dinner, he gave a few remarks. I figured he would talk about what it's like to be a judge and give some friendly advice to the 50 or so law students present.

He did give some advice, but it wasn't law school related. He talked about the problems with retention of young adults (both married and single) in the church. Then he said he was going to give us advice that would help us not be the ones to fall away. He said that there will be times when we will feel alienated at church, when we feel like we don't belong, and when people do offensive things. The church is made up of imperfect people. Then he shared the secret to rising above all of that.

He said that if we focus on the Savior and make partaking of the Sacrament the most important part of church, it will change our lives. If we focus on the Savior, it doesn't matter if we feel alienated from the church because we'll have a place in the gospel.

Last Sunday, I decided to give it a try. I have a firm testimony of the Savior, but I struggle with the church culture. I often feel like I don't belong. I'm not married, I have no children and may never be able to have any, my political views differ from most church members, I plan on always having a career, I'm a vegetarian, and I don't scrapbook.

I came to church and sat down. The meeting started. When it came time for the Sacrament, I got misty eyed as I listened to the prayer on the bread. Then it hit me. All I have to do to be welcome is to be willing to do these three things:
1. Take upon myself the name of Christ
2. Always remember Him
3. Keep His commandments.

That's it. I don't have to conform to some particular culture. I don't even have to like green Jell-o! It's all about Jesus. Jesus hung out with the misfits. He didn't tell people to go away. He told people to come to Him. There's no commandment to marry at age 19, be a Republican, have 6 children, eat meat, and cut pictures out to stick on colorful pages. Christ's commandments can be summed up in two injunctions: Love God, love your neighbor. (See Matthew 22:34-40) I can do that.

How I Receive Personal Revelation

2010-10-19T17:19:00.000-07:00

An anonymous commenter on my post Stake Conference and Personal Revelation said:

I was struck by the clear and very specific nature of the personal revelation you received last september regarding marriage. If it is not too personal, or difficult to describe, could you please relate the process of this revelation? Was it a voice, a warm feeling after a specific question or just what? I would sincerely appreciate your input...I don't think I have ever been able to distinguish between emotions, hopes, fears and the spirit.

I promised a follow-up post to respond to this question, and I'm only just getting around to it. I'm so sorry it took me so long. I hope you see this, Anonymous.

I was going to title this post "How to receive personal revelation", but I realized that personal revelation is just that - personal. How I receive revelation may not be the same way that you receive it. (I don't normally receive revelation this clearly, either.)

Normally, I receive personal revelation about what I need to do in one of two ways. The most common way is that I will feel flashes of insight while studying the scriptures, talking with people, listening to church meetings, etc. It's as if a light turns on and I just know. That's probably not very helpful, but it's the best I can describe it. It's not words or text - it's just thoughts. I still struggle to discern between genuine inspiration and my own thoughts/hopes/fears. However, I take comfort in Moroni 7:12-13:

Wherefore, all things which are good cometh of God...Behold that which is of God inviteth and enticeth to do good continually; wherefore every thing which inviteth and enticeth to do good, and to love God and to serve him, is inspired of God.

For the most part, this takes care of things. Basically, even if I'm unsure whether it is a specific revelation or my own personal desires, as long as it is good and right, it's from God so I do it.

This takes care of the easy cases. The second way I receive personal revelation is much more rare, but it has happened on a few noted occasions, mostly when I have a huge potentially life-altering decision ahead. (i.e. Do I go to school A or school B?) I have, on a few occasions, been blessed to perceive how a certain course of events will likely play out if I make a certain decision. I don't want that future, so I make the other decision.

Neither one of these two scenarios was at play with the marriage revelation. I think that revelation was a long time coming, honestly. I'll have to back up to my teenage years. I joined the church when I was almost 13. (My parents were inactive members, and they did not raise me in the church. A friend shared the gospel with me.) I immediately became the Molliest of Molly Mormons. I carried a For the Strength of Youth pamphlet in my purse, I was eager to share the gospel, I was almost Pharasaic in my Sabbath observance (much to the chagrin of my non-church-attending family), and I decided that I would marry a returned missionary in the temple.

As Molly as I was, I still had what I call a finely-tuned bologna-meter. (My patriarchal blessing calls it the 'gift of discernment', but bologna-meter works for my purposes.) Basically, when something said by an authority figure is off, I can tell. Well, the YW lessons stressed that we should only consider marriage to a returned missionary in the temple, and that we should never accept less because non-returned missionaries aren't good enough. My father is not a returned missionary, and he is one of the best men I know. My parents have a great marriage, filled with respect and love. It felt completely wrong that my YW leaders were basically saying that my mother should not have married my father. (For the record, they were married in the temple.)

By the time I was old enough to date, I was friends with a lot of non-LDS guys. I began dating one of my friends. I took a lot of flak for it, but I figured that since I was too young to even think about marriage, it wasn't a big deal. My parents didn't mind, since he was a great guy who treated me right. I figured that at age 16, it didn't really matter, and that when I was of marriageable age, I would date LDS men. I didn't really talk much about my boyfriend around the ward because I didn't want to set a "bad example" for the other YW, even though I didn't really feel in my heart that I was doing anything bad.

To make a long story short, he joined the church (of his own choice, not for me), we dated for a year and a half, broke up, he served a mission, and is now married in the temple with three kids. Dating outside the church had been shown to be only a good thing for all concerned in that situation, though I still was firm on marrying in the church.

In college, I had an on-again-off-again relationship with an LDS man, but it didn't work out. Then I went on a mission. After my mission, I started law school, and I found that I suddenly became unattractive to LDS men. I was constantly told that I was "too smart", "too ambitious", "too career-focused", etc. I also began to notice that there was a huge disparity in numbers of active single men and active single women after a certain age.

One day, when I was about 23, I was poking around on lds.org, and I saw that there was a topical section (made up of Ensign articles) on single members. I looked it over, and an article stuck out at me. President Hinckley was giving a talk, and he addressed the issue of what single women should do if they find themselves without an opportunity for temple marriage. I assumed that he would say to stay single and wait for the afterlife. Instead, he said to prayerfully consider the options, and that perhaps marrying a righteous non-member would be a valid decision. I was honestly shocked, since that flew in the face of everything I had heard in YW growing up. (I have looked for that article since, and I haven't been able to find it.) I didn't really think much of it, since, at 23, I figured I still had time to date and marry within the LDS pool.

Fast-forward to last September. I was 27, still single, and I was beginning to realize that I was fast approaching my expiration date in LDS singledom. (People were starting to say things like, "Don't worry. I knew someone who got married at 29 to a widower with 3 kids.") I was also beginning to realize that non-LDS men treated me with more respect and kindness than LDS men, and that I was more compatible with them. I found myself very interested in a non-LDS man I met at school with whom I had an excellent rapport.

There was a mid-singles conference that I decided to attend. My plan for that weekend was to ask God to make me stop liking this non-member and to help me like and be liked by a temple worthy LDS man. I had a prayer in my heart the whole weekend. Well, throughout the course of the weekend, I got the impression that God was telling me to chill out and not worry about it. Finally, on the last day of the conference, after I poured my heart out to Him, I got an impression. It wasn't words, it was more a feeling, and the feeling was that I should find a good man without regard to whether or not he is a church member.

I'm not really sure how to articulate it beyond that. I still don't know whether that means that I should chill out and marry a non-member, or whether I should chill out and the right member will come along. God tends to operate on a need-to-know basis with me, so I have faith that when I need more specific direction, I'll get it.

I hope that answers your question, Anonymous. Sorry it took so long to write, and sorry it was so rambling.

Abraham, Isaac, and Me

2010-09-10T17:10:00.000-07:00

It's often said in the church that we will all have to endure a test of our faith like Abraham's. I'm going to set aside for a moment the discussion on whether or not that is hyperbole. It got me thinking. I've always had concerns with the story of Abraham and Isaac. What kind of God would ask someone to sacrifice his child?

Then I realized that in a very real way, God has asked that of me as well. I'm unmarried and I have no children. This is not because I desire a single and childless life. It is because, despite my pleadings, God wants me to be single right now. He asked me to sacrifice family life when He called me on a mission. He asked me to postpone childbearing for a few more years when he called me into academia. I'm itinerant right now because of the nature of my vocation, and that rootlessness is not conducive to family life. There's a common saying among female professors that the time between tenure and menopause is the only time the system allows for pregnancy.

I've never desired to be a stay at home parent, but I do want to have children. God has promised me children, but He has guided my life in such a manner that children cannot be a part of the plan right now. With each passing year that that is the case, the number of children I can bear drops. I'm old enough now that absent medical intervention, I likely will not have as many kids as I want.

God stopped Abraham from completing the sacrifice. In the end, he did not have to give up his child. That made me realize that God will do the same for me. I don't know if that means I'll get tenure expeditiously, if I'll have a longer period of fertility, or if I'll have the opportunity to adopt. All I know is that if I stay faithful, God will allow me the academic career He has called me to, and that I won't have to give up my children.

----
Note: This post is not the place for the "mommy wars". Any comments vilifying stay at home parents, working parents, or non-parents for the paths God has called them to and the life choices those callings necessitate will be deleted. Keep it civil.

Paper or Plastic?

2010-08-29T11:32:00.000-07:00

Some wards I've been in use paper cups for the sacrament, but most wards I've seen use plastic ones. I prefer the plastic ones because the paper ones taste weird to me. I started thinking one day about which one was better for the environment. That got me wondering about the possibility of reusable sacrament cups. My first thought was glass, but I also saw olive wood and stainless steel.

Caring for the environment is great, but I've often found that appealing to people's pocketbooks is the most effective way of getting people to go greener. So, I did a little bit of math.

On lds.org, paper sacrament cups can be purchased for $82.75 for a box of 6,500. Plastic sacrament cups are $60.00 for a box of 8,000.

I did some searching, and I found stainless steel cups for $52.82 for a pack of 40. Glass ones are $0.99 each.

I'm going to guess that in a typical ward, in a given week, 200 people take the Sacrament. 48 weeks per year (since there's no sacrament for stake or general conference) means that a ward would go through 9,600 disposable cups in a year.

Cost of 200 stainless steel cups: $264.10
Cost of 200 glass cups: $198.00
Cost of one year paper disposable cups: $122.22
Cost of one year plastic disposable cups: $72

So, if a ward that uses plastic cups replaces them with stainless steel, the reusable cups would pay for themselves in 3 1/2 years. If a ward that uses paper cups switches, the steel cups would pay for themselves in just over two years.

If a ward that uses plastic replaces them with glass, the cups would pay for themselves in 2 3/4 years, and a paper-using ward would break even in 1 1/2 years.

The only challenge I can see from this is how to ensure that the cups are properly sanitized between uses. It would take a bit of work to wash 200 little cups every week. (I suspect that boiling them and then letting them dry could work, since they just had water in them.) However, I can see that being a great service opportunity and spiritual experience for the young men.

Do you know of any wards that reuse? Has anyone proposed this idea to their bishop? How was it received?

Workplace Question

2010-07-30T12:32:00.000-07:00

I've been insanely busy these past few weeks at work. I work for a small company (about 150 employees, but only about 50 in my office) that just got acquired by a really big company. I work in human resources, so I've had a lot to do in order to make things transition smoothly.

Anyway, completely unrelated to the acquisition, I'm not quite sure what to make of what happened at work this morning. Small company dynamics are such that everybody is rather friendly with one another. We're a casual Silicon Valley software startup. The CEO greets everyone by name when he runs into them in the hallway. Everyone is on a first-name basis with everyone. There's joking and banter in the lunchroom.

There are about 10 women and 40 men in the office. At 28, I'm the youngest employee. We have a few engineers in their early 30's, but most people are in their late 40's or older. There's this one sales engineer who is in his late 60's. We'll call him Fred. (Not his real name.) Over the past year, Fred has made occasional remarks to me, calling me pretty, gorgeous, beautiful, attractive, etc. I didn't really like having my appearance made a subject of conversation, but I let the remarks slide because I didn't want to be "that employee" who cried sexual harassment at the sound of a compliment. Anyway, over the last few weeks, he's started to hang out in the lobby when I'm covering the front desk for the receptionist's lunch break. He'll hang out for 5 or 10 minutes chit-chatting. I find it to be annoying but harmless.

This morning, I was standing in the cubicle of one of my co-workers having a conversation. Fred was walking by with another sales guy. Fred walked up behind me, grabbed my upper arms, grinned jokingly and said in a joking voice to the other sales guy, "Go get her!" I stepped away, freeing my arms, turned toward him, and told him that was inappropriate. The co-worker I was talking to said, "Yeah, Fred, that wasn't cool."

Fred and the other sales guy continued walking to their destination. I went back to my cubicle to collect my thoughts. My boss (the VP of HR) is on vacation until the middle of next week. I went to talk to one of my female co-workers who I also consider a friend. She told me that I handled the situation appropriately and that I should write everything down while it's still fresh in my mind and then report it to my boss when she gets back. I took her advice to write it down. I'm not sure whether I'll tell my boss.

What do you all think? Is telling Fred that his behavior was inappropriate sufficient, or do I need to report it to HR? (Especially given that I am HR, perhaps my remark will do the job.) On the one hand, I don't want to wreck this guy's career over a stupid moment of teasing, but on the other hand, his behavior really wasn't ok, and somebody really does need to let him know that, perhaps in a more official capacity.

Note to readers: This post deals with a sensitive topic. As many of you know, I blog under a pseudonym in order to deal with sensitive topics more freely. For those of you who know my real life identity, I would ask that you refrain from making any comments that would identify me or the company I work for. This could happen at any company.

Learning to Say No

2010-07-19T12:29:00.000-07:00

In the church, we're taught to say yes to callings, to service opportunities, to meetings, etc. Women especially are socialized to be people-pleasers. We're expected to be "nice" and self-effacing. There's nothing wrong with serving, there's nothing wrong with callings, and there's nothing wrong with caring for those around us. However, yes is cheapened when there isn't a viable opportunity to say no.

I've spent the last several years of my life overextending myself. There are the things I have to do (like work, household tasks, etc.), the things I want to do (social life, school, church), and the things I'm expected to do. I've done the things I have to do because they need to get done, the things I want to do because I want to do them, and the things I'm expected to do out of a sense of responsibility or guilt.

A few weeks ago, I was diagnosed with non-Addison's hypoadrenia. Basically, all of the stress in my life has overtaxed my adrenals so they're not making the proper amounts of the hormones I need. It's curable, but it requires lifestyle changes to ensure that I don't relapse. I have to get enough rest, and I have to cut down on my stress. I can't keep running at the insane pace I've been keeping up for the past 7 years.

So, I'm learning how to say no. I got a frantic e-mail from the primary president on Saturday afternoon asking me if I could substitute. I almost said yes, but then I remembered that I'm too exhausted to stay for more than just Sacrament meeting most weeks. So, I said no. I explained why, so she didn't just think I was blowing her off. It was hard to say no, even though I have what most people would think was a good reason. She was very understanding.

My new home teacher called last night asking if he could set up a time for a visit. I don't really like having home teachers come over. I feel like they're imposing on my limited free time. (Work, law school, internships, law review, homework, etc. take up most of my non-Sunday time, and I like to keep Sundays free.) I told him that I would be happy to meet with him for a few minutes in the foyer after church, but that I would prefer if he didn't come over. I'm sure the bishop is going to catch word of this and he'll call me into his office to find out what's up. If he does, I'll tell him.

I'm good friends with the Relief Society president. I told her about my health issues and that I may not be able to attend anything beyond Sacrament Meeting until I'm well, but that I would play it by ear each Sunday to see how I was feeling. She expressed concern over my well-being, but then she said "don't go inactive on us." I wasn't sure how to take that. I'm not in danger of going inactive. I still go to church, pray, read my scriptures, etc. I just sometimes can't make it through the entire meeting block.

In all of these three instances, I had to say no to things that were expected of me. I felt guilty, since I'm supposed to be willing to help out where needed, let my home teachers come over, and go to my meetings. However, right now, I can't. I've been doing too much and it's killing me.

My body is a temple, and I need to take care of it. So, I'm going to exercise my sovereign right to say no and expect that those around me will respect that. No means no. It's an empowering word.

Thoughts on the Bloggersnacker

2010-06-27T08:38:00.001-07:00

I went to the bloggersnacker in Walnut Creek yesterday, hosted by Carol Lynn Pearson. I had a really good time and I'm glad I went. It was good to get out and socialize. I've been pretty sick lately, but I was having a good day yesterday. (The test results should be back next week, and I'll get to find out if it's my thyroid or if I have to go back to square one in getting to the bottom of the mystery of what's wrong with me.)

I got to meet several bloggers (and I apologize if I inadvertently leave anyone out), such as Reese Dixon, Valorie, Kelly Ann, Lynette, Seraphine, Top Hat, and Mike H. I still owe Mike H. a response to his recent comment on my last post, and once I can get my thoughts together and find the energy to write, I'll write another post about it.

We chatted for a bit, and then we had a more organized discussion of feminism in the church. It was an enlightening experience for me. I wasn't raised in the church. I was baptized just before turning 13, and I went to church alone throughout my teenage years. As a result, I never had family home evening or gospel discussions around the dinner table.

The bloggersnacker is what I imagine a family home evening to be like. We all sat around and talked about gospel subjects and what was important to us. I like that. I think I finally figured out the need that the 'nacle fills for me. For some people, the 'nacle fills the need to know that other people feel the way they do. For other people, who can't make it to church, the 'nacle gives them the spiritual boost similar to a church meeting. For me, it gives me a place to have gospel discussions that I didn't get growing up with inactive parents and that I don't get now that I live alone. So, thanks, everyone, for the virtual FHE!

Stake Conference and Personal Revelation

2010-06-13T15:19:00.000-07:00

It’s been a while since I’ve blogged. I made it through finals, more or less. (I’m still waiting for several grades. I’ll never figure out why it takes the professors so long to grade exams. It’s been over a month.) I had a week off from classes, and for the past two weeks I’ve been juggling work with an internship for credit. However, that’s not the topic of this post. (That’s the topic of tomorrow’s post.)

The topic of this post is stake conference, personal revelation, and how it’s my lot in life to be misunderstood. Today was stake conference. Elder Trythall of the Seventy was the presiding authority. This morning, before the general session, he held a meeting for all the YSAs. The meeting was a question and answer session. Nobody seemed interested in asking a question, so I opened up a can of worms by asking a question that seems to crop up frequently in the Bloggernacle, most recently at Zelophehad's Daughters in Seraphine’s excellent series about being a 30-something single in the church.

For background, I’m 28, so while I’m technically still a YSA, I’m on the way older end. As regular readers of the blog know, I’m in law school and feel strongly called to use my God-given talents in the legal profession, most likely in legal academia. This tends to make me unattractive to the typical LDS man who wants someone who is 19, blonde, and with little ambition. (I've been told that the reason I'm single is that I'm too ambitious and too smart. Don't even get me started there.) Anyway, here’s the question I asked:

There are considerably more active single women than active single men in the church. The numbers diverge more sharply as people get older. By my age, the ratio is about 3:1. Given these demographics, there are righteous women who will not have the opportunity for temple marriage in this life. When the choice comes down to remaining unmarried or marrying a non-member, what advice would you give to someone navigating this decision?

He shifted uncomfortably and then asked the rest of the people gathered what they thought. The answers varied. One guy who couldn’t have been a day older than 18 mumbled that there’s always the afterlife. I’m sure he meant well, but telling me that things will be better when I’m dead is really not a helpful answer. A few other people chimed in, and the divide was very gender-based. The men seemed to fall on the don’t worry about it side, and the women seemed to understand the point of my question. Some women said to stay unmarried and have faith, and some women said marry a non-member and have faith. Although they didn't share any tips on how to arrive at that answer, at least they were engaging my question.

Elder Trythall didn’t really answer my question, but honestly, I didn’t expect him to. I understand it’s a hard question, and it’s one that the Lord and I have been discussing for a few years. Anyway, I’m pretty sure Elder Trythall misunderstood where I was coming from. He went off on a tangent about men with goatees, and basically said that we should look to what the church leaders are doing and copy them. He then delivered his opinion about facial hair, using iphones for scripture study, and what we should wear after church on the Sabbath.

He paid lip service to personal revelation, and he invoked Elder Oaks’s famous talk about general rules and their exceptions. Then he pretty much said that people really shouldn’t be exceptions. (That completely misses the point of the talk in my opinion.) Then he preached the importance of temple marriage. This was really unhelpful. I know temple marriage is important. That wasn’t the issue. The issue was what to do when temple marriage isn’t possible in mortality. I don’t know whether that will be the case for me, but even if it isn’t, there are women (and men, but mathematically speaking, more women than men) like me for whom that will be the case. We need answers!

After the meeting, Sister Trythall spoke to me. (She had been sitting near me in the meeting.) She was much more helpful. She had misunderstood the question when I asked it, and she took the time to really understand what I was asking. We had a good conversation about the pros and cons of each option, and I really felt like I was being taken seriously.

I went over to speak with Elder Trythall after the meeting, and that’s when I realized that he completely missed my point. He said that I needed to take an eternal perspective and that I needed to gain a testimony of eternal marriage. I told him that I was taking an eternal perspective and that I did have a testimony of eternal marriage, but that wasn’t the issue. The issue was math. He made some glib remark about mortal math and told me I was being too logical.

Last time I checked, my brain came from God. We’re told to study things out in our minds. Anyway, I told him that I recognize that if I don’t have a chance to receive the sealing ordinance in this life that I’ll have a chance to receive it in the next. However, my concern was with this life. If my choices are to marry a non-member and have children, or to stay single and die alone, I need to figure out how to navigate that. He looked at me completely uncomprehendingly. He seriously seemed not to be able to grasp that anyone who wasn’t sealed in the temple could possibly want to have a family. He didn’t quite come right out and say that it would be unrighteous to have children with a nonmember, but he came pretty close.

I left the meeting frustrated and near tears. I’m not one to share my deepest thoughts and emotions very often because I get misunderstood when I do. Anyway, then I had to put on a fake smile, pretend everything was ok, and make my way to the general session of stake conference. I wasn’t paying too much attention to the talks. I was still thinking about the earlier meeting. Then I realized that I already had my answer to the question I asked. Personal revelation.

Like I mentioned earlier, the Lord and I have been discussing this issue for a long time. I got my answer in September of last year. I went to a singles' conference praying for an answer to that very question. The answer came that I should marry a good man who loves me and who I love, and whose dreams I can support and who can support my dreams, and that I should not concern myself with whether or not he is a member of the church. I’ll admit that wasn’t the answer I expected. I still don’t know how that will play out. He might be LDS, and he might not.

So, when it comes down to it, it would appear that I’m more in the Chieko Okazaki camp and not the Sherri Dew camp. (I’m only bringing them up by name because they’re two female church leaders who I can think of who had to wrestle with this situation, and they were guided to different results. I’m sure they both followed the will of the Lord for them, even if for Sister Okazaki it meant marrying outside the church, and for Sister Dew, it meant staying single.) To my knowledge, the church doesn’t have a position on which option is better.

On the one hand, I wish I hadn’t asked the question, since it clearly made everyone uncomfortable, and I did already have an answer. On the other hand, it was an excellent learning experience for me. I was reminded powerfully that I am entitled to personal revelation for my marriage situation, and that the decision rests solely between me, my soulmate, and God.

If I follow the direction to find a good man without regard to religion, then if I am not sealed in this life, God will work it out in the eternities. He will not punish me for following what He has told me through His spirit.

The closing hymn at the general session was “Press Forward Saints”. I love that hymn. It’s a reminder to keep going when the going gets tough. I don’t know what’s in store for me, but I know it will be amazing. “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him.” ~ 1 Corinthians 2:9.

Final Exams

2010-05-03T08:40:00.000-07:00

I'm in the middle of finals right now, but I'm checking in to let everyone know I haven't abandoned my blog. More to come when I'm not swamped!

Keep Your Politics out of My Religious Organization

2010-04-14T09:35:00.000-07:00

People who take their religion seriously often find that their political views are informed by their religious convictions. I get that. I respect that. I have no problem with that. My politics are informed by my religious views. However, it annoys me when people try to bring their politics into church settings. Church is about worshiping God. It should be a vacation from politics. Good people can differ about the wisest political course to take, and politics can serve to divide instead of unite.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is officially neutral as to partisan politics. Good members of the church can espouse a wide range of political views and be a member of a wide range of political parties. Although a large segment of the U.S. membership is conservative, and often aligned with the Republican party, this is not required.

I recently was elected vice president of my law school's chapter of the J. Reuben Clark Law Society, which is an association of LDS legal professionals. Our bylaws (as a university student organization - I don't know about the organization nationally) prohibit the organization from getting involved in partisan politics. The mission statement of the national society is "We affirm the strength brought to the law by a lawyer’s personal religious conviction. We strive through public service and professional excellence to promote fairness and virtue founded upon the rule of law." That's it. No politics. Just like the church, we're a politically neutral organization.

I like being able to associate with my fellow saints at school without politics getting in the way. There are plenty of political organizations available on campus for people who want to participate in them. (I'm a member of one of the political organizations. I don't object to politics in the abstract.) However, I do object to something that happened last night.

A former JRCLS officer, who is still a member of the organization, but whose term is up, sent out a message last night. He sent it out to the university's JRCLS e-mail list. He put [JRCLS:SC] in the subject line, which is how all official announcements from the organization start out. The e-mail contained a message inviting everyone to an upcoming fundraising dinner for an individual running for statewide office. The dinner is being hosted by a prominent LDS politician. I replied to the e-mail (just to the sender, not to everyone) reminding him that the organization is not permitted to engage in partisan politics.

He responded with a fairly rude e-mail saying that he wasn't doing this officially, and that we have a duty to get involved in politics, and he wasn't trying to convince anyone of anything. He said he was simply giving everyone an opportunity to support the politics we already believe in. (The subtext, of course, was that all good church members support this candidate.)

I didn't reply, simply because I was ticked by the tone of the e-mail. I know I'm right, but the only way of handling this that I can see is to pull rank, which I don't like to do. (In my book, a current VP outranks a former officer of any rank.) This guy is going to graduate next month anyway.

I'm going to get the rest of the officers on board for next year to remind everyone that the membership list is not to be used for political purposes, and that anyone who wishes to talk politics should ensure that s/he doesn't imply that the JRCLS endorses that position. I think I'll have no trouble convincing the officers to get on board with this because a) it's in the bylaws, and b) there are at least 3 different political persuasions represented among the 4 of us.

Food Storage Public Service Announcement

2010-04-12T18:54:00.000-07:00

A few years ago, when my first attempt at law school blew up in my face, I found myself broke, unemployed (since I had previously been a university employee whose employment was contingent on continued enrollment), and facing large student loan payments. All of my money went to my rent and my student loan payments, leaving me with nothing else. Fortunately, I had heeded a prompting to get started on my food storage before all of this happened.

I opened my sealed #10 cans, and I had my own personal loaves and fishes miracle. My food storage sustained me abundantly for two years. Since I was on a budget, all I could afford to store the food in once I had opened the cans was dollar store plastic containers. My most recent move has made money a little tight again, so I decided to get back into my food storage to free up some other dollars until my bonus at work comes through next month. (I've been rotating it anyway, but some of the stuff like dried fruit only gets used in times of need. I like fresh fruit so much better.) Yesterday, I opened my container of raspberries to make muffins. I was greeted with a foul stench that can only be created by fermented fruit.

Apparently, the storage containers weren't as airtight as I had thought, and moisture had gotten in, causing my food to spoil. I checked the rest of my stuff, and I also lost apples, strawberries, bell peppers, powdered eggs, powdered milk, and freeze dried cheese to spoilage. The stuff I stored in good containers borrowed from my mom is in good condition, and I'm assuming the stuff that's still in sealed #10 cans is fine, but I'm not going to open it to check. (That sort of defeats the purpose.)

I guess the moral of the story is when you buy dollar store cheap Tupperware knock-offs, you get what you pay for.

Thoughts on the Word of Wisdom

2010-04-10T22:20:00.001-07:00

Over at The Narrow Gate, C.J. has an interesting post about the Word of Wisdom. She asks, among other things, what people think of cooking with alcohol or serving alcohol to guests. I started to leave a comment, but my comment was longer than the original post, so I decided to bring it over here instead.

I don't cook with alcohol. My aunt is an alcoholic, and I saw the devastation it brought on her life and the lives of those around her. I decided when I was 5 years old, before I ever heard of the Word of Wisdom, that I would never touch the stuff. (There's enough evidence that there's some genetic component to alcoholism that I don't want to even chance it with cooking. Contrary to popular belief, it doesn't all cook out.) That said, I don't have an opinion on whether it would be a violation of the word of wisdom to cook with it. (I know members who do, and members who don't.) I can see good arguments either way. On the one hand, D&C 89:7 says "strong drinks are not for the belly," with the exception of homemade wine for use in the Sacrament. On the other hand, strong drink isn't defined. Does it refer to all alcohol, or only a specific type? I'm not sure; I've never needed to find out.

I also don't serve alcohol, for the same reasons that I don't cook with it. I don't think LDS hosts should feel expected to serve alcohol to guests. After all, if I go to the home of a Jewish friend, I don't expect to be served pork. I don't think it would be wrong to serve alcohol to non-LDS guests, however. I don't see the Word of Wisdom as a universal commandment (after all, Jesus drank wine). I see it, rather, as a community marker that God has commanded for His people in this dispensation. People who have not made those covenants aren't bound by the Word of Wisdom.

Thoughts?

Personal Revelation and the "Ideal"

2010-04-07T14:45:00.000-07:00

I've been mulling this one over for a while, and now that I have a few moments, I decided to sit down and write it. Since most of my writing these days has consisted of law review articles, you're going to end up with footnotes. It's an occupational hazard. [1]

I find the rhetoric used in the church to describe the "ideal" to be off-putting. It's usually trotted out in the context of family relations, but it can apply in other situations as well. It goes something like this: The "ideal" is a man and a woman who married in the temple in their early 20's (after the man served an honorable full-time mission), upon which the woman got pregnant within a year or two, quit her job, and became a full-time homemaker. [2] Any other situation is "less-than-ideal" and is something that the parties to the situation should feel at least slightly bad about. We can't acknowledge these situations with more than a few off-hand comments in talks because if we focus too much on them, then the "ideal" will be compromised.

In addition to causing heartache and pain to members whose lives have, for whatever reason, taken a different path, this notion of the "ideal" is in direct contradiction to our belief in personal revelation. Personal revelation comes through the Holy Spirit, a member of the Godhead. How could following instruction from God be less than ideal?

If someone receives personal revelation on a subject that differs from the "ideal", that doesn't make acting on that revelation not ideal. That revelation creates, for that person, a different ideal. For example, I have a good friend who became very close friends with a man not of our faith. As they got closer, she prayed about it and received a prompting to marry him. She was quite surprised by this, and she asked again to make sure she had understood correctly. She had. They've been married for 10 years, and they have a wonderful marriage and family. Marrying him became her ideal.

Personal revelation can serve to liberalize, as in the above instance of marrying a nonmember, but it can also serve to make things stricter for a given individual. For example, men are expected to serve a mission, and women are not. [3] When I reached the age where I was making the decision of whether or not to serve a mission, I received a witness that I should go. This revelation, which came from God, made my personal obligation to serve equal to the obligation of any man. Serving a mission became my ideal, and I would have been disobedient to God if I had chosen not to serve.

Instead of using the term "ideal" to describe the default position, I propose we use a different term which can avoid the baggage of value judgments. Perhaps something like "general rule", "default", or another suitable synonym. Basically, the idea is "do this unless you have revelation to do it differently". This phrasing is consistent with how Elder Oaks frames the issue. He has said:

As a General Authority, I have the responsibility to preach general principles. When I do, I don’t try to define all the exceptions. There are exceptions to some rules. . . . But don’t ask me to give an opinion on your exception. I only teach the general rules. Whether an exception applies to you is your responsibility. You must work that out individually between you and the Lord.
The Prophet Joseph Smith taught this same thing in another way. When he was asked how he governed such a diverse group of Saints, he said, “I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves.” In what I have just said, I am simply teaching correct principles and inviting each one of you to act upon these principles by governing yourself. [4]

As a people who believe in personal revelation, we need to make our speech consistent with our doctrine.

---
[1] I once wrote a 7 word sentence that was followed by an 87 word footnote.
[2] In talking about the rhetoric of the "ideal", I don't mean to imply that there's anything wrong with marrying young or being a full-time homemaker.
[3] See e.g. Gordon B. Hinckley, "Some Thoughts on Temples, Retention of Converts, and Missionary Service", October 1997 General Conference, reprinted in November 1997 Ensign p. 49. Available here. (Accessed April 7, 2010). ("I say what has been said before, that missionary work is essentially a priesthood responsibility. ... We do not ask the young women to consider a mission as an essential part of their life’s program. ... Again to the sisters I say that you will be as highly respected, you will be considered as being as much in the line of duty, your efforts will be as acceptable to the Lord and to the Church whether you go on a mission or do not go on a mission.)
[4] Dallin H. Oaks, "Dating versus Hanging Out", CES Fireside May 1, 2005. Available here. (Accessed April 7, 2010).

Some Administrative Business

2010-04-05T15:50:00.000-07:00

I've been absent from my blog for a few weeks because of the move and because of school. I have comment moderation turned on for posts older than two weeks in order to cut down on comment spam. Unfortunately, for some reason, Blogger neglected to e-mail me to let me know I had comments awaiting moderation, and I didn't discover them until today. I've now cleared the moderation backlog, and I apologize for the delay. All comments were legitimate, and they have now been posted.

Happy (belated) Easter!

2010-04-05T15:44:00.000-07:00

I was going to write up an Easter post yesterday, but my grandparents surprised me with a visit. (Well, technically, they visited my parents, but I took the opportunity to drive the 45 minutes to my parents' place to spend the weekend with them.) So, Happy Easter, a day late.

Easter was great! General Conference was mostly good, too. I especially liked President Uchtdorf's talk on Sunday morning. I also liked Elder Andersen's talk on Sunday afternoon, reminding us that we should focus more on Christ. I appreciate that the audio from the priesthood session is available for download so that I don't have to wait for the transcripts to find out what the men were told in my absence. I loaded the talks onto my iPod to listen to them while I commute.

Update on My Living Situation

2010-03-18T12:43:00.000-07:00

As I blogged here, I've been having roommate trouble. Well, it all blew up in my face on Tuesday. I tried to have a rational conversation with my roommate on the subject, and she flew off the handle, making insults which I will not reprint on this blog. I offered to move out and find her a new roommate, but she started making excuses why that wouldn't work. Then she said that she would move out, and she laid some guilt trip about how she had hoped she would be able to stay until her daughter graduates from 8th grade in June. I told her I wasn't kicking her out, and when she insisted on leaving I offered to help. She stormed off and has been avoiding me ever since.

I've been having problems with the landlord, too. (The complex is a dump, and the landlord doesn't seem to feel the need to comply with notice requirements before demanding entry to the apartment.) After talking to a lawyer, I've decided to just move. Since the lease is so close to being up, it's cheaper for me to keep paying for the place even while not living there than it is to break the lease or make the legal argument that the landlord has broken the lease.

I can see the Lord's hand in all of this. I was able to secure a beautiful apartment in the complex a block away from where I'm living now. There was a special running, so I can afford it. The apartment is just the right size for me, and when I walked inside, it felt like home. (There's no good way to describe it. I just knew it was the right place.) My sister is moving back in with our parents, which is good for her, too. I am officially done with roommates! The next time I live with anyone will be if I get married or adopt children.

Now my crazy roommate can have her shiftless husband around as often as she wants and I don't have to deal with it. I'm moving next Saturday. Hallelujah!

I Think I've Run Out of Other Cheeks to Turn

2010-03-08T12:13:00.000-08:00

I know we're supposed to be forgiving, and we're supposed to turn the other cheek, but I think I've run out of other cheeks in regards to my roommate situation.

Don't get me wrong; I like my roommates. It's just the garbage that comes along with them that's the problem. I live in a 3 bedroom apartment. I have one room, my sister has another room, and the third room is shared by my 45 year old roommate and her 14 year old daughter. My roommate is separated from her husband, and they're sort of going through a divorce, but not really. (Meaning they don't live together, and when she moved in with me, she told me they were going through a divorce. That was two years ago and nothing has changed.)

The husband can't hold down a job and bounces around between his brother's place and his parents' place. (His parents live in a town about an hour away. I much prefer it when he's there.) He used to spend a lot of time at my place, too. My roommate felt bad and felt responsible for him and kept letting him stay. This made me extremely uncomfortable because I get bad vibes from him whenever he's around.

About a year ago, it got to the point where he stayed over every night for three weeks straight. He would also hang around during the day when the rest of us were at work/school. I told my roommate that this wasn't acceptable. I signed up to live with her and her daughter, not with her husband. We reached an agreement that he would no longer spend the night, and that he would no longer be present in the apartment unless either my roommate or their daughter was also there.

I figured this would be the end of the problem. Unfortunately, it wasn't. Now, instead of actually living in the apartment, he only practically lived there. He would stay until about midnight, when he would go and sleep in my roommate's car. Then he would come back around 6 in the morning to use the shower. He would leave after breakfast to go do whatever he does during the day. One day I was home sick from work. I was in the kitchen doing the dishes when I heard the key in the lock. My roommate's husband walked in (unaccompanied) like he owned the place. I didn't have the presence of mind to ask him to leave. (Partly because I was so foggy-headed from cold medicine, but partly because it probably would have been really dangerous of me to do so.) He went into my roommate's room and surfed the web all day, leaving a few minutes before my roommate got home from work.

I told my roommate what had happened, and she called him up and yelled at him for it. (Which he totally deserved.) We're not sure how he got the key, but we changed the locks and have been very careful about knowing where all keys are at all times. He returned to his parents' house and pretty much stayed gone for a long time.

My roommate lost her job a few months back, and she's been struggling to make ends meet. Her car broke down, so she's been carless for the last month or so, complicating her job search. Last week, her husband showed up again, supposedly to attend a school function for their daughter. He's been here all week! (Pulling the sleep in the car routine again.) My sister and I refer to him (only outside anyone else's earshot) as crabgrass because just when you think he's gone, he'll come back.

The situation is becoming completely untenable. My sister and I don't feel comfortable leaving our rooms when he's around. My cat, who loves everyone, is terrified of him. I've forgiven him for the whole stolen-key break-in incident. (Meaning that I hold no ill-will toward him about it. I still don't trust him, though, and I probably never will.) However, I don't want him around my living space. On the other hand, I know that talking to my roommate about it won't do any good. She feels responsible for him and she keeps enabling him. It seems like my two choices are to put up with the invasion of the creepy man or to kick out an unemployed single mother in the middle of a recession. Neither option is appealing to me. The first option is unfair to me (and my sister), and the second option strikes me as profoundly un-Christian. (The third potential option of me moving out won't work because my sister and my roommate don't have the financial resources to stay in the apartment without my income and credit securing the lease, and I can't afford to break the lease.)

At least the lease is up in 3 months. I have a feeling it's going to be a really long few months.

Why I Admire Vashti

2010-02-28T13:03:00.000-08:00

The book of Esther doesn't quite sit right with me. A few years ago, I was re-reading the book of Esther, and I found a new hero from that story - Vashti. Vashti was the queen at the beginning of the story. She was throwing a party for the women of the court, and her husband, King Ahasuerus, was throwing a party for the men. There isn't much in the text about the women's party, but the men's party involved a lot of alcohol. Ahasuerus sent some servants to fetch Vashti to have her come to the men's party "to show the people and the princes her beauty: for she was fair to look on." Vashti declined, and as a result, she was no longer the queen. (The text doesn't state whether she was executed, or whether the king merely divorced her and kicked her out of the palace.)

In various church lessons growing up, I had always heard Vashti used as an example of what happens to people who are disobedient. However, upon thinking it over, I've decided that Vashti is an admirable character. She is strong, and she shows self-respect.

Hospitality was a major cultural value in the middle east during Biblical times. Vashti was hosting a party, and it would have been extremely rude of her to leave in the middle. She was willing to stand up to messengers of the king in order to fulfill her duty. Her husband showed a great deal of disrespect in asking her to come. First there was the disrespect involved in asking her to leave her party. The second part of the disrespect was when he ordered her to show her beauty to a room full of drunk men. At best, this would subject her to leering and catcalls. It had the potential to be much worse. By refusing the order, she showed that she respected herself when her husband did not. She also provided an example to other women that it's okay to stand up for yourself.

It's that second example that the king's servants feared. After Vashti refused to come, the king was angry, and he spoke with his advisers in order to figure out what to do.

What shall we do unto the queen Vashti according to law, because she hath not performed the commandment of the king Ahasuerus by the chamberlains?
Memucan answered before the king and the princes, Vashti the queen hath not done wrong to the king only, but also to all the princes, and to all the people that are in all the provinces of the king Ahasuerus.
For this deed of the queen shall come abroad unto all women, so that they shall despise their husbands in their eyes, when it shall be reported, The king Ahasuerus commanded Vashti the queen to be brought in before him, but she came not.
Likewise shall the ladies of Persia and Media say this day unto all the king's princes, which have heard of the deed of the queen. Thus shall there arise too much contempt and wrath.
If it please the king, let there go a royal commandment from him, and let it be written among the laws of the Persians and the Medes, that it be not altered, That Vashti come no more before king Ahasuerus; and let the king give her royal estate unto another that is better than she.
And when the king's decree which he shall make shall be published throughout all his empire, (for it is great,) all the wives shall give to their husbands honour, both to great and small.

Esther 1:15-20

Vashti was deposed because the men were afraid that the women were going to stand up and demand respect! So, the hunt for a new queen ensues. Esther is selected, and she uses her beauty to charm the king into rescinding an order to slaughter her people.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not faulting Esther personally. She did what she could with what she had, and she accomplished a great deal of good. However, I find it disturbing that the author of the book of Esther chose to paint the two women in the way they were shown. The woman who is forceful, direct, and stands up for herself is portrayed as wicked and a threat to the establishment. The woman who uses her beauty to get what she wants from the powerful men around her without attempting to claim her rightful power is portrayed as the righteous hero of the story. This dynamic is unfortunately alive and well today. Women like Vashti are often called "bitches" or "ball-busters". Women like Esther are referred to as "soft" and "pink".

28 Years

2010-02-12T14:04:00.000-08:00

I'm a blog slacker. (Not to be confused with a Bloggersnacker, which, by the way, is happening in Berkeley tomorrow at 2:00 pm.) I've been so busy with real life that I haven't had much energy to write blog posts lately, though I've been commenting throughout the 'Nacle a bit.

mfranti put up a beautiful poem on Feminist Mormon Housewives about the last 35 years of her life, and she invited the rest of us to post our lists. So, here's the last 28 years of my life, in brief. (My poor writing professor would probably cringe if he read this; he already thinks I'm too concise.)

I am...

different
a dreamer
misunderstood
::emerging::
involved
working
learning
growing
attacked
bruised
::rescued::
climbing
sliding
clawing
tired
clawing
::reborn::
called
striving
struggling
lonely
::not alone::
thinking
questioning
still believing

Merry Christmas

2009-12-24T20:56:00.000-08:00

Christmas is one of my favorite holidays. I love the opportunity to pause and think of the Savior, and I love spending time with my family.

Why I Stay

2009-12-13T18:22:00.001-08:00

Sorry for the lack of blogging. Finals really swamped me this semester. (I'm done, thank goodness.)

This post is a response to a thread on Feminist Mormon Housewives. A non-member wrote in asking what concerns feminist LDS women have with the church, and a lengthy thread ensued. One commenter, also a non-member, asked what makes feminist LDS women stay active in a church with such a patriarchal structure. Since the thread got long, and people started talking past one another, I decided to respond on my blog instead.

In the New Testament, Christ preached many things to the people. At one point, many people became offended and stopped following Him. Christ's exchange with his apostles as a result is instructive.

From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?
Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.

John 6:66-69.

I have received a witness from the Holy Spirit that God's authority, the priesthood, is contained within the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Although the people who make up the church are imperfect, the church is still authorized. In the words of Peter, "to whom shall [I] go?" I have faith that all of the things that are wrong with the patriarchy will be made right through the atonement of Jesus Christ.

When the priesthood was extended to all worthy male members of the church without regard to race, one of the things that stuck out to me in Official Declaration 2 was that the revelation came about in part because of the "faithfulness of those from whom the priesthood has been withheld." Today, my sisters and I are those from whom the priesthood has been withheld. I can't expect change if I'm not faithful. My faith can be a driving force in preparing the way for God to continue to fix man's errors.

The Sabbath Day

2009-11-08T16:37:00.000-08:00

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

Exodus 20:8-10

I love the Sabbath. I love having a day set aside for spiritual pursuits, a day where I can say no to worldly cares. Some of the best Sabbaths I've had have been when I've been visiting my extended family. We sit and talk and get caught up with one another. The conversations range from current events to what's going on in our lives, to spiritual topics. It feels refreshing.

I live in an apartment right now with four other women. I'm the only Sabbath observer in the apartment. We're in pretty close quarters, so it's hard to find a quiet space sometimes. I've come to realize that in many ways, the Sabbath is a feeling I can carry with me, regardless of what is going on around me.

When the Ten Commandments were given, two reasons were listed for the commandment to observe the Sabbath:
In Exodus 20:11, we are reminded of the story of the creation. "For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."
In Deuteronomy 5:15, we are reminded of the miracle of the children of Israel being led out of Egypt. "And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day."

We live in an increasingly 24/7 world. Obviously, there is some work that must be done, even on the Sabbath. Police officers, fire fighters, and emergency room personnel must be available at all times. When my car broke down on the way home from church, I was grateful that a tow truck driver was working and was able to help me pull my modern-day ox out of the mire.

However, I worry about what is going to happen to my Sabbath observance when I get out into the legal field. I already feel at a bit of a disadvantage even in law school, since I don't study or do homework on Sunday. I have six days to do what everyone else has seven days to do, and with how competitive law school is, it's a sacrifice. (I've been blessed for making that sacrifice, so I'm not complaining.)

I know I have several lawyers who read my blog. How do you manage observing the Sabbath while working as a lawyer? For you non-lawyers out there, how do you manage Sabbath observance with your job?

Rebirth

2009-10-30T12:41:00.000-07:00

Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

John 3:3

I've gone through several periods in my life that I would categorize as rebirths. I experienced my first rebirth in my mid-teens when I became converted to the gospel. My second rebirth came when I reached adulthood. I received the ordinances of the temple when I was 19, partly because I used this as a symbol of my rebirth as a grown woman. I experienced another rebirth on my mission. This was perhaps the most striking rebirth of all. I can honestly say I am a completely different person as a result of that experience. (Some of the change was for the better, and some of the change was for the worse.) I experienced another rebirth during my hiatus from law school. This was a painful rebirth, but I drew nearer to God through that experience than through anything else I've experienced in my whole life. I gained a new and greater understanding and appreciation of the Atonement.

I'm standing on the cusp of another rebirth, and it frightens me. I'm at the point in my law school career where I need to start figuring out what I'm going to do with my life. I know my goal, but I don't know how to get there. When I've asked for advice, I get conflicting information.

Some of my professors have told me that as long as I persevere, get good grades, and write well, I should be able to get a tenure-track position, but that it will take a while. A few of my professors say that since I didn't go to an elite law school, the best I can hope for is teaching legal writing and research. If I could pick one subject in all of law school that I don't want to teach, it's legal writing and research. The dean of career services is convinced that I can't become a professor, and she's trying to track me into litigation. If there's anything I want to do less than teach legal writing and research, it's litigate.

Since my call to teach came from God, I know He'll tell me how to get there, and He'll help me become the person He needs. It's a scary process not knowing what's ahead, though. I've been drowning in schoolwork, and I haven't been as good at spiritual pursuits as I should be. I still pray and read the scriptures and go to church, but my pondering and temple attendance have slipped. I don't remember the last time I went to the temple, but it's probably been several months. I made time in my schedule to go tonight after work. Hopefully I'll get some more direction.

I know this is a rather rambling, disjointed post, but that's how I'm feeling right now - rambling and disjointed. I tend to grow the most when times are uncertain, but it's unnerving in the moment. I'm sure I'll be able to look back on this time and see the Lord's hand in it, but right now, I'm feeling a bit like I'm just hanging.

30 Days of Scripture Study

2009-09-27T20:59:00.000-07:00

When I was a teenager, I read my scriptures every day. I continued this through college and my mission. I derived strength and inspiration from daily study of the word of God. After my mission, my scripture study started to slip. I would miss a day here and a day there, and it got to the point that I would sometimes go for a week or two at a time without opening the scriptures. (I would still read and ponder spiritual things, but there's no substitute for the primary source.)

I've had a concern that has been weighing heavily on my mind for the past several weeks. (I may blog about it later, but not now.) I was talking to one of my friends about it, and she gave me the best advice. She told me that I should take the problem to the Lord and study the scriptures every day for 30 days with that particular problem in mind. She had done that once, and it changed her life.

I'm on day 5 now. I haven't experienced anything life-changing yet, but I'm feeling a greater measure of peace and spirituality. I'm noticing the hand of the Lord more fully in my life. I'm getting back into the habit of regular scripture study. (I hear it takes 21 days to create a habit, so I'm hoping I can get the habit ingrained.)

After the Manner of Happiness

2009-09-23T08:52:00.000-07:00

And it came to pass that we lived after the manner of happiness.

2 Nephi 5:27

I went to a mid-singles' conference this past weekend in Santa Cruz, and this scripture was supposedly the theme of the conference. (I say supposedly because the events and activities never really seemed to tie in.)

I've been thinking over the past few days about what it means to live after the manner of happiness. I'm not sure I have an answer. We're told that we will be happy when we live the gospel, and for the most part, I've found that to be the case. However, there are times when I've been living the gospel and I've still been miserable.

My mission was one of the most difficult experiences of my life, and I was definitely not happy most of the time. (There were moments, but not many.) Christ Himself was described in the scriptures as "a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief".

Right now in my life, I'm quite happy. I know I need to study the scriptures more, and I know I need to be more serious about the Sabbath, but things are going well. I don't get it. Any thoughts?

Update from Institute

2009-09-09T08:32:00.000-07:00

I started attending institute again this semester. I signed up for a Book of Mormon class because it was the only one that would fit in my schedule. The first week was great. There were three of us in the class (plus the teacher), and we were able to have some great in-depth discussions of the material, the kind that wouldn't really work in Sunday school. The second week was okay. There were a few more people in the class, and the teacher asked me to tone down the level of my comments/questions. (There was nothing wrong/bad/subversive about my comments, they were simply complex.) I obliged.

The third week (yesterday) was a bit more frustrating. There were three brand-new investigators in class yesterday. Don't get me wrong, I think it's great that people are investigating the church. I'm happy that they're attending institute. However, I'll admit that I was annoyed at the impact their presence had on the class discussion. When people ask questions like "Who is Lehi?" or "Why were they leaving Jerusalem?", it makes it harder for me to ask the questions I want to ask.

I was getting a bit grouchy and I was considering dropping institute for the semester. (With how busy my schedule is, it's a fairly significant sacrifice of time. I could spend those two hours studying.) Finally, I decided to stick with it just for the sake of going. I would like to say that I was rewarded with some new earth-shattering insight, but I wasn't. Instead, I had the opportunity to step out of the world for a few hours, feel the Spirit, and help share the gospel. Sometimes it isn't about me.

God Qualifies the Called

2009-08-23T20:06:00.000-07:00

When I was an undergraduate, I had considered the idea of becoming a political science or philosophy professor. I decided not to, since I didn't feel like I had what it took. (I don't really fully know what it takes, but for some reason I didn't think I had it.) During my senior year, I contemplated applying to law school, but I felt that the timing was wrong. I decided to go on a mission instead.

After my mission, I went to law school. (I started 3 weeks after I got home.) I was at a 4th tier school with a major inferiority complex and a relatively incompetent administration. (The teachers were good, but the deans and other powers left something to be desired.) I don't remember exactly when it happened, but sometime in either my second or third semester there, I was standing in the 5th floor foyer one foggy afternoon (San Francisco is notorious for its fog), and it hit me. Right there, surrounded by tacky vinyl couches, God called me to be a law professor.

The school I was at got put on probation by the ABA, and the administration panicked. I got caught up in a big purge and got academically disqualified. The irony of the whole thing is that my disqualification letter and my Witkin award* came in the mail the same day. I appealed the disqualification decision, and it was denied. As a result, I had to wait 2 years before returning to another ABA accredited law school.

Last year, my waiting period was up, and I returned to law school at a school much better suited to me. Gone are the foggy days and incompetent administrators, replaced by splendid sunshine, palm trees, and an institution dedicated to the glory of God. A statue of the Savior sits in the middle of campus, inscribed with Biblical reminders to come unto Christ.

On the first day of new student orientation, we met in our legal writing and research class. My professor (Professor A) asked us each to introduce ourselves and tell what we want to do with our law degree. He made commentary on each choice. When my turn came, I said that I wanted to be a law professor. He paused for a moment before getting solemn and saying, "That will be very difficult."

He then proceeded to talk about how unless someone goes to Yale or graduates at the top of the class, it's practically impossible to get hired to teach a doctrinal subject, and that anyone else who teaches will have to teach legal writing and research. I was stunned, since most people only tell me happy things like, "You'll do great," or "Go for it!"

Over the course of the year, I came to really respect this professor and his opinions. He was always honest with me when critiquing my writing, which meant a lot to me. Still, his not so stellar pronouncement about my career prospects has stuck with me. Unfortunately, legal writing and research was not my best subject.

Over the summer, when I took summer school, I decided that it was time to start talking to my professors and finding out how they got started teaching. I asked my legal ethics teacher (Professor B) what he thought, and he told me basically the same thing. I told him I didn't think I was qualified to teach writing and research, and he suggested that I specialize in an area of law that the regular faculty didn't like to teach and then become an adjunct. He suggested I talk to Professor C to get his idea. (Professor C happens to be my copyright law professor this semester, so I'm going to catch him in office hours and find out what he thinks.)

I have Professor A again this semester, this time for appellate advocacy. I've decided to brave his office for another conversation on the subject. I've been mulling it over for a few days, and I'm nervous. I'm afraid he'll tell me what I already fear- that I'm not qualified. The other fear is that he'll tell me that I am qualified, but the black marks on my academic record, as a result of my prior disqualification from law school, will make me nonetheless unhireable.

We often hear in church the popular quote "whom God calls, He qualifies", or my personal favorite rendition of the sentiment, "God does not call the qualified; He qualifies the called". I had an amazing epiphany regarding this thought today during church.

We usually think of it as referring to church callings, but today when my mind was wandering during Sacrament meeting, I realized something. It's not just for church callings. He called me to be a law professor, and He will make me qualified. I don't know how it will happen, but it will. I think I have a unique contribution to make to the legal academy because my background is different from the typical professor. I can empathize with struggling students because I've struggled. I know what it's like to fall down and get up again. I know what it's like to have to work while going to school. God doesn't just want some random person off the street to teach - He wants me, and He'll make it possible.

Professor A's pronouncement of a year ago, that it's not going to be easy, still stands, but nothing worthwhile in this life is easy. I'm going to keep plugging along, doing my part, with faith that the Lord will do His part.

----
*The Witkin Award is given to the student with the highest grade in each section of each course. I got one in Constitutional Law II just before getting kicked out of law school.

Back to School

2009-08-21T11:39:00.000-07:00

I'm back to school. There's something fresh and exciting about a new school year. This is going to be a really busy semester, but I'm looking forward to it. I'm a full-time student now, and I'm only working 20 hours per week. It's a still a juggling act, but it's more manageable than before.

I'm taking a seminar in bioethics and the law that I'm really excited about. Instead of a final exam, I have to write a law review article. I'm really looking forward to that. I like writing, and getting published will look great on my resume. It will also satisfy my supervised analytical writing (i.e. thesis) requirement.

I'm also taking copyright law. So far, I really like it. It's nice to have a class that isn't a re-run. I'm grateful that I got a second chance, but re-taking everything I had already taken was really unpleasant.

In the category of re-runs, I'm taking appellate advocacy, civil procedure, and the second semester of constitutional law. It's not going to be too bad. I love constitutional law, so taking it again will be fun. My teachers for all three re-run classes are great, so I'm sure I'll learn something new anyway.

I enrolled in institute this semester. I wasn't sure if I was going to do it or not, since I've already graduated from institute multiple times, but I figured that since I have the time, I should give it a try. I took a day class, since in my experience, the day classes have more of a spiritual education feel instead of a singles' ward feel like the night classes.

I'm going to try to get back to the spiritual roots of this blog in the future, instead of always talking about law school. Look for some more posts about my scripture study in the near future.

Surfacing for Air

2009-07-20T15:52:00.000-07:00

I've been drowning in work and summer school, but I'm still mostly alive over here. If someone you love is planning on working 75 hours per week while taking 6 units of summer school, please attempt to dissuade him or her. I'm running on adrenaline and inertia right now. I have a final in Constitutional Law on Thursday night, and a final in Legal Ethics on Saturday morning. Then I have three weeks off before I go back to school.

I'm making some changes for the better. I'm quitting my second job, cutting back to part-time on my main job, and I'm switching into the full-time division at school. I've made it onto one of the law journals, and I'm going to get more involved in on-campus activities and clubs. I'm going to go back to institute and I'm going to try to revive my stagnant social life.

Yesterday in Relief Society, someone in my ward made a comment that really resonated with me. She told the story of three stone-cutters back a long time ago who were at a quarry cutting stone for a cathedral. Someone asked the first man what he was doing, and he replied, "I'm cutting stone." The second man was asked the same question, and he said, "I'm working with Christopher Wren to build a cathedral." The third man was asked the same question and he answered, "I'm building a house for my God."

I think I've been metaphorically cutting stone this past year, when I really need to be building a house for my God. I know that God has done many miracles to get me where I am today, and I know that He has called me into the legal profession. I need to find a way to make this a holy and spiritual endeavor. I love the motto of the Jesuits, "Ad maiorem Dei gloriam" (for the greater glory of God). As I was walking past the building where my classes are held, I stopped to notice the inscription. It listed the architect, the year it was dedicated, and the letters AMDG. If the building I study in is dedicated to God's glory, then I should remember to dedicate my studies to His glory.

Around the Bloggernacle - Volume 8

2009-05-23T15:41:00.000-07:00

I just finished finals. I'm free! (Well, I suppose free is a relative term. I have a week to do my law review casenote and then I start summer school.)

Here's a list of interesting Bloggernacle posts lately:

Over at the Millennial Star, Tanya Spackman tries to debunk the myth that Utah drivers are bad. Apparently the Californians are to blame. (I'm a Californian, and I'm a perfectly fine driver, thankyouverymuch...)

Bookslinger has some tips on how to offer the Book of Mormon to other people.

On the lighter side, The 9th Ward has a comic explaining the Liahona.

Finally, here's an honorable mention. While it's not a Bloggernacle blog, there's a great post over at Everyday Narcissism about the cervical cancer vaccine and the law of chastity.

Imperfect People Doing God's Perfect Work

2009-04-27T08:07:00.000-07:00

If there's one thing that the Old Testament makes clear, it's that God demands complete fidelity to the covenant relationship with Him. He has no tolerance for idolatry, even at times calling it "whoring after other gods".

Given that background, the story of Aaron and the golden calf (Exodus 32) confused me. Moses was up on the mountain talking to God, and the Israelites were starting to wonder what had become of him. They asked Aaron to make them new gods to go before them. Aaron collected all the gold and made a calf. He proclaimed to the people, "These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt." He then built an altar, proclaimed a feast day, and led the people in offering burnt offerings before it.

God was understandably upset and sent Moses back down to the people to sort the situation out. There was some divine smiting of the people, but Aaron himself got off lightly. Although there is no textual evidence of Aaron's repentance, a few chapters later, he was called to serve in the temple. Even today in the church, we call the lesser priesthood after him.

A few years ago, it hit me. God uses imperfect people to do His perfect work. I've never made golden calves and led people in idolatrous worship, but I've definitely made mistakes in my life and in my service. Still, God needs me to serve. He needs you to serve.

This realization has helped me when church leaders haven't lived up to the standard one could expect someone in a position of trust to abide. The problem isn't with God or with the church. The gospel is still true even if the people aren't. The church is still authorized even when leaders do unauthorized things.

Around the Bloggernacle - Volume 7

2009-04-20T20:04:00.000-07:00

I turned in my final paper for my writing and research class this evening. In true procrastinating form, I handed it in 45 minutes before the deadline. Needless to say, I'm tired.

There have been some great posts on the Bloggernacle lately.

Segullah has a post about various object lessons, the good, the bad, the ugly, that are or were presented to the youth of the church.

By Common Consent has a post about going to church in Iraq.

There has been a cross-blog debate about Ayn Rand's philosophy, especially as discussed in Atlas Shrugged. Here, here, here, and here.

I'm running on very little sleep, so more to come later. Have a great day!

Miscellaneous Updates

2009-04-03T11:10:00.000-07:00

I'm going to be absent from my blog for about three weeks. My take-home final exam for my legal writing and research class was distributed last night, so most of my energy will be divided between that, my reading for my other classes, and my two jobs. I may or may not comment on other Bloggernacle blogs when I have time, but don't expect to see anything here.

I'm looking forward to General Conference this weekend. I may take a break from my blogging hiatus to post some quick thoughts afterward. I'm grateful for modern technology that allows me to watch it on my laptop in my free time or listen to it on my ipod during my commute.

I'm winding up on the home stretch for the semester, and I'm starting to get nervous. I know the material, but I'm concerned about my exams. I can't afford to mess it up this time, since I'm on my last chance. I'm going to keep working hard and exercising faith. I'm going to be praying and trusting God. Please include me in your prayers if you feel moved upon to do so.

Thanks for all of your comments on my recent posts. I'm glad people are finding this blog a helpful forum for discussion, and I enjoy virtually talking with you all. Have a great week!

Inviting the Single Saint to Stay in the Church

2009-03-18T14:37:00.000-07:00

This is in response to a post on Keepapitchinin, where some commenters asked what to do about the widespread inactivity of single church members ages 18-30. I decided that it merited a response, but I didn't want to threadjack a lovely post by Ardis.

I'm 27 and single, and I've been active ever since I joined the church as a teenager. Prior to my mission, I held several YSA and institute callings where I saw up close and personal the issues faced with rampant inactivity among the YSA age range. (In my stake, we had about 1000 YSAs on the rolls, and there were between 3 and 10 who were active.)

There are a few issues at play here:

First: The late teens and early twenties are a naturally itinerant time in the life of an individual. He or she is embarking on adulthood and has to find out what he or she believes and wants to do in life. This is often accompanied by going off to college or otherwise moving away from parents. Sometimes people slip through the cracks. If someone isn't converted to the gospel, it's easy to stop going when you move.

Second: The church often doesn't know what to do with single people. We're a church of eternal families. This is a central doctrine. It's a beautiful and all-encompassing doctrine, and sometimes in our excitement to proclaim and discuss it, we leave out people who aren't married. When every Relief Society lesson consists of "and here's how we can teach this gospel principle to our children" or "and here's how we can support our husband as he does xyz", it makes things less relevant to unmarried, childless members. Although I haven't attended singles wards, my friends who do have remarked that the lessons seem to be geared toward "all marriage all the time".

Third: In many areas, there is a critical mass problem. There often aren't enough single people, so those who are there feel alienated. Some of this is solved by singles wards, but when the singles wards suck away some of the faithful (usually across stake boundaries), it makes it that much harder for those few of us who stay in the geographic wards. The singles wards contribute to the married members not knowing what to do about single people because they so rarely interact with single people, as they're conveniently quarantined in a social leper colony.

Now that I've laid out what I see to be the problem, I'll propose my solution. Of course, your mileage may vary.

First: Eliminate singles wards. This will powerfully show the single members that we are all a part of Christ's church. There isn't a separate church for married people and single people. Granted, there will be some wards where there still isn't critical mass. If that's the case, designate one ward in the stake as some sort of singles magnet ward. Basically, it's a regular geographic ward (I hate the term "family ward"; it sounds so exclusive) where all single members are invited to attend along with the members within the ward boundaries. There is a ward like that in my area for the 25-45 age group and it seems to work well. (I don't attend as it's not in my stake, but many of my friends are happy about it.)

Second: Give single members meaningful opportunities for service. I can't stress this enough. I've felt most engaged in the church when I have felt that I had something to contribute. I find it tragic that so many singles go without a calling. We can help. Use us! We can teach, we can provide compassionate service, we can be in presidencies, we can help with the music. My favorite calling was nursery leader, which is usually the calling that a single, childless career woman would never be offered, but it was great to be asked to serve.

Third: Ensure that the youth (i.e. YM/YW) are given ample assistance and training in the gospel so that they can develop a personal testimony before they reach the critical YSA years. Personal conversion to the gospel is essential. Someone is much less likely to fall away if he or she has a relationship with God and a burning witness that this is His church.

Fourth: Get to know the singles as people, not as projects. We're not broken. We're fellow saints walking the same path as you. Sure, our life experiences are different, but that's part of the fun. We know things that you don't, and you know things that we don't. We can learn and grow together. Don't pity or patronize us. Sure, I want to get married, but I'm quite happy in my single state. I feel blessed for all of the opportunities God has given me, and if I sat around wallowing in pity and sorrow, I would be guilty of the sin of ingratitude. Please don't make it any harder than it already is.

My Favorite Scriptures

2009-02-28T16:44:00.000-08:00

I could regale you with a long tale on why I haven't blogged lately, but mostly it's because I'm just too lazy. School is going well, work is going well, life is going well. I can't complain.

I love the scriptures. When someone asks me what my favorite scripture is, it's hard for me to come up with a response because I have so many favorites. Today, I'm going to blog on my favorite scriptures, choosing two from each of the standard works.

Old Testament:

-Deuteronomy 6:3-12. This one shouldn't come as much of a surprise. After all, it's where I got the title of my blog from. I just love the reminder that we need to put God at the forefront of our lives, and that we need to remember Him in everything we do.

-Isaiah 1:18. I just love the promise of forgiveness in this verse. It's poetic and succinct all in one. The imagery of crimson sins being changed to pure white snow is profound.

New Testament:

-Matthew 11:28-30. When people ask me my favorite scripture, this is usually the one I respond with. In a very real way, I've come to know that Christ's yoke is easy and His burden is light.

-1 John 4:8. "He that loveth not knoweth not God, for God is love." I like this one because it's a concise reminder of the most essential attributes of God, and a reminder of how we need to be.

Book of Mormon:

-2 Nephi 25:26. I love the focus on Christ as the center of everything we do, and a reminder that He is the source of our salvation.

-Mosiah 18:8-11. This is a good explanation of the baptismal covenant. I especially like the reminder to mourn with those who mourn and comfort those who need comfort.

Doctrine and Covenants:

-D&C 6:34. This is a good reminder that the Lord sustains and upholds His followers.

-D&C 76:69. This is a portion of the description of those who inherit the Celestial Kingdom. I love this verse because it reminds us that we attain Celestial glory not by being perfect on our own, but by being perfected by the Atonement of Christ.

Pearl of Great Price:

-Moses 7:18. This is a good reminder that Zion is wherever the Lord's people are- that it's a state of mind, not a physical location. This fits in very well with last week's multi-stake conference for northern California. The speakers emphasized over and over that Zion was wherever the stakes are established, and that we don't need to go to Utah to be there.

-9th Article of Faith. I love the principle of continuing revelation. I love the promise that God will reveal many great and important things regarding His kingdom. I can't wait to see what's in store!

What are some of your favorite scriptures?

God With Us

2009-01-21T09:30:00.000-08:00

Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
Matthew 1:23

This scripture is referring to the birth of our Savior, Jesus Christ. He took on human form, and thus became God with us. However, I've been pondering lately that the title "God with us" is probably more appropriately given to the Holy Spirit.*

The promise each week as we take the Sacrament in remembrance of the Lord's body and blood is that we will always have the Spirit to be with us. When I think about it, I feel like I know the Father and the Son, but I know less about the Spirit. This seems odd to me, since the Spirit is the member of the Godhead I've been promised the constant companionship of. He is the one I've been commanded to receive as hands were placed on my head after I exited the waters of baptism. I know I've felt the presence and promptings of the Spirit on many occasions, but I don't feel like I really know Him.

I'm going to recommit to getting closer to the Holy Spirit. In doing so, I'm sure this will also draw me closer to the Father and the Son, as they are all united. (Although, I suppose that since I feel close to the Father and Son, I'm probably closer to the Spirit than I realize.)

Anyway, this is my morning rambling that probably doesn't make much sense. I'm back in school now, and it's keeping me so busy that I don't have much time for anything else. Have a great day!

*I'm well aware that in contemporary LDS speech, the term "Holy Ghost" is more commonly used instead of "Holy Spirit". I prefer "Holy Spirit" because I like how it sounds better. Chalk it up to hanging around with Jesuits.

New Year's Resolutions

2009-01-01T12:32:00.000-08:00

It's that time of year again. These past few weeks have really flown by. I had intended a Christmas post, but Christmas has come and gone. So, Happy New Year!

Last year I made a really ambitious list of resolutions. I managed to keep some of them, but I broke several of them. I'm going to scale back this year.

My Resolutions for 2009:
1) Exercise for at least 20 minutes, 3 times per week.
2) Meaningfully study the scriptures each day.
3) Stay on top of my homework.
4) Keep a positive attitude.

Meditations on Meditation

2008-12-10T09:02:00.000-08:00

This week is final exams at school, or as I like to call it, Judgment Day. It's where I reap the just rewards of a semester's worth of procrastination.

This semester has been no different. I'm not as prepared as I would have liked. On Monday evening, I had my first final, in contracts. Contracts is one of my weaker subjects; I didn't do well the first time around. I was really nervous about this exam, but by 5:00 pm (for a 6:00 pm final), I realized that I was as prepared as I was going to be.

My favorite spot on campus to meditate is in the garden behind Mission Santa Clara. There is a statue of Christ with a Latin inscription of Matthew 11:28-30, which is one of my favorite scriptures. I went over there and began to (silently) pour my heart out to God. I explained how nervous I was about this exam, and how I realized that if I mess this second chance up, I won't get a third chance. I pleaded for divine help and promised I would do better and work harder in the future. (I was completely sincere in that promise.)

Afterward, I stood there for a while and felt the Spirit wash over me. I was reminded of promises the Lord has given me regarding my education. I was reminded that even though I could have theoretically done more this semester, I did enough, and that I would be able to remember what I learned this semester and also what I learned my first time in law school. I felt confident and at peace.

I went in to take the exam. As the test began, I read over the fact pattern, and information suddenly began to flow. It was amazing. I knew that some of the information was stuff I had studied, but much of it was direct inspiration. I was able to concentrate for the duration of the exam, which is something that is often difficult for me. (I'm easily distracted.) At the end of the exam, I was exhausted, but I felt like I did well enough.

I don't know why I got that extra help. I'm sure there are people more deserving, and I know there are more pressing concerns in this world than my grade on a contracts exam. I'm just grateful that God was mindful of me.

Tomorrow I have my torts exam, which I'm less concerned about. Then I'm done for a month. I'm really looking forward to the time off.

Happy Thanksgiving

2008-11-27T08:04:00.000-08:00

In everything give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you.

1 Thessalonians 5:18

I have much to be thankful for this year. When I count my blessings, I realize that God has richly and abundantly blessed me.

1. Against all odds, I got accepted back into law school. Not only did I get back into law school, but I got into a school considerably higher ranked than the one that kicked me out the first time around.
2. At a time when many good people are out of work, I still have a job.
3. I am reasonably healthy, and my loved ones enjoy good health, too.
4. I have a sweet and loving cat who brightens my day.
5. I'm part of an intellectually and spiritually uplifting community online composed of my fellow saints.

There are too many blessings to number; these are just a few. Have a happy Thanksgiving, and please remember to count your blessings!