The Mountain Meadows Massacre

September 11 marks the anniversary of the 1857 massacre of some 120 California-bound emigrants in southern Utah. An article by Richard E. Turley Jr., the managing director for the Family and Church History Department, will be printed in the September 2007 Ensign magazine, but you can read it online now.

An Unending Conflict, a Victory Assured

Gordon B. Hinckley, “An Unending Conflict, a Victory Assured,” Ensign, Jun 2007, 4–9

Nearly 10 decades have passed now since my birth, and for the better part of that time, there has been war among mankind in one part of the earth or another. No one can ever estimate the terrible suffering incident to these wars across the globe. Lives numbered in the millions have been lost. The terrible wounds of war have left bodies maimed and minds destroyed. Families have been left without fathers and mothers. Young people who have been recruited to fight have, in many instances, died while those yet alive have had woven into the very fabric of their natures elements of hatred which will never leave them. The treasure of nations has been wasted and will never be recovered.

The devastation of war seems so unnecessary and such a terrible waste of human life and national resources. We ask, will this terrible, destructive way of handling disagreements among the sons and daughters of God ever end?

But there is another war that has gone on since before the world was created and that is likely to continue for a long time. It is a war that reaches beyond questions of territory or national sovereignty. John the Revelator speaks of that struggle:

“And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

“And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.

“And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him” (Revelation 12:7–9).

The Continuing Struggle

That war, so bitter, so intense, has never ceased. It is the war between truth and error, between agency and compulsion, between the followers of Christ and those who have denied Him. His enemies have used every stratagem in that conflict. They’ve indulged in lying and deceit. They’ve employed money and wealth. They’ve tricked the minds of men. They’ve murdered and destroyed and engaged in every kind of evil practice to thwart the work of Christ.

Murder began on the earth when Cain slew Abel. The Old Testament is replete with accounts of the same eternal struggle.

It found expression in the vile accusations against the Man of Galilee, the Christ, who healed the sick and lifted men’s hearts and hopes, He who taught the gospel of peace. His enemies, motivated by that evil power, seized Him, tortured Him, nailed Him to the cross, and spoke in mockery against Him. But by the power of His godhood, He overcame the death His enemies had inflicted and through His sacrifice brought salvation from death to all men.

That eternal war went on in the decay of the work He established, in the corruption which later infected it, when darkness covered the earth and gross darkness the people (see Isaiah 60:2).

But the forces of God could not be vanquished. The Light of Christ touched the heart of a man here and a man there, and vast good came to pass notwithstanding much of oppression and suffering.

There came a time of renaissance, with struggles for liberty—struggles for which much of blood and sacrifice was paid. The Spirit of God moved upon men to found a nation wherein freedom of worship and freedom of expression and freedom of agency were protected. There followed then the opening of the dispensation of the fulness of times with a visit to earth of God the Eternal Father and His Beloved Son, the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ. This glorious event was followed by visits of angels restoring the ancient keys and priesthood.

But the war was not over. It was renewed and redirected. There was contempt. There was persecution. There were drivings from one place to another. There was the murder of the young prophet of God and of his beloved brother, 163 years ago this month.

The Latter-day Saints fled their comfortable homes, their farms, their fields, their shops, their beautiful temple built at such tremendous sacrifice. They came to mountain valleys, thousands of them dying along the way. They came to the kind of place that President Joseph Smith had instructed the Twelve to find, “where the devil cannot dig us out.”1

But the adversary has never stopped trying. In the October conference of 1896, President Wilford Woodruff (1807–98), then an aged man, stood in the Tabernacle on Temple Square and said:

“There are two powers on the earth and in the midst of the inhabitants of the earth—the power of God and the power of the devil. In our history we have had some very peculiar experiences. When God has had a people on the earth, it matters not in what age, Lucifer, the son of the morning, and the millions of fallen spirits that were cast out of heaven, have warred against God, against Christ, against the work of God, and against the people of God. And they are not backward in doing it in our day and generation. Whenever the Lord set His hand to perform any work, those powers labored to overthrow it.”2

President Woodruff knew whereof he spoke. He had then only recently passed through those difficult and perilous days when the government of the nation had come against our people, determined to destroy this Church as an organization. Despite the difficulties of those days, the Saints did not give up. In faith they moved forward. They put their trust in the Almighty, and He revealed unto them the path they should follow. In faith they accepted that revelation and walked in obedience.

The Pattern of Conflict

But the war did not end. It abated somewhat, and we’re grateful for that. Nonetheless, the adversary of truth has continued his struggle.

Notwithstanding the present strength of the Church, it seems that we are constantly under attack from one quarter or another. But we go on. We must go on. We have gone forward, and we will continue to go forward. In some seasons the issues are major. At other times they are only local skirmishes. But they are all part of a pattern.

Opposition has been felt in the undying efforts of many, both within and without the Church, to destroy faith, to belittle, to demean, to bear false witness, to tempt and allure and induce our people to practices inconsistent with the teachings and standards of this work of God.

The war goes on. It is as it was in the beginning. There may not be the intensity, and I am grateful for that. But the principles at issue are the same. The victims who fall are as precious as those who have fallen in the past. It is an ongoing battle. The men of the priesthood, with the daughters of God who are our companions and allies, are all part of the army of the Lord. We must be united. An army that is disorganized will not be victorious. It is imperative that we close ranks, that we march together as one. We cannot have division among us and expect victory. We cannot have disloyalty and expect unity. We cannot be unclean and expect the help of the Almighty.

The young men of the priesthood, the deacons, teachers, and priests, have had laid upon them in their priesthood offices the duty to preach the gospel, to teach the truth, to encourage the weak to be strong, to “invite all to come unto Christ” (D&C 20:59). The young women of the Church have no less a responsibility to be obedient to the commandments of God and to serve as examples of faith and virtue.

No son or daughter of our Heavenly Father can afford to partake of things that will weaken the mind, the body, or the eternal spirit. These include drugs, alcohol, tobacco, and pornography. You cannot be involved in immoral activity. You cannot do these things and be valiant as warriors in the cause of the Lord in the great, everlasting contest that goes on for the souls of our Father’s children.

The men of this Church cannot be unfaithful or untrue to their wives, to their families, to their priesthood responsibilities if they are to be valiant in moving the work of the Lord forward in this great battle for truth and salvation. They cannot be dishonest and unscrupulous in temporal affairs without tarnishing their armor. The women of this Church, be they wives, mothers, or sisters who have not found companions, cannot be unfaithful or untrue to their covenants and blessings and serve as the bulwark in the kingdom that they are meant to be.

In our meetings, we occasionally sing an old hymn:

Who’s on the Lord’s side? Who?
Now is the time to show.
We ask it fearlessly:
Who’s on the Lord’s side? Who?
We wage no common war,
Cope with no common foe.
The enemy’s awake;
Who’s on the Lord’s side? Who?

A Call to Commitment

Some years ago a friend told me of a conversation he had had with another member of the Church. My friend had asked whether his associate felt close to his Heavenly Father. The man replied that he did not feel close. Why not? He said, “Candidly, because I don’t want to.” Then he went on to say, “If I were close to Heavenly Father, He would probably want some commitment from me, and I am not ready for that.”

Think of it—a man who has taken upon himself the name of the Lord in baptism, a man who has renewed his covenants with the Lord in his sacrament meetings, a man who has accepted the priesthood of God and yet has said that if he were close to his Heavenly Father, some commitment might be expected of him, and he was not ready for that.

In this work there must be commitment. There must be devotion. We are engaged in a great eternal struggle that concerns the very souls of the sons and daughters of God. We are not losing. We are winning. We will continue to win if we will be faithful and true. We can do it. We must do it. We will do it. There is nothing the Lord has asked of us that in faith we cannot accomplish.

I think of the children of Israel when they fled Egypt. They camped beside the Red Sea. Looking back, they saw Pharaoh and his armies coming to destroy them. Fear gripped their hearts. With the armies behind them and the sea before them, they cried out in terror.

“And Moses said unto the people, Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the Lord, which he will shew to you to day: for the Egyptians whom ye have seen to day, ye shall see them again no more for ever.

“The Lord shall fight for you, and ye shall hold your peace.

“And the Lord said unto Moses, … speak unto the children of Israel, that they go forward” (Exodus 14:13–15; emphasis added).

The sea parted, and the children of Israel moved to their salvation. The Egyptians followed to their own destruction.

Shall we not also in faith move forward? He who is our eternal leader, the Lord Jesus Christ, has challenged us in words of revelation. Said He:

“Wherefore, lift up your hearts and rejoice, and gird up your loins, and take upon you my whole armor, that ye may be able to withstand the evil day. …

“Stand, therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, having on the breastplate of righteousness, and your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace, which I have sent mine angels to commit unto you;

“Taking the shield of faith wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked;

“And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of my Spirit, … and be faithful until I come, and ye shall be caught up, that where I am ye shall be also” (D&C 27:15–18).

A Bright Future

The war goes on. It is waged across the world over the issues of agency and compulsion. It is waged by an army of missionaries over the issues of truth and error. It is waged in our own lives, day in and day out, in our homes, in our work, in our school associations; it is waged over questions of love and respect, of loyalty and fidelity, of obedience and integrity. We are all involved in it—child, youth, or adult, each of us. We are winning, and the future never looked brighter.

May our God bless us in the work that is so clearly laid out before us. May we be faithful. May we be valiant. May we have the courage to be true to the trust God has placed in each of us. May we be unafraid. “For [to quote the words of Paul to Timothy] God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord” (2 Timothy 1:7–8).

The Rev. Al Sharpton Completes Visit to Church Headquarters

SALT LAKE CITY 22 May 2007 Elder M. Russell Ballard, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles — the second-highest governing body of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints — hosted the Rev. Al Sharpton and his associates at a dinner Monday night, concluding Sharpton’s visit to Church headquarters.

The evening before, Elder Ballard greeted Rev. Sharpton upon his arrival to Salt Lake City and gave him a personal tour of Temple Square.

“I was very touched,” Rev. Sharpton said of his first visit with Elder Ballard. “He took me over to the square, where we both visited the Christus statue, which is a very moving thing for me.”

Rev. Sharpton had the opportunity to attend a family home evening at the home of Jorge and Debbie Becerra. He was able to see firsthand the Monday-night tradition where Mormon families gather together to have spiritual lessons, discuss issues important to the family or simply enjoy a fun activity.

“It was an honor to have the Reverend Sharpton be a part of our family,” said Debbie Becerra. “I will never forget looking up and seeing the Reverend Al Sharpton sitting with my family, taking his turn reading from the scriptures.”

The family night concluded with everyone singing “God Be With You Till We Meet Again.”

Sharpton’s visit to Salt Lake City came following a personal pledge on his radio network to learn more about the Church firsthand.

Church leader Elder Robert C. Oaks, one of the presidents of the Seventy — a high Church council — hosted Sharpton and his associates on Monday. The group was able to tour the Humanitarian Center — from which the Church’s relief supplies are sent worldwide — as well as Welfare Square, the Family History Library, the Conference Center and the Tabernacle.

Talking to reporters after his tour, Sharpton said his visit was an effort to find “common ground” and “things we should know about each other that we did not know and areas, possibly, we can work together for the betterment of humanity.”

View Entire Article at LDS.org

RESPONSE: PBS and the Mormons

To: PBS – Frontline & American Experience

Re: “The Mormons”

Fr: Thomas E. Sherry, Ed.D



Dear PBS,

I was disturbed and disappointed in the imbalanced portrayal of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints which you aired on April 30 and May 1, 2007. I wish to state some of my disgust with your method and message. My comments, of course, represent my own views and I am not speaking in any way as an official representative of the LDS Church. Nevertheless, I do have some qualifications: I am an adult convert to the LDS Church; my masters and doctoral degrees included a minor in religious studies; I have been an LDS Religious Educator for 34 years, the last 28 of those at Eastern Washington University, Pennsylvania State University, Brigham Young University, and Oregon State University. I teach World Religions, Bible and Christian History, LDS History and Doctrine. I serve as adjunct faculty of the OSU History Department, and on the Boards of the Holocaust Memorial Committee and Religious Advisors Association at OSU (the latter is a coordinating body of the 28 religious groups which function on the campus of Oregon State University). My experience and education have contributed to the sense that producers had just accomplished one of the most seriously skewed programs I’ve ever seen. When I view “anti-mormon” films and literature, at least they are overt in their mission and purpose; yours, however, was a program from which viewers expect fairness and balance but which delivered just the opposite – a sort of “wolf in sheep’s’ clothing” experience. You described a church that I do not recognize, which did not portray my beliefs, and almost wholly missed the mark for accurate journalism.

My family has been staunch and consistent supporters of PBS both in time, devotion, and money – this program causes me to re-evaluate the respect we have held for you and our future financial support. If on a subject of which I know much, you present such an imbalanced representation, what does that mean for so many other programs for which I know little? That is a disturbing thought.

Before going further, I wish to recognize the admirable portrayal of certain topics: The international welfare and humanitarian aid efforts of the Church; the conversion story of the former drug addict; and, your sensitive treatment of the challenges of homosexual lifestyle and Church doctrine & practice regarding such. Thank you for those elements.



PBS Purpose and Vision

For days after the program I sincerely wondered just how the mission and purpose of your presentation had developed. Had it begun ostensibly with the intent to broadly “explore” Mormonism or was it driven by a darker mission? Regardless of the original intent, the show felt like the producers at some point progressively digressed from a balanced exploration to an intent to “expose the under-belly of Mormonism.” In an interesting comment from one of my university students, he said that he (a new convert) had invited his non-LDS roommates to watch the show with him. During the show he felt terrible and wondered what “damage” he’d done by so inviting them. But afterward, they turned to him and said; “I thought we were going to learn something about your Church in this program but this was just a rehash of all the crap we hear constantly – we didn’t learn anything new.” By the way, the most uniform observation I heard from students was that from the first minutes of the program, they knew this would be a bad experience – it felt dark, ugly, and ominous.

Did the producers and interviewers just become enamored with all the controversy and forget their journalistic responsibility? It’s a baffle to me. But the program evidenced a production that seemed intent on: 1) “Knocking Mormonism down a notch or two;” 2) Tipping the “great American religion” off its pedestal” (if it ever were on one); and, 3) portraying Mormon history and doctrine as cultic, deceitful and secretive, absurd, and outlandishly weird.

What follows is some comment on areas in which I feel you did a disservice and left viewers with skewed and erroneous impressions:



Imbalance

Krister Stendall, former Dean of Religion at Harvard University and Episcopal bishop of Stockholm, Sweden, has stated 3 rules which guide his participation on interfaith discussion and exploration of other religions. The first two are: 1) “If you’re going to ask the question as to what others believe, ask them – not their critics, not their enemies because what one tradition says of another is usually a breach of the 9th commandment – “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.” It is important that we do not picture the other person’s faith in a manner they do not recognize as true; 2) “If you’re going to compare, don’t compare your bests with their worsts. Most think of their own tradition as it is at its best and they use caricatures of the others.” In the case of your program, it was not so much one religious view opposing another, it was the slick and sophisticated portrayal of the “intellectual and dissident” view verses the “un-intellectual and blindly obedient” Mormon mainstream and leadership – an unfortunate and mistaken dichotomy.

Regarding Stendall’s rules, PBS somehow decided to give a time ratio of approximately 10-1 to non-LDS commentators and those who are bitter former members with an axe to grind (several of whom I know personally). Do those persons have a legitimate story to tell and a right to tell it – of course. But those persons were given the overwhelming amount of time and when time was given to the few LDS commentators – particularly in part 1 -- it was in short and awkward clips with little context and sometimes so weird and irrelevant that you wondered why PBS even included the clip.

For example, with an almost dismissive manner you trivialized the Book of Mormon by numerous references to a strange and magical translation story, DNA accusations of unreliability, and Antebellum American context for book which you portrayed as very human and very flawed. No matter that the book is among the most widely sold books in the world, that millions of converts trace their conversions to the text, and that intelligent people actually believe it. No, the best you could come up with on a positive note was a non-LDS “poet” commenting on how he really enjoyed the Book of Mormon as a quaint self expose of Joseph Smith and hot button issues in his culture. Additionally, Terryl Givens (a respected author) was given the bulk of his time on the first night to an exploration of Mormon “dance” as theology – what’s up with that? Weird, yes; representative, no. So was that the modus operandi of PBS – to emphasize “weird?” Did Givens misrepresent us? No, but the relevance of that portion to LDS history and theology was so insignificant and strained, and the presentation so mystical that it effectively conveyed strangeness – a seemingly central intent of the producers. And that relatively irrelevant portion was given more time than any other issue from LDS commentators in program 1 – a shameful misappropriation of time.

Mystical strangeness was the hallmark of nearly every piece of art, shadowy background, and eerie music selections which dominated the show and exercised such an oppressive feeling. Did you want to portray Joseph Smith and LDS belief as demented and strange—perhaps even evil? Even the voice intonation and script of the main commentator added to the “secret, strange, and oppressive” aura of the show which focused on the sensational and eschewed the compelling and easy to understand story of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its international growth.

As such, the expose was masterfully crafted if what PBS wanted to emphasize was “strange, secret, and oppressive.” Watching the show was akin to reading one of the tabloids on the news stand – titillating but unreliable and misrepresentative. Is that what the producers sought to accomplish? If not, one would ask where the art loved by Latter-day Saints was; where was the light, cheery and faith filled art, music, and landscape which so represents us and is produced 100-1 over that which was chosen by the producers? Where were the pictures of Joseph Smith that looked normal? And where were the devoted, faith filled “normal” every-day Latter-day Saints in the show – particularly in Part 1? By the millions, they are the real story of the Latter-day Saints. Where were the intellectuals, scientists, and eminent public servants who believe? Apparently including such would have worked against the purposes of PBS. Doesn’t it seem rather contrary to logic to assume that anyone who believes in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its doctrine is ignorant, oppressed, or mentally incapable to discern “the real story” astutely “uncovered” by PBS? That’s the message your program conveyed. Yes, you did give attention to Mitt Romney and Harry Reid, but the context made no effort to cast them as reasonably intelligent disciples – rather, it was to explore whether a Mormon could be elected to any significant office given the strangeness of this religion.



Balance in the Issues

In Part 1 (Monday evening), you took roughly the first 100 years of LDS Church history. HALF of that program was reduced to 2 events – plural marriage and the Mountain Meadows massacre. The rest was devoted largely to your view of how strange, mysterious, and weird Joseph Smith apparently was. Was that the best you could do for 100 years of history, accomplishment, and contribution?

1) Mountain Meadows – no question about it, this is the darkest piece of LDS history with despicable acts by members and local leaders – thank you for including Elder Dallin H. Oaks comment on it. Among historians in and out of the LDS Church, there is significant challenge and varied interpretation in print on this subject and you covered NONE of the debate except a brief statement by one LDS historian who said he was satisfied that blame did not lay in the office of Brigham Young. But he had maybe 3 seconds, compared to 20 minutes by critic historians. The truth is, the most debatable aspect of this story is the knowledge and responsibility of Brigham Young. You gave that debate almost no time, not even mentioning it as a legitimate point of disagreement among qualified historians.

After allowing critics to lambaste Church responsibility for the event you feature a preposterous summary statement as proof that the murderous edict came from Brigham Young – “Young was governor of the territory and nothing happened without his knowledge.” What a silly statement. The Utah territory was a big chunk of land (encompassing current Nevada, Utah, and parts of Wyoming and Colorado), and pre-dated telegraph services at the time (Mountain Meadows was a 3-day hard ride from SLC). Just how did Brigham Young magically control and know “everything” going on in the territory? And how about the indisputable historical record that a rider was sent to Young to get advice on the pending crisis but could not have arrived, conferred, and returned before the massacre had occurred?

On a related matter, consider the restrained position of Brigham Young regarding not harming any individual from the invading forces of the United States Army who were heading into the valley? He did direct harassment and the capture of supply wagons; he did prepare members to once again leave their homes in the valley and to burn them if necessary to give the army no benefit from arriving in SLC. But it is well known that with all the skirmishes and threat, no direction was ever given to contest by firearms the invasion. Doesn’t that seem a little contrary to Brigham Young then turning around and ordering the deaths of men, women, and children in an immigrating pioneer train? So where was the balance in the PBS report on this issue? You strongly accused Young and others of “running out of town” federal officials sent to govern Utah. But where was the coverage of those same officials acting illegally and mistreating the saints? Again, that was a balance you seemed uninterested in covering.



2) Plural Marriage – here again, where were the first-hand journal records of this policy and practice being a blessing to people, a trial of faith that in the end strengthened their testimony of Joseph Smith’s inspiration in the matter and of the Lord’s hand in this? No where to be found. But by far the greatest disservice done in the PBS report and other writings on this subject was to cast it as a sex-crazed policy of a lunatic gone mad with power – as though this practice was invented by Joseph Smith. Did you check into this interpretation – or was it just the sensational and pejorative that you were interested in?

Point One: Plural marriage was a common Bible practice. COMMON – not exceptional and weird to Bible peoples. All Bible believers, both Jewish and Christian must wrestle with that. And Jesus himself held up as the quintessential prophets and people of faith those who practiced plural marriage (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, etc.). The Savior even went so far as to liken himself to the great Moses and heaven to Abrahams’ bosom. Sounds like Jesus didn’t have a problem with the practice. But did you mention that? Of course not – it didn’t seem to fit in your production purposes. After all, that would make plural marriage in modern times a restoration of lauded biblical precedent instead of a weird invention of Joseph Smith – not a message you apparently wanted to risk conveying. Latter-day Saints do not apologize for following the Lord’s direction on this matter. We have nothing to hide. I may personally never wish to participate in the practice but it is not a source of embarrassment.

Point Two: Did you look into the history of this with Joseph Smith? Do you know that while studying the Bible he came across the plural marriages of these early venerated prophets and was in such shock that he went to the Lord in prayer to ask how in the world such a practice could be acceptable? And to his dismay and disgust, he was answered by the Lord – but not with an answer he could have ever imagined. In our publicly accessible scriptures (Doctrine and Covenants 132) the Lord answers by saying that He would tell Joseph Smith the answer, but once He did, Joseph would be asked to live the same law. This is among the best known and accessible of historical records on the subject but was never mentioned by you. And what a surprise – none of the critics mentioned it either!

Point Three: You erroneously portrayed plural marriage as an LDS requirement to enter heaven. That is how many fundamentalist polygamists think (you gave a lot of coverage to them!). But that has never been the doctrine of the LDS Church. Celestial marriage is a practice whereby two worthy individuals enter a marriage covenant and have it sealed by one having priesthood authority – period. That policy includes monogamous and plural marriages but the latter does not overshadow the former. You altogether failed to make this distinction in your show even though you devoted 40 minutes to the subject. And where were the respected LDS voices on the beauty of this belief? No where to be found in your skewed representation.



3) Missionary Service – In night two, you devoted a fair amount of time to a subject which deserves it – the amazing missionary program of the Church. But what was the dominant message you conveyed? It was that LDS missionaries are mindless automatons doing what they cannot choose not to do – no choice, no choice, no choice – “you go, you go, you just go,” was the repeated message. And then to make things worse, 3 of the 4 voices you gave time to were missionaries who apparently went under real or imagined duress and subsequently abandoned the LDS Church. What a disservice – skewed and bigoted, flawed and incomplete. You portrayed such service, the LDS culture which encourages it, and the Church program which sponsors it as oppressive, mechanical, and regimented to the point of intellectual and emotional pain. It was Jesus that “commanded” (yes, commanded – not lightly “suggested”) that disciples go into all the world and preach repentance, faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, baptism, and enduring in obedience to the gospel – “Mormons” didn’t make that up.

Over the years, I have worked with hundreds of young men and women and older couples who were preparing and did serve missions. In my experience less than 1% have any such feelings which you portrayed as “normal.” They deeply desired to serve, they saved and sacrificed to serve, and they count the time as the best years of their lives. Where was that message in your presentation? You did give the positive some time but there again, it was minor compared to the negative interpretation. I can again, only surmise that the overwhelmingly positive experience of hundreds of thousands of individuals was of little interest to you – you had a purpose and that overwhelming set of evidence did not fit within your purposes so you largely left it out.

To your credit however, you did give liberal time to the story of one woman convert and how the gospel had blessed her. Also, you allowed Marlin K. Jensen to tell his mission experience. Thank you for doing that.



4) The LDS Church is secretively rich and power hungry – I think you would have done well to return to the public record on this and how President Gordon B. Hinckley has repeatedly summarized in public interviews the wealth of the Church. Most of that wealth is in income consuming, not income producing ventures – the bulk of which are chapels and other worship and welfare structures and land.

To the amazing credit and faithfulness of members, many do fully observe the Law of Tithing and pay 10% of their income to the Church – we don’t look at that as a suppressive burden. But again, that’s a biblical precedence of which we again follow in our day whereas you portrayed it as a mysterious coupe accomplished by secretive power hungry church leaders. “They have devious plans and bilk their members so they can exercise power over them to get personal gain and insure that no one questions their practices” – was the ridiculous mystique purveyed by critics. It’s just plain wrong on its face, wrong in fact, and wrong in interpretation but none of that deterred the producers.

For many years I have been part of and witness to the extraordinary auditing practices of the Church to insure that all sacred funds are handled legally and appropriately – I can assure you that it is done in minute detail. In addition, the Church hires non-LDS auditing services to assess its handling of these funds and to make an annual public statement. While the individual expenditures are not public record, those expenditures are publicly audited (a requirement by the Federal government for “non-profit” organizations).

I am grateful for the law of tithing, that as members we can share the blessings granted us and elevate our brothers and sisters around the world both in and out of LDS membership. Tithing monies allows the work to go forward throughout the world and those few leaders (very few by comparison), who do receive a living stipend receive very little. They are poorer than if they held normal jobs in the world and anyone who portrays the leaders as accessing income from tithing funds to live luxuriously is mistaken. Those who publicly portray this message are ill-informed or downright dishonest.

You did equally poorly on the portrayal of temples and their purposes, on Church disciplinary councils, and governance. I am very familiar with these issues and you did not portray an honest and balanced perspective. Again and again your cast and backdrops were intended to convey strangeness, weirdness, thoughtless obedience, and extreme authoritarianism on the part of LDS leaders and the membership. You portrayed little respect, a great deal of antagonism, and a general avoidance of the grandness of the Church and its doctrines. One wonders just how the LDS Church could be growing at all given your abysmal assessment. Was that irony lost on you? Or do you simply explain it by adjudging LDS members and converts to be from the poor and downtrodden, the uneducated and desperate and hence largely unknowledgeable and indiscriminate?

I could go on with other subjects but I hope I have adequately made the point. I’m sorry that you chose to do the show you did. I think you have done a serious disservice to the viewing public and to the reputation of PBS. I believe that viewers were left with erroneous ideas and impressions and the responsibility for that lies directly on your shoulders.


Thomas E. Sherry,

May 8, 2007

Are Mormons Christians?

The leading article on LDS.org suggests searching for this answer in the gospel library.

Jesus Christ is the Only Begotten Son of God the Father in the flesh. He was the Creator, He is our Savior, and He will be our Judge. Under the direction of our Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ created the earth. Through His suffering in the Garden of Gethsemane and by giving His life on the cross—that is, by performing the Atonement—Jesus Christ saves us from our sins as we follow Him. Through His Resurrection, Jesus Christ saves us from physical death. Because He overcame death, we will all be given the gift of resurrection.

Why is it so important for Jesus Christ to have a Prophet lead his Church?

Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.

Amos 3:7

Local Churches Teach How to Plan for Disasters

ORLANDO, Florida 7 May 2007 Days before a category F-5 tornado touched down in Greensburg, Kansas, destroying 95 percent of the city, residents of Orlando, Florida, were taking part in an emergency preparedness fair, hoping to learn what they could do to help themselves and their family in the event a disaster struck.

As with many disasters, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are preparing to assist in the recovery effort in Kansas. Mormons will be on the ground working alongside the Greenburg community to clean up debris and make repairs.

Over the last few years, hurricanes have swept through many parts of the United States, leaving communities without utilities, shelter and food. These communities know firsthand what it is like to survive a disaster and what it takes to rebuild.

Members of the local Catholic, Methodist, Presbyterian and Latter-day Saint congregations in Orlando hosted a free emergency preparedness training seminar last week. Twenty information booths were set up in the St. Margaret Mary Catholic church. Topics included water storage, food rotation, family emergency plans and 72-hour emergency kits.

In addition to booths, classes were provided in which experts spoke on city preparedness, severe weather and family preparedness.

“I learned how to prepare my family,” said 13-year old Shaina — one of the youngest attendees at the fair. “Being prepared will take your fear away and calm you.”

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints provides resources, including a Web site, that teach people how to select the right food and non-food items, as well as how to prepare for emergency situations. Information is also available on long-term food storage.

The First Presidency — the highest governing body of the Church — has asked that members be prepared “so that, should adversity come, we may care for ourselves and our neighbors.”

In April, the Church introduced two new pamphlets that teach the basics of food storage and financial preparedness.

LDS.org

Mormon.org New Look & Feel is Great!!

Go Check it out

Approaching Mormon Doctrine

The recent PBS documentary has sparked a lot of media attention regarding Mormon Doctrine. Here is the LDS Church's view on how to know if what you hear is official doctrine:

SALT LAKE CITY 4 May 2007 Much misunderstanding about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints revolves around its doctrine. The news media is increasingly asking what distinguishes the Church from other faiths, and reporters like to contrast one set of beliefs with another.

The Church welcomes inquisitiveness, but the challenge of understanding Mormon doctrine is not merely a matter of accessing the abundant information available. Rather, it is a matter of how this information is approached and examined.

The doctrinal tenets of any religion are best understood within a broad context (see here and here), and thoughtful analysis is required to understand them. News reporters pressed by daily deadlines often find that problematic. Therefore, as the Church continues to grow throughout the world and receive increasing media attention, a few simple principles that facilitate a better understanding may be helpful:

* Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.
* Some doctrines are more important than others and might be considered core doctrines. For example, the precise location of the Garden of Eden is far less important than doctrine about Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice. The mistake that public commentators often make is taking an obscure teaching that is peripheral to the Church’s purpose and placing it at the very center. This is especially common among reporters or researchers who rely on how other Christians interpret Latter-day Saint doctrine.

Based on the scriptures, Joseph Smith declared: “The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.”

* Because different times present different challenges, modern-day prophets receive revelation relevant to the circumstances of their day. This follows the biblical pattern (Amos 3:7), in which God communicated messages and warnings to His people through prophets in order to secure their well-being. In our day, President Gordon B. Hinckley has repeatedly emphasized the importance of the family in our increasingly fractional society. In addition, the Church does not preclude future additions or changes to its teachings or practices. This living, dynamic aspect of the Church provides flexibility in meeting those challenges. According to the Articles of Faith, “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.”
* Latter-day Saints place heavy emphasis on the application of their faith in daily life. For example, the active participation of Latter-day Saints in their community and worldwide humanitarian programs reflects concern for other people. As Jesus Christ declared, “By their fruits ye shall know them.”
* Individual members are encouraged to independently strive to receive their own spiritual confirmation of the truthfulness of Church doctrine. Moreover, the Church exhorts all people to approach the gospel not only intellectually but with the intellect and the spirit, a process in which reason and faith work together.
* Those writing or commenting on Latter-day Saint doctrine also need to understand that certain words in the Mormon vocabulary have slightly different meanings and connotations than those same words have in other religions. For example, Latter-day Saints generally view being born again as a process of conversion, whereas many other Christian denominations often view it as a conversion that happens in one defining moment. Sometimes what some may consider an argument or dispute over doctrine is really a misunderstanding of simple differences in terminology.

Journalists, academics and laymen alike are encouraged to pursue their inquiries into the Church by recognizing the broad and complex context within which its doctrines have been declared, in a spirit of reason and good will.

From LDS.org

How can The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints help my life?

Heavenly Father has a plan for His children, which He reveals through His prophets. The plan will allow you to live a happier life and eventually to return to God.

By attending The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, you can learn about God’s plan for you, receive necessary ordinances such as baptism, and obtain the spiritual guidance you need to be happy in life and return to live with your Heavenly Father.

What do I do Next?

Why is family so important to Mormons?

Answer:
Gordon B. Hinckley, President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, said:

"A nation will rise no higher than the strength of its homes. If you want to reform a nation, you begin with families, with parents who teach their children principles and values that are positive and affirmative and will lead them to worthwhile endeavors. That is the basic failure that has taken place in America. And we are making a tremendous effort to bring about greater solidarity in families. Parents have no greater responsibility in this world than the bringing up of their children in the right way, and they will have no greater satisfaction as the years pass than to see those children grow in integrity and honesty and make something of their lives, adding to society because they are a part of it."

The Presidency’s Mormon Moment

In its 9 April edition, The New York Times ran an opinion editorial by Kenneth Woodward entitled “The Presidency’s Mormon Moment.” Writing primarily about the presidential candidacy of Mitt Romney, Mr. Woodward noted the “stumbling block” that Mr. Romney’s religious faith might be.

“Although with 5.6 million adherents Mormonism is the nation’s fourth-largest denomination,” Mr. Woodward wrote, “57 percent of respondents to a recent CBS poll said they know little or nothing about Mormon beliefs and practices.”

That irony — being large and still largely misunderstood — recalls an experience following Hurricane Andrew. One local official thanked the many who helped in the cleanup, including members of the Mormon Church and members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Thankful for the help, the official didn’t realize those helping hands came from the same denomination.

Mr. Woodward’s column and the hurricane experience hit upon a reality in America. Polls show considerable “ignorance” about the Church of Jesus Christ, while Mormons feel the church they belong to is not the same church they often hear and read about. This unfortunate reality need not persist.

Mr. Woodward’s observations about Mormons include a certain “clannishness” and lack of close friendships with non-Mormon neighbors, due, in part, to their being so “busy.” It’s true that many Mormons are busy — they volunteer at church and try to spend time with family members. They probably don’t know all of their neighbors as well as they’d like. And they’ve heard their own Church president caution them against being “clannish” or holding any kind of “holier-than-thou” attitude.

They also know the dilemma of being “perceived as unusually secretive” about temple ceremonies. From the outside, Mormon temples can appear “secretive.” From the inside, faithful Mormons know temple worship to be sacred. Such worship is indeed uncommon — there is little in society that is so private and even less that can be considered holy. Mormons won’t discuss the details of temple worship, but they’ll certainly explain what the experience means to them and how it informs their lives.

On the other hand, they’re fully aware that anyone can visit — and in fact anyone is invited to attend — any Sunday service in the 27,475 congregations around the world.

Do Mormons “speak one way among themselves, another among outsiders,” as Mr. Woodward observes? Many probably do. Visitors to a Sunday service, for example, will almost certainly hear religious beliefs and doctrines expressed in ways unfamiliar to them. Fair enough. It's having a conversation that counts. Both sides — Mormons and non-Mormons — should be aware of the need to listen carefully and to explain and clarify the terms of their beliefs. Conversation and dialogue are welcome.

But there remain the weightier matters. Mr. Woodward thinks “Americans distrust the Mormon church.” The polls suggest he is right. On the other hand, some Mormons think 150-year-old stereotypes — like polygamy, which the Church discontinued over a century ago — still obscure who they are and the life they live. They’re right too.

Mr. Woodward squarely addresses both a stereotype and the potential distrust that could result. Some might fear the president of the Church — regarded by members as a prophet — might have too much political influence, as with earlier concerns about the pope and the Catholic Church. Mr. Woodward simply proposes to “review the church’s record.” There are many prominent Mormon office holders with divergent political views, including Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Republican Senator Orrin Hatch. Mr. Woodward correctly notes “there is no evidence that church authorities have tried to influence any of these public servants.”

He seems to be suggesting, at least in this case, that fears and concerns will work out with experience, accurate information and patience.

History will have to determine if this will be the “Mormon moment in presidential politics.” But whatever the political outcome, there is the opportunity for distrust and stereotypes to yield to understanding.

Happy April 6th!!!

Today is the 177th anniversery of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints!

In the spring of 1820, a 14-year-old boy named Joseph Smith went into a grove of trees near his home in Palmyra, New York, and prayed to learn which church he should join. In answer to his prayer, God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, appeared to him, just as heavenly beings had appeared to prophets like Moses and Paul in biblical times. Joseph learned that the Church originally organized by Jesus Christ was no longer on the earth.

Joseph Smith was chosen by God to restore the Church of Jesus Christ to the earth. During the next 10 years, Joseph was visited by other heavenly messengers, translated the Book of Mormon, and received authority to organize the Church. The Church was organized in Fayette, New York, on 6 April 1830, under the leadership of Joseph Smith. It has grown to an organization with members and congregations throughout the world.

Learn More at Mormon.org

What is the purpose of life?

Have you ever thought there must be something more to life than just living day to day?

There is—much more. Your life has a divine purpose.

God, your Heavenly Father, has prepared a marvelous plan for your happiness. When you realize that God has a plan for you, it is easier to understand why you are on this earth. God wants all of His children to progress and become more like Him. This time on Earth provides opportunities for you to grow and progress. Coming here allows you to:

* Receive a physical body.
* Exercise agency and learn to choose between good and evil.
* Learn and gain experience that will help you become more like your Heavenly Father.

By following our Heavenly Father’s plan, you—like all of His children—can someday return to live with Him and with your loved ones. You can have greater peace in this life and eternal joy in the life to come.

Learn More

Google's Mormon Thought of the Day

You can now get a "Mormon thought of the Day" on your Google Personalized Homepage. Or you can add it to your website.

Joseph Smith - A True Superman

A Way of Life

What a joy to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints! It isn't just a Sunday Religion, but a way of life! The Church had been taken from the earth and had to be restored in our day! We have the Gospel in its fullness, with true prophets of God like they had in ancient times. In this day of crime and wickedness and uncertainty we need a prophet more than we ever did! President Gordon B. Hinckley is that prophet today and leads and guides the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as well, if not better than any of our ancient prophets! Listen to the Missionaries and be baptized and you will find happiness you never knew existed! It is exactly what you have been looking for!

- Rae Olsen

Jesus Christ has Restored His Church

The gospel that Jesus had on the earth is the same as we have today. There was an apostasy and it was necessary to restore all the principles it had in ancient times. So it was necessary to have prophets, apostles, priests, bishops, patriarchs, and the true principles of the Gospel restored in our day. They were restored and by following its teachings we are blessed because they are established for the purpose of bringing mankind happiness. The commandments are not restrictions, they are truths that have been proven through the years to bring us joy, comfort, blessings, and all the happiness they were designed for! I know they are for our benefit! Find the true Church by looking up the missionaries and learn about the restoration of all the former principles of the Gospel of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints!

- Rae Olsen