Thursday, November 17, 2011

Christian Existentialism


Christian Existentialism

Evolution

Most people seem to believe that you either except Darwin's Theory or you except The Bible. I don't understand their dichotomy. Science tells you HOW something happened describing the process in empirical formula showing cause and effect.  It's very "if p, then q". Science is physics. To be science something must be subject to precise description, repeatable and measurable. The theory of evolution continues to struggle with some of these in our experience (nobody has lived long enough to witness the creation of homo sapien from an amoeba), but by and large it is an acceptable theory. That is, we think we've got most of it right, but we're still refining our thoughts as our skills improve.  We don't expect something to come along and refute natural selection and sexual selection. We can apply this model reliably in other science and make progress. We explain how it happened: mutation (thank you, Mendel).
In The Bible we read a wonderful story of divine beings using the matter at hand and organizing it (I hope NOBODY still supports creatio ex nihilo [http://tektonics.org/af/exnihilo.html]). There are some wonderful "coincidences" in the biblical description (the discovery of the seven basic amino acids in clay that's bolted by electrical current or the progressive creation from dust to man), but God does not appear to be concerned with transferring knowledge of how this is done. He does want us to understand WHY it was done (search the scriptures for the words "try" and "test"). We are here on probation. The irony might be that this is a scientific experiment on God's part to see what "q"s will result from the "p"s when placed in an environment with certain (in His experience) controlled variables. In doing this, He would use the theories and laws of physics (My omnipotent god cannot break the laws of the universe any more than we can break the law of gravity. We fly because we put aluminum together in a particular pattern and apply thrust, not because we defy the law of gravity). This does not diminish His power any more than using standard American spelling diminishes my power to communicate. In fact, it enhances it.

Nature vs. Nurture

The logical next step is trying to understand why we are the way we are. We've really progressed in this area. My grandmother knew that my green eyes came from my grandfather, but she did not understand how it was the result of a genetic crossover or evolutionary algorithm. My wife and I have continued this scientific experiment to create humans with blue, green and brown eyes; red, blond and brunette hair. Modern religion seems to not be concerned about why I have green eyes, but in some social groups I might have been executed for this witch-like phenomenon. Science continues to get better and better at helping us know how to produce humans with certain physical traits and without congenital challenges.
Social Science, one of the great oxymorons attempts to explain why we have become what we are. As we continue to advance in this area we identify more variables and build theories that are better at explaining our behavior. It requires a great deal of faith to accept many social theories and our experience demonstrates that the vast majority of these have to be continuously revised. When this art evolves to a true science we should be able to explain how I became obnoxious and better yet, predict the environment where somebody will have a certain behavior. This prediction is the true value of science.
As I read books like Albion's Seed and other social history I can see patterns develop influenced by the social variables (often the result of physical variables) inherent to a group of people. We combine physical science with social science and we begin to predict the pattern of blond and red-headed people coming from a region besot with violence creating the warriors that we appreciate today. My father always said that the Japanese attacked the United States because they had been to California and thought all Americans were laid back and submissive.  If they'd bothered to explore Alabama they might have changed their ideas.

Religion

As an aside I comment that the world uses the expression “tradition” interchangeably with “religion”. To my point of view this defines religion as a set of behaviors or habits that a group portrays. I define religion in terms of faith: Religion is believing.  It is faith the way Paul describes it in the New Testament. It is the power of believing. Faith does not define a system of beliefs (an organization or a “church”), but a power and influence over matter and behavior. Contrary to its etymology, religion is a liberating force allowing you to go beyond what is scientifically described.
What all of these approaches lack is recognition of Divine Nature. This is where we can only find acceptance of principles through faith.  The religious experiment is to question an idea, principle or event, research and study with all the tools available and then present it to God for affirmation or disqualification. We call this process faith or spirituality, and like pain we have no way of determining its presence or measuring its intensity. I am an expert on pain and can verify the similarity in experimentation with both. I can also verify the power of belief in dealing with its attributes.
What honest religion does is accept the laws of thermodynamics: 
  • Matter and energy are eternal and constant. The form may change, but the quantity remains the same. This is the genius of e=mc2. There is no more or less matter/energy in the universe today than there was at "creation" (organization). 
  • The next law, entropy, states that "in all energy exchanges, if no energy enters or leaves the system, the potential energy of the state will always be less than that of the initial state" (http://www2.estrellamountain.edu/faculty/farabee/biobk/biobookener1.html). This means that as you talk or stand by, your cell phone battery will die. Your phone will not work again until your battery is recharged (a transfer of energy).
What science cannot measure (yet), but our subjective observation affirms is a level of matter and energy that result in life and death. This is as much a spiritual state as it is physical.  Our common sense accepts this in all that we do. When animation ceases, we call the experience death. The spirit leaves the body. Spirits may account for other attributes. I have four children with the same woman. Genetics explains their various physical features.  They were all raised in the same environment (excepting the period of time which is different for them all as none are twins). They have very different personalities. The expression of this started with their first breath. Any parent knows this, but I defy you to explain it based on science. I posit that each of us has a divine nature or spirit. Everything on the planet expresses spiritual qualities. An influence in all the behaviors we exhibit is the result of this spirit.
At some date, we may be able to answer the why of everything in scientific terms. If I could do this, I would be a god among men.  Maybe, just maybe, this is why we're here. My faith confirms this. My science? It's still trying to figure it out.


Friday, November 11, 2011


Another 11/11/11 at 11:00 Event

Today is Veterans Day. I started writing this at eleven o’clock so this counts as my 11/11/11 11:00 gesture.  This is not nearly as important as what took place on 11/11/1918 11:00. The Armistice had been signed. Hostilities officially ended at the eleventh hour on the eleventh day of the eleventh month.  One of the greatest tragedies of mankind ended. “The war to end all wars” was over. The death of seventeen million people was attributed to the war. Ten million military personnel died, seven million civilians. For the first time in war, more people died from hostilities than from disease (although 1/3 of the soldiers’ deaths was from the Spanish Influenza Epidemic). Twenty-one years later we demonstrated what we learned from World War I. Between 1939 and 1945 60 million lives would be lost due to wartime hostilities. Estimates vary (from 62 million to 78.5 million) but again civilian deaths were astronomical: estimates range from a low of 37.5 million to a high of 55 million. The German blitz on London alone killed 28.5 million. This officially marked a truth that was often unmentioned: Civilians die in war. They are a valuable target considered a valid military target to deplete morale and the manufacture of war materielle.  This same justification was offered by the Allies when the carpet bombing of Germany began and retaliation was made against Tokyo for the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Two things remain true in how we wage war.
  •  It is dangerous to be a soldier during the war.
  •  It’s good to have a couple of oceans between you and the enemy if you’re a civilian.

Many are appalled by the civilian deaths in war.  Civilian deaths are not new. If you’re opposed on a religious ground you may need to review 1 Samuel of the Old Testament. In 15:3 God says to Saul through Samuel, Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.” (KJV) When Saul decides he’ll make his own decisions and spares Agag, the livestock and “all that was good” (his judgment). God’s response through Samuel is “thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, and the LORD hath rejected thee from being king over Israel.” (verse 26 KJV) God cleans up by having Agag hewn to pieces and giving Saul the silent treatment.
God also doesn’t seem too concerned about deaths when he provides a rain shower, sends Joshua to Jericho or practices urban renewal in Sodom and Gomorrah. One thing the Old Testament does well is emphasize how unimportant death is to God.

If you wish to take a religious stance against civilian casualties from an Islamic viewpoint you again will find problems. The history of Mohammed is rife with his lack of worry for civilians. When he conquers the last Jewish tribe in Medinah through siege he has a Hebrew elder pronounce the sentence from Mohammed:
·        All males will be slaughtered in front of their mothers, wives, sisters and daughters.
·        Remaining women and children will become slaves and concubines.
Somehow at the culmination of almost every victory Allah provides a revelation giving Mohammed rights to rape, bring into servitude and plunder. In some cases Allah forbids Mohammed from all married women EXCEPT “…those captives whom your right hand possesses.” (Koran 4:24) I assume Mohammed was right-handed. Other commandments forbid rape unless they practice coitus interruptus (“Azl”). Apparently raping your conquered civilians is only bad if you can make them pregnant and bring forth unbelievers.

I grew up in the South. I lived in Atlanta two miles from where Sherman made his headquarters to battle the city. His 50 mile wide sweep through the South was devastating. Crops were burned, homes and plantations destroyed and property ruined.  Civilians became casualties: dead, wounded, raped.  Only this terrible annihilation of a culture could bring the Confederacy to surrender in a war they new they had lost from the attack on Ft. Sumter.

Who are the innocent civilians? I have never held a weapon against any person. As a matter of fact I was blessed to be born in a time when the draft had been dismantled when I reached my eighteenth birthday. I never had to register for selective service. When casting my vote I generally back the candidate that is against waging war. Am I an innocent civilian? I don’t think so. I believe I play a substantial role in America’s military offense (as Coach Vince Lombardi said, "The best defense is offense).

War is a simple thing. You cannot wage war if you do not have weapons, ammunition, soldiers and ways to support them. There is a concept in the military called the “tooth to tail” ratio. The “tooth” is the number of combat soldiers, those involved in direct fighting. The “tail” is the number of support personnel required to get the materielle and personnel of war into combat. The modern American soldier has always had a lower tooth to tail ratio than their enemy.  In World War II when people realized that women could do most of the administrative work and staff support positions as well as men (actually better: 1 woman usually replaced 3 men – read the history of the WACs and WAVEs) complaints became rampant as the guy who landed the quartermaster role could become available as infantry.

According to the recent report by John J. McGrath at Ft. Leavenworth (http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/download/csipubs/mcgrath_op23.pdf) the current ratio gives the tooth about 10% of the manpower. This is even misleading because much of the functions that used to be done by military personnel (commissary, cafeteria, construction, and security) have been contracted out to private companies. Private companies even provide some of the “feet on the ground” (remember Blackwater?) in our modern warfare. My point is that it is impossible to wage war without the support of innocent civilians.

At the very least all of us contribute through our relationship with the IRS. The United States spends 47% of all the money that is spent or military purposes. Over half (54 cents) of every dollar you pay in tax is spent to buy stuff so we can kill people.  That makes me 54% less innocent as a civilian. We choose to live in this country. We choose our representative government that makes decisions about expenditures and budget. We choose to provide the money needed to make war. Americans are NOT innocent civilians. We enable the military.

Now about our opponents. The Taliban has an interesting conscription system: As an AK-47 is pointed at you, you are allowed to decide if you want to support “Allah” against the great Satan. If you say no, you become the owner of a 7.62X39 mm piece of metal. If you say yes, you receive the same piece of metal from the other end. If you’re under 10 you may be able to defer your decision, but not for long.
The Taliban MRE consists of “Hi we’re here. Give everything you have that can be eaten.” The village may starve, but they will support the war effort. If the clothing looks better than what one has, you make an acquisition.

I doubt that Afghan and Iraqi citizens are all willing donors of these goods. I know many in this country that are less than willing with the money that disappears from their wages before it is deposited into their account. This is really not consequential. Civilians must provide for the war to go forth.  Take away the civilians, and the military power is gone, the cause lost.

So why all this rambling on this Veterans Day? If ever I turn on the news I am bound to hear a story about how “innocent civilians” lost their lives in a predator attack (this is called collateral damage). The story is usually flavored with how bad this is. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want anyone to die.  I’d be perfectly happy if other countries would just give us what we want and we wouldn’t have to kill their citizens. Another view would be if people would quit wearing bombs into crowds, assassinating leaders and flying jetliners into World Trade Centers maybe we could live with fewer predator strikes.

What I choose to hear when I listen to the story of a predator launching is this:
  • ·        If the targeted person was there and we got him, great. One less person to coordinate the downfall of the US.
  • ·        If the targeted person is not there or we missed him, great. By spending $4.5 million on an aircraft spending $68,000 in throw weight no Americans were killed there and maybe a few won’t be targeted here. As cream, we got the attention of some people that it might be safer to stand off the guy with the AK.

Every Memorial Day my father used to ask me, “Did you send me a card thanking me for saving you from the communists?”  I would always answer, “You’re still alive. This is Memorial Day. You didn’t die in combat saving me from the communists.” On Veterans Day I sent him a card thanking him for saving me from the communists.
I owe thanks and prayer to every person who has been involved in the good and bad decisions that resulted in injury and death to allow me to live in America. I have lived in other countries. I like this one best and I’d like to be able to stay and not worry about the guy with the briefcase or the woman with pram.

I pray daily for the lives of all those who contribute to US ability to maintain our country. I pray also for the families of friends or Afghanis and Americans who suffer because of this silly idea about how to resolve a situation. In the end I am comforted by my faith: I know that in the eternal scheme of things it doesn’t matter how long we live or how we die. I trust in God that we will all come to a merciful eternity.

Saturday, November 5, 2011

The Glee Phenom

On Wednesday I dutifully stopped at the library to pick up some CDs my daughter, Carmen, had on hold. I came out of the library with 7 CDs that all had "GLEE" somewhere in the title. I wonder why this phenomenon is so prominent. I hear the music constantly from her iPod, the car stereo and the sound system. I recognize most of the music as it is the same music I listened to when I was a teenager on my Walkman (okay, maybe in my twenties), car stereo and sound system at home. I invariably make the unwelcome remark that she should listen to the version by the original artist in my collection at home (yes, I've even converted my vinyl to 320 MP3). She always responds, "I like this version better." I think she says this even if she hasn't heard the song performed by The Beatles, Carol King, Fleetwood Mac or Elton John. It's the principle that we established in the 60's that our parents' music has no value and that "our" music is superior.

I have to wonder why here in 2011 my daughter (and a lot more people) are revisiting the music of love, peace and rock and roll. I came up with a theory: There is an insatiable thirst for melody. We love melody. It has been scientifically proven that our bodies, our minds and our emotions react positively to melody. Its subliminal effect is proved to be way beyond anything previously suspected. It doesn't just affect us humans, it impacts our pets, our pests and our friends in nature (songbirds are the only animals who's heartbeat responds to music tempo like humans).

Much of 21st century music is built on a rhythm track. You see composers (yes, even the ones in Compton) first coming up with a beat track. It is the combination of the percussion rhythm that lays the foundation: percussion is the hook. It used to be that the hook was a simple melody (usually only three to five tones) that was easily absorbed by gray matter. This is the stuff that gets stuck in your mind and can drive you crazy, especially if you're a musician and your mind yearns for a full tonal scale. Now we organize everything around a rhythm that continues throughout the track without variation. Frequently this sound has been sampled and performed by a percussion synthesizer ad nauseum. Even the tempo of most of the music is the same, somewhere between 65 and 80 beats per minute which renders it easy to slowly grind to on the dance floor (electronic dance music is usually at 100 beats per minute - fast enough to give you a workout but allowing you to stay on the floor all night). If you Google "beat track" your search will return pages of tracks you can download and just "add vocals to". I note they don't say "lyrics" as most rap and hip hop is more of stream of consciousness improv with little tone playing off the beat track.

Enter "GLEE". Why songs from the 20th century? First of all, they have melodies that have been proven. Songs that achieved top 10 status for a number of weeks are usually the reservoir for selection. They know humans will respond to the tune favorably. Another reason, there is no reliance on the creative juices (read expense) of a group of composers like we had at Motown and other labels. The third advantage is that the rights for most of these songs are not terribly expensive to procure. I imagine that those that are find their way quickly to the round file. The people that produce "GLEE" are of the generation of the composers. If they are not themselves the owner of the rights, they probably enjoy being able to further enrich and old friend.

So where is music going? We saw with the introduction of MTV (they used to play music before the reality shows took over) that "underground" and "indie" rock would suffer. So would the works of someone who had chosen a vocal career because they lacked the video luster or charm and sexiness. The results included the heyday of disco while the creative groups came up with alternative, punk and grunge. Still, there was a melody, even with disco (although I don't like the Bee Gees after their first album, I can appreciate their vocal talents and harmonies). In my car I enjoy XM radio. There are quite a number of stations featuring pop, rap and hip hop. Being a subscription service they are not regulated in what words may pass from your speakers into your audience. If you look hard, there are 3 stations that play Jazz Fusion (Watercolors), jazz standards (Real Jazz) and prozac jazz (Spa). You can find "Symphony Hall", "Pops" and Opera if you like classical. The rest is the paradox of commercial free commercial radio. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to pay the subscription to be able to classical and jazz varieties along with NPR, BYU and other stations, especially living in the "middle of nowhere" (if you draw and X from the corners of the Oregon's boundaries you'll find Bend: eco paradise in the middle of the harsh eastern desert).

So where will we go from here? I don't know anybody that doesn't own a personal media device (iPod, MP3 or phone). We have the ability to create our own soundtrack to life. We can keep it to ourselves (headphones), share it (sound systems) or annoy the world (Boom and Kicker systems - competition between these systems is done using remote controls using hearing protection because the sound pressure level is dangerous - they also use a sound having nothing to do with music called "frogging" from a reference disc to achieve the absolute loudest output usually using only the sub woofers - most of these systems can't play regular music in a recognizable form).

I don't know how much longer the "GLEE" phenomenon will continue. It's already outlasted my expectations. I usually enjoy hearing a different arrangement of an old tune. If nothing else, it inspires me to play my collection of classics bringing back the joy and agony of adolescence. It reminds me of lost friends to chase down on Facebook. It reminds me of how proud I was to have an 8-Track recorder to compile my own music (remember the pause as it changed tracks in mid-song?). I can smell the incense and recall the black light posters. All this, and my daughter cheerfully offers to share "this awesome new song" she heard on "GLEE".

Friday, November 4, 2011

Mormon Pioneer Women

I was asked in June 2011 to prepare a talk on "Our Pioneer Heritage." In the research process, I kept veering off onto the tangent of the great contributions of Mormon women. As is most history, L.D.S. chronicles are not nearly as vocal on this subject as on the accomplishments of the men. I ended up preparing two talks. As I got up to speak, I realized that there was insufficient time to elucidate my comments and felt that it would be better left to a lesson where people could comment and participate. I gave the other talk.

Immediately after the meeting I was stopped in the hall by the Bishopric. A fifth Sunday was coming and they asked if I had something I could present to the combined Priesthood and Relief Society.

I presented this information in a hybrid form of lecture and discussion. After the block, several of the brethren commented that it was a great lesson and they learned things they hadn't known. The reaction of the Sisters was different. They approached me and said, "Thank You. That was wonderful." I don't think I've ever been thanked for a talk or lesson before in my life.

Our Sisters are incredible. How fortunate we are to have them. Here is my information:

Talk 2: Our Pioneer Heritage

I love coincidences. In July of 1776 Father Escalante entered Utah Valley and camped on the south shore of Utah Lake. This would become a stronghold of Mormon Independence as our Founding Fathers signed the document marking our separation from England. Another coincidence, John C. Fremont described the Salt Lake and Utah valleys in 1820 as Joseph Smith brought his questions to the Lord. The words he wrote are the description Joseph Smith read in 1840. It was revealed to him at this time that this was where the Saints would go; thus, “This is the right place!” not “This is the place!” To add to that coincidence, John Fremont was a polygamist. He concurrently had a wife in the East, Jessie Benton, daughter of Senator Thomas Benton, a Mexican woman in Alta California and a squaw from the Klamath Tribe. The difference in his practice is that none of his wives knew of the others.

Most of the Saint’ journeys were incredibly well planned, provisioned and lead. They had learned much in abandoning Nauvoo and on the trail to Winter Quarters. The Mormon Migration only hit the average mortality rate with the Martin and Woolly handcart companies. The Mormons were the only pioneers to include as many or more women in their companies as men.

In Elder Quentin Cook’s talk at General Conference, he mentioned a book by Wallace Stegner, a non-Mormon who had great respect for Mormon Women. The book is available at the library and I would encourage you to explore it. Stories of the pioneers and the accomplishment of the men have been told and retold in our recounting of the Mormon Exodus. What has been neglected is the amazing accomplishments of Mormon Women. We’re going to investigate some of these women briefly.

In order to be fair, I’ve verified any of the facts in at least two sources, one LDS and the other gentile.

At this point in time, the Church was still trying to become fully organized. If you read the literature, it is amazing how much this period with the Saints matched the activities of the 1st Century Christians.

We still organize and reform our groups as modern revelation dictates. Principles are eternal. Structure is ephemeral.

Eliza Roxcy Snow

“I was born in Becket, Berkshire Co., Mass. Jan. 21, 1804. My parents were of English descent—their ancestors were among the earliest settlers of New England. My father, Oliver Snow, was a native of Massachusetts—my mother, Rosetta L. Pettibone, of Connecticut.”

Siblings: Leonora, Percy, Melissa, Lorenzo, Lucius, and Samuel.

Whatever became of Lorenzo? (5th president}

She walked not in the borrowed light of others, but faced the morning unafraid and invincible.

Joseph F. Smith

Eliza was the second of seven children of Oliver and Rosetta Pettibone Snow. The family moved to the Western Reserve in 1806. She worked as secretary in the office of her father, a justice of the peace. Trained by her mother in domestic arts, she earned income as a seamstress. She was also a schoolteacher. Between 1826 and 1832 she published more than 20 poems over various pen names in Ravenna, Ohio’s Western Courier and Ohio Star.

She was called as the first Secretary to the RS in 1842.

She is Known as Zion's Poetess

I was partial to poetical works, and when very young frequently made attempts at imitations of the different styles of favorite authors. In school I often bothered my teachers by writing my dissertations in rhyme.3

She published several poems as a young woman under several different pseudonyms, demonstrating her passion for classical literature. Her poems chronicled the history of the Church and captured snapshots of the lives of hundreds of individuals. The first of her two volumes of Poems, Religious, Historical, and Poetical appeared in 1856, the second in 1877. Several of her poems affirm a woman’s place in Latter-day Saint theology.

In about 1842 while in Missouri and living with Emma she says,

I remember it was about this time I “first understood that the practice of plurality was to be introduced into the church. The subject was very repugnant to my feelings...I consoled myself with the idea that it was far in the distance and beyond the period of my mortal existence.” However, a few months later, on June 29, 1842, Eliza married Joseph Smith. She wrote, “I was sealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith, for time and eternity, in accordance with the Celestial Law of Marriage which God has revealed

Characteristically she expressed her feelings about plural marriage in a poem:

[We are] apt to conclude, from the medly of things;
We’ve got into a jumble of late-
A deep intricate puzzle, a tangle of strings,
That no possible scheme can make straight

From the midst of confusion can harmony flow?
Or can peace from distraction come forth?
From out of corruption, integrity grow?
Or can vice unto virtue give birth?

Will the righteous come forth with their garments unstained?
With their hearts unpolluted with sin?
O, yes; Zion, thy honor will be sustained.
And the glory of God usher’d in.

How She felt about Joseph

Throughout her life Eliza referred to Joseph as "her first and only love . . . the choice of her heart and the crown of her life." and when Joseph was martyred in 1844 she was so overcome by grief that she could not eat or sleep and even pled with the Lord to allow her to die. It was during this time of grieving that Joseph appeared to her in vision and told her that she must not desire to die. He then explained that her mission on earth was not yet completed and counseled her to be of good cheer and service to those around her.

Second Husband: Brigham Young
Married: 1844

According to Brigham, it was “a marriage to take care of her.”

She remained at Brigham’s right hand in all business matters. She was his confidante and counselor.

She was moved into the Lion House when it was completed.

She encouraged sisters to attend society meetings, sustain priesthood leaders, and support Brigham Young's program for economic self-sufficiency by establishing cooperatives, storing grain, raising silk, and obtaining medical training. Though not officially set apart as general president of the Relief Society until June 1880, she had essentially functioned in that capacity since 1867 when it was again organized.

She admonished the Relief Society to:

"Let your first business be to perform your duties at home," she said. "Inasmuch as you are wise stewards, you will find time for social duties, because these are incumbent upon us as daughters and mothers in Zion. By seeking to perform every duty, you will find that your capacity will increase, and you will be astonished at what you can accomplish."

She had a significant impact on the Church development.

Instrumental in:

She assisted the Bishops in organizing the Relief Society (1866)

She started The Retrenchment Association for Young Ladies (1869)

She created the Primary Associations (1878)

She actually organized started it, then went and asked permission. This was her way of “getting men to do what she wanted.”

Some of her poems include:

· "How Great the Wisdom and the Love”

· "Invocation, or the Eternal Father and Mother" ("Oh, My Father")

· "Be Not Discouraged"

· "My First View of a Western Prairie"

· "Mental Gas"

· "Think not When You Gather to Zion Your Troubles and Trials are Through"

· "O Awake! My Slumbering Minstrel"

· "Truth Reflects upon Our Senses

She was set apart as a healer. She was witnessed administering to many. When she helped a boy that the Elders had considered too far gone, he was witnessed to get up and walk along his way after her blessing.

This is her recorded testimony:

I will go forward. I will smile at the rage of the tempest, and ride fearlessly and triumphantly across the boisterous ocean of circumstance... and 'the testimony of Jesus' will light up a lamp that will guide my vision through the portals of immortality, and communicate to my understanding the glories of the Celestial kingdom.

Eliza R. Snow

Patty Sessions

She is not as well known. Many have never heard of her.

She was born in 1795 Maine and at 17, married David Sessions. She did not receive much formal schooling, but she loved to read and write.

One of the greatest accomplishments of the immigrants who settled in the Northeast was the establishment of Sunday Schools. They were not created to teach Bible stories; they were founded to teach every person to read so they could read the Bible. Literacy in 19th century America was really quite good in the North. The ability to write was far less practiced. This seems strange to us as we learn both skills together, but if you’ve learned a foreign language, you can relate to the ability to read much better than compose.

In 1834 she was baptized and brought along some of her family.

By 1837 in Missouri she had delivered 7 children, 4 of whom died. This fits the normal practice for women who would have a child every two years and lose a tooth in the same period of time. Childbirth was the greatest cause of death among women. The mortality rate was between 1% and 1.5%. On the average women bore eight children. This meant that a woman had a 1 in 8 chance of death or that for every eight women, one would perish. Literacy among women is considered one of the factors that improved the odds as information was transferred between mothers and midwives.

She was also “spiritually married” to Joseph Smith, hough she spent mortality with David.

Her circle of friends included “Brigham’s Girls” or “Heber’s Girls”. She was part of the elite women in Salt Lake City.

She worked with her mother-in-law as a midwife and learned the profession. She kept a meticulous diary covering 40 years.

She was set apart as a healer and followed her mother as a midwife. She drove her own wagon across the plains.

She was part of the “Big Company” which arrived in the Salt Lake valley in September, 1847. She once delivered three babies in six hours during the trek. She was witnessed as a powerful healer and performed a “laying on of hands” on many occasions.

She frequently would “speak in tongues” or would interpret for another sister speaking in tongues.

Though she was sealed to Joseph, she had some different feelings about David taking on a second wife. Rosilla had a “saucy tongue”, was younger and threatened to “take David for herself”. This led to months of complaining and disagreement. Rosilla eventually gave up and went back to Nauvoo.

Patty was president of the Council of Health and presided over the Mormon Women’s Group that later became the Relief Society (it had lapsed for the period between leaving Nauvoo and reorganization in Utah in 1869).

In her mid-fifties David died. A year later she was married to the conductor of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, John Parry. He too, took a second wife but by then she states she “…was rather unfazed by the whole thing.”

In 1883 she owned $16,000 worth of shares in ZCMI which made her not just one of the richest women in Utah, but one of the richest people in Utah. Still, she took in borders and weaved to make extra income. She always paid her tithing and contributed liberally to charities and the PEF.

In 1868 John Parry died and she moved to Bountiful which her son had helped found.

Patty was the first person seen by 3,977 babies. I doubt there are many modern obstetricians or midwives that can rival her efforts and her records.


Jane Manning James

I preface the next discussion with a quote from Bruce R. McConkie. You will recall that in his book Mormon Doctrine he stated, Negroes in this life are denied the priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty. Fortunately, the atonement covers even the misspeaking by those who have received full enlightenment. I response to President Kimball’s announcement of the revelation extending the Priesthood to all worthy males, he repented:

“There are statements in our literature by the early Brethren that we have interpreted to mean that the Negroes would not receive the priesthood in mortality. I have said the same things, and people write me letters and say, "You said such and such, and how is it now that we do such and such?" All I can say is that it is time disbelieving people repented and got in line and believed in a living, modern prophet. Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or George Q. Cannon or whoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world.

It doesn't make a particle of difference what anybody ever said about the Negro matter before the first day of June 1978. It is a new day and a new arrangement, and the Lord has now given the revelation that sheds light out into the world on this subject. As to any slivers of light or any particles of darkness of the past, we forget about them. We now do what meridian Israel did when the Lord said the gospel should go to the Gentiles. We forget all the statements that limited the gospel to the house of Israel, and we start going to the Gentiles.”

I would reiterate that there was never a reason given by doctrine limiting the blessings of the Temple and the Priesthood to those of African descent. This practice did not come into effect until Brigham Young started it in 1849 and lasted until 1978. African-Americans had been ordained to both Priesthoods, one, Green Flake was made a seventy when sent to Canada on a mission. They also received their temple endowment and sealing.

Jane Manning James was also in the “Big Party” that went west. She had been born in 1822 (sometimes listed as 1813, but 1822 seems more correct) in Wilton, Connecticut. She joined the Church in 1841 and brought most of her family with her. In 1842 Jane walked with her family in the winter 750 miles to Nauvoo. She had arranged and paid for travel, but when the captain of the riverboat saw her, he refused to let her and her family board. He did take her luggage though, which was never returned.

She was the first free African American to arrive in Utah. She prided herself for having always supported her family and never been in servitude.

Jane walked with her family in the winter 750 miles to Nauvoo. She had arranged and paid for travel, but when the captain of the riverboat saw her, he refused to let her and her family board. He did take her luggage though.

They walked until their shoes wore out and their feet were cracked and bleeding. Their red tracks were visible on the road and commented on by other voyagers. When they arrived at Nauvoo they were directly shown to the house of Joseph Smith who informed other boarders that they would make room for them. When the rest of the family found work, Jane was found in tears by the prophet who admonished her that his was a happy house. She told him that she was the only one not to find work and was destitute. Joseph immediately consulted with Emma who agreed that she would be a part of their household.

She was treated as an equal in all things and Emma offered to adopt her. She didn’t know what that meant and declined. Later in Utah she would reconsider. She asked many times to perform the sealing, but permission was not granted. She was also forbidden to attend the Temple and receive her endowment which caused her great anguish as she feared for her soul not having received the required ordinances of salvation. She was finally adopted into the Smith family; sealed not as a daughter, but as their “eternal servant.” This is the engraving on her headstone in the Smith family plot of the Salt Lake cemetery. As far as I can tell, she is still the only worthy person who was living at the time of her temple ordinance but required a proxy in the temple as she waited outside.

She asked multiple times to be allowed to “gain her salvation through the required temple ordinances.” Ironically, her persistent and earnest queries may have contributed to the steadfast feeling against African Americans in the church.

Conclusion

In the short amount of time available we have just seen the barest snippets of the contributions of Mormon Women. I have researched a great deal on this subject and can testify that in the present day as in the past, Mormon women are the pinnacle of God’s creation. I am grateful to be married to one.