Friday, June 15, 2018

We Believe in Fathers

I had a wonderful mother.  She was as intentional as any I have ever seen.  She had a bachelor's degree in Human Development and Family Relations and her greatest ambition was to raise a family and make a lovely home.  She served home-cooked meals with vegetables, read us Caldecott Award-winning books, spoke to us with respect and love, pushed us to set goals, sewed us matching dresses, kissed us on the head, and taught us how to work.  She was !good! at her profession.

My Dad tells me that he was impressed with and grateful for her capacity, talent and efficiency with the home and children. Working in tandem, he knew he had a role as a provider and a spiritual guider, but beyond that, he didn't exactly know what it was that he contributed to our family life, especially the child-rearing.

One day, my dad had a young 40-something year old heart attack.  After some days of hospitalization, he was visited by my oldest sister, Alison.  She encouraged him to get better, "Hurry!  We need you at home!"  She told him that things were kind of chaotic without him.

My dad tells me that that plea from a teen-age daughter was insight into family influence that he hadn't before recognized completely.  "I learned that I was a stabilizing force for our family. That I was steady, kept things positive, and on even-keel emotionally." To this day, he gets a little teary when he tells this story because it was such an important lesson for him to learn-- even with a capable mother, our family needed HIM!

I agree with my sisters long-ago assessment, families need fathers.  I needed my dad's kind encouragement, his predictable reactions, his weakness for spoiling this daughter.  I needed his wise, measured counsel, his Gospel instruction, and his pillow fights.  I needed LeGrande Richards read out loud to me, regular scripture study, and his kind, approving looks.  I needed to play hide and seek with him, even though we knew he would always be found in the bathtub. I needed his example of hard work and sacrifice, the use of his beat-up pick up truck, and his kneeling prayers at dinner time. I needed more than provisions, I needed a father in the deepest most sacred use of that word.

"We believe in fathers. We believe in 'the ideal of the man' who puts his family first...We believe that far from being superfluous, fathers are unique and irreplaceable."

I recently listened to a BYU-I devotional spoken by a Child Development/Marriage and Family Studies professor, Tim Rarick. He taught me that a man hasn't even really been introduced to their potential and life's mission until they have prepared for, embraced, and then magnified their role as a father.  His words corrected the perception that success in church service, societal influence, and bread-winning completely meet the requirements that God has for men.  He said, "sometimes I think that we ...speak of wanting to become like our Heavenly Father by developing His knowledge and perfect attributes, without focusing on becoming what He is: a parent—more specifically, a father." (2)

Brother Rarick quoted the Church's manual titled 'A Parent’s Guide':  “Since a major purpose of our mortal existence is to become like our Heavenly Father…the ultimate goal of a man or boy is to become an effective husband and father..." (3) Then He concluded, "(Fatherhood) is how men reach the full measure of their creation. Brethren, if your goal is exaltation, your goal is fatherhood." (4)

"If your goal is exaltation, your goal is fatherhood"-- this is amazing doctrine.

This is not a statement of biology, this is a clarion call for men to rise to the role of being an intentional, focused parent.

Perhaps we focus too much on the father's responsibilities outside of the home.  Is he a resource-gatherer? A family provider? Yes.  Emphatically.  In fact Elder Christofferson stated, "Jesus said, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” Fathers manifest that love as they lay down their lives day by day, laboring in the service and support of their families." (5)  Isn't that beautiful!  And does a father have duties in God's Kingdom?  Yes. Absolutely. He bears the Priesthood and serves to bring people to Christ through ordinances and covenants.  But, a man's development, even in all of the good he does elsewhere, is incomplete until he embraces being a father. Until he lets the experiences of caring for children, in their weakness and complexity, become his passion. His development opportunity.  His life's purpose.

These couple of weeks between mid-May and mid-June where we celebrate motherhood and fatherhood, are an annual, respectful bow to the two most influential roles that a human could ever play. If the families of the world were led by women who were singularly-focused, purposed mothers, and by men who were were taking care of their families physical needs and were involved fathers, then !ta da! many of the societal ills that plague us today would find resolution.

Yes, we believe in fathers and fatherhood.  We believe in the strength, goodness and worth of men. We believe in their invaluable contribution to families.  Kudos to the great men on this earth.

Happy Father's Day!

(1) Fathers, D Todd Christofferson, Apr 2016 GC
(2) "Men Are That They Might Be Fathers", Tim Rarick, BYU-I Devotional, May 18, 2018
(3) A Parent’s Guide (manual, 1985); lds.org.
(4) "Men Are That They Might Be Fathers", Tim Rarick, BYU-I Devotional, May 18, 2018
(5) Fathers, D Todd Christofferson, Apr 2016 GC

Friday, May 11, 2018

Happy Mother's Day!

Kneeling at the bedside of my boys in the late evening is one of my very favorite places to be.  Tucked in their blankets, they are spongy and smart, teachable and cute.  Over the years we have read a whole library full of books out loud.

Near President's Day I have pulled out an old $1.48 copy of Abraham Lincoln: President for the People by Larry Weinberg. I love Mr. Weinberg's writing about Abe's childhood.

Abe and his sister were the third generation of Lincolns who lived quite primitively in the forests of Kentucky and then Indiana. The Lincoln cabin, which had a dirt floor and drafty spaces in between the logs, was their frontier home. Abe was nine years old when his mother died of milk disease. His father, Tom, was sad. After harvest was over, Tom left the kids in the custody of a 17 year old orphan boy, and without explanation, headed through the woods.  The children, aged 9 and 11, foraged for food and lived lean for weeks and weeks as winter set in. When Tom returned in December, he brought a new mother and three new siblings.

The author described the first meeting of the new family, "The youngsters standing in front of the new Mrs. Lincoln were filthy.  But she opened her heart to them at once and took them into her arms as if they were her own. Like her own children, they were soon well-scrubbed, well-fed, and wearing clean clothes... But Mrs Lincoln cared about much more...Sarah saw Abe's curiosity and desire to learn and (gave him opportunities at education), and also enough confidence in himself to last him all his life.  Even when he became a famous politician (He said), 'All that I am or hope to be, I owe to my angel mother.'"

This sweet little boy needed an advocate, a cheerleader, a director, a nurturer, stability and an opportunity.  This, so that he could blossom into the man of faith, strength, brilliance, and distinction that became the Abraham Lincoln that we, generations later, are still so incredibly thankful for.

So, this weekend is Mother's Day and everyone, in increments of cards and flowers, is thankful.  But outside of this annual celebration, a mother's value isn't every day understood.  It is a very restless world we live in. Societal philosophy has blanketed us with questions about our worth, has stripped us of traditional roles, thrown us into a game of comparison and a search for "equality", has told us to be discontented, and even has made us a little ferocious as we collectively seek for powerful and visible ways to influence. With all of these unsettling messages, we could wonder and question whether mothering, one by one, to a very small audience, is where we can make the our life's greatest contribution.

Thank heavens for Julie Beck who once pointed out, “I think sometimes people confuse stardom with influence." (1)  I might rephrase that to say, we confuse "visibility and promotion" with influence.  We might believe that in order to have sway and affect in this world, we need to be out in front, loud, picketing, leading a crowd, speaking from a pulpit with a large audience, rocking a board room, running a business, or getting awards and raises.  But Julie Beck said, and I would concur, that influence isn't always connected to visibility or "stardom".

A mother marches along quietly and usually without accolades and fanfare.  But don't mistake that for lack of influence.  Joseph F. Smith once explained, "...(children) drink into the spirit of their mothers, and the influence of the mother over the children is the most enduring impression that can be made. There is nothing so imperishable as the influence of the mother." (2)

Sometimes it may be a little hard to see your own significance, which makes the work faith-based, but children love and trust and quote their mothers. I have driven a lot of carpools, have taught youth classes, and have had a lot of little visitors in my home.  From my interaction with children, this I know-- what mothers teach and say and do shape the lens by which children see themselves and how they see the world. This makes me feel very careful.  Every president and king, plumber and architect has a mother. Every single, big something is done by someone's well-cared for, enabled, loved, grown up, little child.  A mother is one of the kindest gifts that God could give.

A woman's influence may start with just one little person, but it grows and spreads exponentially. Joseph F Smith said, "The...influence (of) a good mother...is like leaven cast into the measure of meal, that will leaven the whole lump... her influence extends, not only to her own children but to the associates of her children.  You do not know how far your influence extends.  A mother....sows the seeds...and wherever that boy or girl goes, in whatever society they mingle, the good effects of... that mother will be felt." (3)

That quote describes perfectly "The Sarah Lincoln Effect".  Her stewardship was, first, a boy of hidden promise, and then a fine man and community lawyer.  Eventually her charge was a President of an unsettled, divided America. Her "fruit" is the nation we live in today.  She created the possibility for this man, and we all sit indebted to this almost anonymous woman, who cared about a filthy, hungry little boy.  Who helped him read and gave him the opportunity of education.  Who loved him, taught him, cared for him, and believed in him. That is influence that is known to almost no one but the God of Heaven, but He must be so very grateful for Mrs. Sarah Lincoln. (4)

And may I add, He is grateful for YOU!  Because you are doing the same work.
 
A terrible modern-day miss is in not seeing that a woman's greatest power to influence comes from within family relationships. It is worth all of a woman's resources because the time, talent and energy spent therein goes forward into eternity.  A child is an investment in something that is completely unbound by the world. Mothering is influence that never ends.

Happy, Happy Mother's Day.  I love and admire you so much.
Mother on!

--Valerie

1- Julie B Beck, General Relief Society President, 2012 Interview with LDS Living
2- Deseret News: Semi-Weekly, 5 Jan. 1892, 3.
3- Deseret News: Semi-Weekly, 5 Jan. 1892, 3.
4- Photo by Bryan Eaton, http://coloroflincoln.com/Parents.html

Monday, February 26, 2018

A Call For the Resurgence of Family--

I read a news release last week about Alaina Petty, a 14 year old who died in the Parkland, Florida shooting on February 14, 2018.  This quote from Alaina's Dad, Ryan, is just exactly where my head has been for eleven days.

"While grief-stricken over Alaina’s death, Ryan Petty said of the accused gunman, 'I’m not angry at the shooter. I feel like we, as a society, failed this young man. He did not have the opportunity to live in a family that could love him the way he needed to be loved; to take care of him and understand the challenges and emotions he was feeling, and to give him positive ways to deal with them.'  Loving families, he added, are often remedies to such challenges. 'I can’t help but think that the solutions to these types of problems don’t lie in the policy realm—they lie in having strong families that [care] for their children and live according to Heavenly Father’s plan.'” (1)

As society tries to understand this senseless event, they are suggesting solutions like gun control, increased school security, teachers with protection responsibilities, and more cops on campuses.  They blame the sheriff, the FBI, The President, or the NRA.  

I really can't evaluate well the merits or weakness of any of those ideas. That is for people smarter than me.  But, I know that there is something powerful that we can collectively do.  My idea is Ryan Petty's idea-- we need functional, child-centric families.

Our Families Are Broken

As a society, we are broken.

 * Almost half of US babies are born to unwed mothers.  And, the numbers are substantially higher in certain demographics. (2)
* Only 50% of children live with two parents. And 17 million children live with their mother, but no father. (3)
* There were 8.5 million single mothers in the US in 2016. (4)
* 70% of women with children under 18 years old participate in the workforce. (5)
* 40-50% of marriages in the US will end in divorce.  (6)
* 45% of US households are "unmarried households".  (7)  
* About 38 % of unmarried but cohabitating couples have a child under age 18 living with them. (8)
* Only 7% of households with children are "traditional"—where one parent works and one stays home. (9)

Children Need Families

Expert in human development, Erik Erickson (1902-1994), taught about the development of healthy persons. (10)  His research has been long-held as a standard. 

He speaks to the developmental stages of a child:
Trust vs. Mistrust  0 - 1½ years old
Autonomy vs. Shame  1½ - 3 years old
Initiative vs. Guilt  3 - 5 years old
Industry vs. Inferiority  5 - 12 years old
Identity vs. Role Confusion  12 - 18 years old

Yet, starting at six weeks old, as soon as maternity leave is over, 61% of American children spend most of their waking hours in "non-parental" care-- 33% of those in "non-relative care".   That equates to 12.5 million children in daycares or being cared for by a non-parent, and this is during the season of a child's life when they are developing trust, autonomy, and initiative. (11)  

Preschool outside the home is the norm for American children. 40% of four year olds are in government-funded preschools.  Add the millions of preschoolers that attend non-publically funded schools and the number rises. (12)  People argue that it is inequity and injustice that the number is not 100% of children being educated in preschools outside of their mothers care.  They are asking "Why does America invest so little in their children?"  (13)

This is flawed on several levels.  First, it assumes that academic development is the highest societal priority for children ages three to five years old.  After studying Erik Erickson, I would argue that it is, instead, emotional development that is of top importance during those years. And second, mandatory preschool assumes that a mother can not do what educators and babysitters can. 

I learned about Erickson’s ideas as a single, young-adult, college student. I was so impressed at how very important a child’s very first days and months and years were in becoming a healthy adult.  I remember thinking, “A mother gets but one chance at influencing this. You can not get those important years back. ”

Further, the most well-known and influential theory of cognitive development was set forth by Jean Piaget (1896-1980).  (14)   He taught that there are four cognitive stages of childhood development, he identified them as:

Sensorimotor (birth through about 2 years)- Children learn about the world through their senses and the manipulation of objects.
Preoperational (ages 2 through 7)- Children develop memory and imagination. They are also able to understand things symbolically, and to understand the ideas of past and future.
Concrete Operational (ages 7 through 11)- During this stage, children become more aware of external events, as well as feelings other than their own. They become less egocentric, and begin to understand that not everyone shares their thoughts, beliefs, or feelings.
Formal Operations (ages 11 and older)- During this stage, children are able to use logic to solve problems, view the world around them, and plan for the future.

Jean Piaget taught that school age children are trying to figure out their own feelings and others' feelings and beliefs.  They are learning to look beyond themselves and understand others.  They are working on the skills of becoming empathetic and compassionate.  They are thinking about their own place in the world and where they belong in relation to others.  They are working on the cognitive skills to problem solve and plan for their future. And yet, 15.1 million children, five to fourteen years old, spend after school hours alone-- including a full third of American middle schoolers.  And another 6.5 million (a 2004 number and it was on the rise), are in non-parental, after-school care. (15)

The thought that a child can raise himself or that public schools and government are best equipt to raise a child, is irresponsible.  This is a whole new progressive take on the old African proverb, "It Takes a Village to Raise a Child".  I believe that that phrase originally suggested that children need intentional and present parents, but also benefit from many loving and caring helper-people. But in all of the talk about the power of accessory supporters, we have lost this truth—first and foremost, it takes a mother, and a father to raise a child.

I am not critical of skilled, loving providers, nor hard-working single parents, but the facts are there.  For half a century, many of our children have been either raised by helpers, part-time parents, or have been alone in their development.  I think that we are finding out that that model does not work. 

Children need quality and quantity time from parents. They need someone to listen and process ideas with.  They need a check and balance system, accountability, rules and expectations.  And this should be executed by someone who loves unconditionally and will parent individually.  They need an environment where they can be honest and vulnerable, and have someone to talk to who cares about them deeply and can help them through struggle.  They need modeling.  They need a reliable schedule and structure.  They need downtime and playtime. They need space to make mistakes where they can be urged and taught and redirected with love and mercy.  They need correction and oversight. They need mealtime and bedtime.  They need family touch-- hugs and kisses and compliments. 

These opportunities do not come at predictable, scheduled moments or when it is most convenient for a parent. Kids are funny-- they learn when they want to learn, not when you want to teach them. (16)

Perceptions Have Shifted

Adult roles have been under attack for decades.  Over the past fifty years the trend away from traditional "Father Knows Best" and "Leave it to Beaver" family has drifted to a society that focuses on the needs of adults, and not of children. 

Woman's liberation movements of the 1960's redefined marriage and mothering.  Robert Sheaffer wrote, “One can try to argue that the U.S. family died of natural causes at precisely the same time feminists began shooting at it, but after examining the depth and ferocity of the feminist attack against women’s roles as wives and mothers, such an argument fails to convince”.  (17)  He asserts that women, themselves, injured mothering and marriage.  This because feminism heavily values personal development and personal contribution over family.  It sees less value in helping husbands and children to have order, security, and nurturing.

Along with the demise of woman's roles, there has been a degradation of father and manhood. David Blankenhorn, the author of "Fatherless America", observed: "Fatherless is the most harmful demographic trend of this generation. It is the leading cause of declining child well-being in our society. It is also the engine driving our most urgent social problems." (18)  Men have given up and/or been forced to relinquish the protective, providing, supportive role that they have long held.

Neal Maxwell once said, “…by reversals and renunciations of role(s), we make a wasteland of both womanhood and manhood.” (19)

The Blueprint for Successful Families

The blueprint for improving society is The Family Proclamation.  This one page humankind-stabilizing document was delivered by President Gordon B Hinckley, former prophet of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (20)  The document, first publically read in 1995, was distributed far and worldwide to Heads of State, Kings and Queens, Parliaments, and Government Officials.

It declared that each of us are children of God and have "divine nature and destiny".  That "gender is eternal".  That marriage is God's, and is between a man and woman. That each have equally important, God-given roles that they fulfill with the love and support of one another.  A father is to provide, preside and protect, and a mother is to nurture and minister. Both with full attention and intention. Together, side by side, they run a home and family that is full of faith, love, forgiveness, teaching, activities and respect. A child is to honor and obey. The family's purpose is assist heaven in "returning" God's children back to Him.

This document reaffirmed roles and called on adults to refocus on marriage, home and family.  I believe that it called on parents to “come home” in their hearts and minds, in body and in soul, and see their greatest contribution to society as the work that they do within the family.

And while there is no guarantee that children will use their free will and agency to immediately follow even the most beautiful of parental love, modeling and teaching.  And while a functional family is not a guarantee that children will be free of organic dysfunction and imperfection, I would still bank on family.  Why?  Because, this I know for sure, reclaiming a child who has diverted or been difficult, or nurturing a child who has illness or disability is best accomplished through patient intervention, love, compassion, urging and nurturing from a family.  Where our hand-wringing, justice-driven society fails, over time, families succeed.  Intentional families win.

The Family Proclamation concludes with this warning voice: "We warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets." (21) 

What Can We Do?

It has been said that “a very large ship is benefited very much by a very small helm in the time of a storm”. (22)  Humankind is a “very large ship” and society is in a raging “storm”.  To produce communities filled to the brim with functioning, loving, child-centric families is a seemingly “very small helm” and a one by one effort.  But I believe that that societal change can shift the trajectory and bring wonderful, sweeping changes to our nation and world.  


References and Notes:

12-(https://www2.ed.gov/documents/early-learning/matter-equity-preschool-america.pdf) 
16- Clayton Christensen, The Power of Everyday Missionaries (2012) page 30.
17-("Feminism, the Noble Lie", as quoted in https://www.thetrumpet.com/2384-how-feminism-harms-families)
18-(David Blankenhorn, Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem (1995), 62.)  
19-Elder Maxwell Quote
20-(The Family Proclamation, September 23, 1995, lds.org)
21-(The Family Proclamation, September 23, 1995, lds.org)
22- Doctrine and Covenants 123:16

Monday, May 15, 2017

Happy Mother's Day 2017!

Back in the good old days, Relief Society included an occasional lesson on the arts called, "Cultural Refinement".  At one of those lessons, my Mom tried her hand at writing a Haiku. This was her poem:

little boy on loan
how long, I do not know
slow down speeding days

You see, my younger brother, Michael, was battling a serious congenital heart defect that would take his life.  My mom knew that with Micheal, time was a precious commodity. She knew that this was a "boy on loan" and begged that the passage of days and hours and minutes would tick by very slowly.  When he died, my Mom felt that thirteen years had not been enough time.

I have thought long on the idea that our children are "on loan". This mothering/banking analogy speaks to me. Any credible "lender" has expectations for the one to whom he granted custody.  It is a trust. And for it to be a good investment, the lender wants a return on his asset.  In the case of children, God is the lender, and mothers, the primary custodian and curator and developer. 

Elder H. Burke Peterson quoted the song "To A Child":  "..children are not a gift to us, but a precious loan, a priceless loan to be returned-- returned more valuable than when we received them. Understanding more, better prepared to return to Him who lent them to us."(1)

This is the doctrine-- "...the opportunity and responsibility of wives is 'to multiply and replenish the earth', ..and to fulfill the promise (of salvation and exaltation) which was given by the Father before the foundation of the world,...that (mothers) may bear (and not just at birth, but bear them for life) the souls of men; for herein is the (saving) work of my Father continued..." (2)  The work of mothers is "the work of The Father continued." Mothers are nurturing, teaching, caring "bridges"-- from God's arms premortally, back to God's arms eternally. Mothering is Heavenly Father's "work" of salvation continued in the life of every child, until they are secured by Christ and safely delivered back their heavenly home.

This is a concept that Susannah Wesley understood. She was the mother of nineteen, one of whom was the great Reformer and founder of the Methodist Church, John Wesley.  She felt it was her Divine charge to consecrate "above twenty years of the prime of life" to the rearing of kids.  To what end? "...in hopes of saving the souls of (my) children."

She continued, "I...look upon every soul you leave under my care as a 'talent' committed to me under a trust, (from) the Lord of all the families of Heaven and earth.  And if I am unfaithful to Him...in neglecting to improve these 'talents', how shall I answer unto Him when he shall command me to render an account of my stewardships." (3)

Susannah Wesley asks the salient, weighty question, How can I answer to Him if I have not given the children of my charge my all?  My everything. My best. My mind. My heart. My time.

I believe that my mom was insightful when she suggested that time with children was precious.  Quality time, yes!  This is when we are staring into the whites of our kids' eyes-- listening, teaching, empathizing, laughing, playing, building. Times of true mothering magic.

But, twenty-four years and a passel of boys later, I have learned that quality time is born of quantity time. In a very real way, my job is to be 'hanging around' waiting to be needed. Milling and vigilantly watching for crisis, emotion, interpersonal tangles, a teachable heart, a humble disposition, oversight needs, correction, and for just the right time to show love and praise. You can't schedule that stuff.  You can't predict it or anticipate it very well.  It happens because you are there.

I am pretty sure that this was what President Benson meant when he advised mothers, "Be at the crossroads ... always be at (there) when your children are either coming or going- -when they leave and return --when they bring friends home. Be there at the crossroads whether your children  are six or sixteen ." (4)

And while I am 'standing by' and 'on call' for such moments, I nurture.  I nurture by preparing meals, taxi-ing, folding socks, weeding the garden, sweeping and mopping.  I am like a stealthy spy, posing as a laundress or chef, but really lying in wait for the precious moments when I pop out and become psychiatrist, counselor, cheerleader, nurse, teacher, confidant, advisor, clown, friend.  The times when we mothers can, in very real ways, save.

I am pretty sure that I will feel most prepared to meet the Lord of the "talents" if I can stand before Him and declare with confidence that my mothering attention was undivided, concentrated, and intentional.


Mother-on!
Valerie

(1) "Mother, Catch the Vision of Your Call", H. Burke Peterson, April 1974 GC
(2)  D and C 132:63. "To the Mothers in Zion", President Ezra Taft Benson, Address given at a Fireside for Parents, 22 February 1987
(3)  Franklin Wilder, Immortal Mother, New York: Vantage Press, 1966, p 43
(4) "To the Mothers in Zion", President Ezra Taft Benson, Fireside for Parents, 22 February 1987

Tuesday, October 11, 2016

Hold On World! Men Can Be Gentlemen!

So, social media is aflame this weekend with video of the lewd and tawdry coming out of the mouth of a presidential candidate when he spoke about interacting with daughters of God. This video clip was not too much a shocking revelation to me, but, I've got to say, the public reaction has been.

We have seen politicians, movie stars and others weighing in, telling us that this behavior is exactly what one expects from men and that we are being too hard on the candidate.  But it was this ditty from a woman that especially bothered me:

"I am a woman and I proudly support (the candidate).  I don't care what (he) said about women.  If there is a male out there who has never made a vulgar statement about a woman in a private conversation with another male, then congratulations....you should enter the priesthood." (1) And even more shocking to me was the string of women whole-heatedly agreeing, "Yes. Yes", "My thoughts exactly", and even, "I just wish I had written this".

Hold on World!  

Women don't care about men's vulgarity? Yes, we do. Dirty men, hurt women.  Please care about that.  All men are course?  Oh, please, please don't believe this damaging view.  Men are NOT inherently raw and crass. We should not be callously expecting it of them. A man who is filthy has chosen to be filthy. And men could, instead, choose to be moral and refined.

I think that this misunderstanding deserves a little dive into God's doctrines....

In the first place, we are children of Deity. The soul of man is born of God. Our spiritual heritage is that of loving truth and good. Even though we are living away from Him now, yearnings to follow God are "still deep in our souls". (2) 

God's perfect plan was for us, His spirit children, to come to earth and receive a physical body. This body of ours is a wonderful gift.  It is the temple of our eternal spirit come from God.  Some believe that a body is a liability and that we bow to its desires, but this is not true. Because we have a physical body, we are MORE like our Heavenly Father, not less. (3)

The Fall brought us into a world that is "natural"-- meaning that there is opposition from an adversary who hates God's plan and covets our bodies.  Because of this antagonism, there are opportunities for us to sin, but don't forget, also boundless opportunity for good.  While temptation makes our bodies vulnerable to or subject to temptations of the flesh, that vulnerability does not define children of God.

I am uncomfortable with the erroneous idea that our trial in life is to be ever-taming and keeping at bay what some say are inborn desires of our physical bodies. That sounds like the description of an animal, not a child of God. 

We must remember that "Jesus was also a Being of flesh and spirit, but yielded not to temptation." (4)  It was never designed that man should naturally do and love evil. (5) Instead, it is natural for the child of God to be influenced by the Spirit of God. (6)

Our bodies are not some force ruling over us that we can't beat-- there is always choice. We are agents unto ourselves. (7) We can decide how to respond to temptations and inclinations.  A boorish man has nurtured and coddled the raw and unworthy.  But, the polite and respectful man has cultured what is clean.  "It is just as easy to keep the commandments of God as it is to break them." (8)  "The natural man is the earthy man who has allowed rude animal passions to overshadow his spiritual inclinations." (9) "The natural man is a man who is functioning without the Spirit or the Holy Ghost". (10)  

Our bodies are so precious that they were bought with a price-- the sinless suffering and death of Jesus Christ. (11)  And "...every appetite, desire, propensity, and impulse of the natural man may be overcome by and through the His Atonement." (12)

Every single one.

So there.  It is worse than misguided to just accept that men talk this way and act this way. 

Men of God do not. 


So that begs a look at one more response to the candidate and his video-- "Hey, He apologized.  Everyone makes mistakes".

For which I respond with all sorts of grateful knowing, "Yes. We do make mistakes", and I am grateful to know that because of the precious sacrifice of Jesus Christ, woman and men can change.  And I am thankful that who we were, doesn't have to be who we are. (13) 

Let God engage in the repentance process of individuals and, Him alone, be the judge of ultimate salvation. But, I do have a responsibility.  And that is to judge the things around me everyday so that I know how to act. (14)  When entering the polls to choose the leader of the free world, I have to ask myself to consider the character of someone who has those kinds of unrefined and immoral thoughts and words.

(1) Jan Morgan
(2) Jeffrey Holland, "Christ and the New Covenant", pg 205-7
(3) "The Sanctity of the Body", Susan Tanner, GC Oct 2005
(4) DTodd Christofferson, "That They May Be One in Us". GC Apr 2002   (Mosiah 15:5)
(5) Brigham Young, J of D, 9:305
(6) Brigham Young, J of D 6:330
(7) D and C 58:28
(8) Joseph Fielding Smith, New Era, July 1972, page 23
(9) Spencer W Kimball, "Ocean Currents and Family Influences", Ensign, June 1984
(10) Spencer W Kimball, "Ocean Currents and Family Influences", Ensign, June 1984
(11) 1 Corinthians 6:20
(12) We Believe In Being Chaste", DAB, GC Apr 2013
(13) Elder Renlund, April 2015 GC talk, "Latter-day Saints Keep on Trying"
(14) Dallin Oaks, "Judge Not and Judging, Mar 1998, BYU Devotional

Friday, April 8, 2016

Marriage = The Work of The Father Continued

I am shoulder-deep in thinking about marriage and family right now. For nearly one year I have been working on our Stake's strengthening the family fair, "Family Strong",  with the objective of sharing with our Stake and her communities why Latter-day Saints "do" family.  As a result, the societal goal of strong families has rested heavy on my mind and heart.

A scripture has really stood out to me doctrinally: "...it is the opportunity and responsibility of wives (and husbands) to 'multiply and replenish the earth...(and) to fulfill the promise which was given by (The) Father"... (to exalt) His children."  He continues, "That they might bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of The Father continued." (132:62)

Let's explore, "herein is the work of The Father continued".  

We know that God's work is the immortality and eternal life of His children (Moses 1:39) and in the scripture above, God stated that the work of family is to continue His saving work.  This makes family a loving, teaching, caring bridge, from God's arms premortally to God's arms eternally.  These relationships are covenanted partnerships to love and care for each other, back into the presence of the Lord.

Now I think most people get this in regards to children that come to a union.  But what of the union itself? 

It's a no-brainer question. Marriage is the foundation of the family and the responsibilities to each other are the same.  The civil marriage ceremony gets it right-- a couple is to love, honor, cherish through sickness and health and whatever befalls it, for the entirety of life.  And beyond that, the Gospel teaches that "...marriages are meant to last forever." ("In Praise of Those Who Save", Elder Uchtdorf, GC April 2016)

Vows have purpose in contracting a man and a women into the saving work of God. That means that a married person's first concern in life is the care and happiness of his spouse.  At the altar we promise our most sincere efforts for safe delivery of that partner back to our Heavenly Father.

This idea breathes new meaning for me into Dietrich Bonhoeffer's "Letters and Papers from Prison" where he states that: “Marriage is more than your love for each other. … In your love you see only the heaven of your own happiness, but in marriage you are placed at a post of responsibility towards the world and mankind. Your love is your own private possession, but marriage is more than something personal—it is a status, an office.” (as quoted by, "Why Marriage, Why Family?", Elder Christofferson, GC April 2015)

You see, your happiness and even your own "private possession of love" belongs to you, but marriage is different.  In the marital covenant you are standing at a post of responsibility, in a status or office to that spouse.  You are the guardian of their feelings, comfort, and care.  You are like a soldier at the castle's walls defending and protecting your spouse. You are the servant caring for needs and being ever solicitous.  You are the garden staff making life beautiful. You are, in every unselfish way, continuing the work of The Father for your beloved.

The scriptures share descriptions of what a couple aspires to and owes to one another:

Genesis 2:18 "It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him." Genesis 2:24 "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."
D and C 42:22 "Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her and none else."
1 Corinthians 11:11 "Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord."
Ephesians 5:25,28 "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself;  For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh; let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband."


It is good to remember that marriages are a "faith-based work" -- meaning that we go into it, quite probably naive, but with a heart full of hope in Christ. In times of trouble, we seem to think that we were promised a healthy, long life of happiness and security with a best friend.  No.  What we were promised was a probationary state.  What we were promised was an opportunity to prove, test, refine, and sanctify a marriage relationship so that it will last into the eternities-- celestially.

Elder Jensen said, "None of us knows when we marry what life will bring in terms of health challenges, financial setbacks, or even transgressions. Giving ourselves to one another in an eternal marriage is an unconditional giving of the whole person for the whole journey. In an eternal marriage, the thought of ending what began with a covenant between God and each other simply has little place. When challenges come and our individual weaknesses are revealed, the remedy is to repent, improve, and apologize, not to separate or divorce. When we make covenants with the Lord and our eternal companion, we should do everything in our power to honor the terms. (Marlin K. Jensen, “A Union of Love and Understanding,” Ensign, Oct. 1994, 47)

Elder Packer confirmed, "Marriage is not without trials of many kinds. These tests forge virtue and strength. The tempering that comes in marriage and family life produces men and women who will someday be exalted." (Boyd K. Packer, “Marriage,” Ensign, May 1981, 13)

Marriage trouble and divorce is rooted in selfishness.  It is when one or both spouses have taken their eyes off of the care of their partner and have turned them squarely to themselves. The common justifications are me-centered: "I'm not happy anymore.  I haven't been happy for a while.  I don't love you anymore."

Whoa, slow down, Buster.  You promised.

"When one accepts the conditions and obligations of this eternal partnership, he must realize that failure here is almost total failure. Whatever his successes may be in other fields of activity, if a man fails to discharge the obligations imposed by the eternal covenant, the appalling penalty will be the loss of celestial glory, accompanied by responsibility for the losses sustained by those with whom he made the contract and for whom he is responsible." (Hugh B. Brown, “The LDS Concept of Marriage,” Ensign, Jan. 1972, 60)

One might ask, what happens when one partner is still in it, but the spouse is giving up?  I don't know.  It's hard.  But my gut is that you should view it in the same way that you would a prodigal, rebellious child.  Stay. Try. Turn on your total unselfishness, even though you are wounded, too.  Look outward.  Be committed.  Take care of them.  Show them love. Extend mercy.  Be patient.  Take the long view.  Wait it out.  Repent of your own weakness.  Pour on compassion and caring.  Trust that God loves this partnership more than you do and He will help.  Remember that don't have to do it alone.  Marriage is the great trifecta--You will always have Christ.

I watched a video on the Internet recently where the woman was speaking with candor about a husband's trouble.  Paraphrased, she said, "If I leave, then he deals with this alone, or else the problem transfers to another."  I heard in her words, "I can’t do that because he is my covenanted duty and responsibility."   I heard her imply that she felt the obligation to care for him and not delegate that to anyone else.  That during the time that he was weak, she saw herself as the custodian of their covenant.

This is so beautiful to me.  I think it is realistic. There might possibly be times when one carries the covenant, and times when the other takes a turn.  But they do it with this as the goal-- an eventual heaven with two healthy adults whose number one objective is the happiness and salvation of each other.  Marriage equals the work of The Father continued.  We have got to hold on tight.

Thursday, October 29, 2015

Saving Marriage

I have found myself fascinated  by the World Congress of Families that is going on in Salt Lake City this week.  I've read reports and can confidently say that it is shaping up to be a motherlode of precious gems .  The speakers are working their way all around and through the issues that both strengthen and threaten family.  They have been compelling in their defense of God's views on men and women, masculine and feminine, husbands and wives, marriages and child-rearing. In the opening remarks of this Congress, Elder Ballard encouraged people, "We must rally all the support we can to strengthen and protect our...families."  With that call to action in mind, I would like to stand on my little "blog-soap box" for a bit.

The World Congress of Families is an "international, interfaith conference designed to support life, traditional marriage, and the "natural family," made up of a husband, a wife and children." (1)  I am grateful for this gathering because it re focuses our efforts to stand FOR something.  This strikes me as a more powerful place to be than either standing passive, or opposing something else.  So much of late has been said about saving traditional marriage from it's imitations. But, I am stirred up today thinking that perhaps in all of that non-traditional marital chaos, we are being distracted. 

Yes.  Distracted.

I mean, I'm wondering if we have been so worried about defending God's marriage from it's counterfeits, that maybe we have collectively forgotten that traditional marriage has been in awful peril for several decades, and not wholly in freefall from it's impersonators.

Stick with me.

All this thinking started with a read and re-read of Bruce C Hafen's  “Marriage, Family Law, and the Temple,” which was a speech re-published in the August 2015 Ensign.  (2)

In legal brilliance, Mr. Hafen shows how a series of Court rulings starting in the 1960's and 70's have progressively taken marriage from a "relatively permanent social institution" that is the "key to a stable continuing society" to a "temporary, private relationship, terminable at will".

"US Courts began to interpret family laws in ways that gave individual interests a much higher priority than the social interests (of married parents raising their ...children together)."  Which means to me that society, in an attempt to be "fair" to individualism, has progressively and probably inadvertently given individuals permission to be all-out selfish.  Bruce Hafen asserted that these rulings "spawned new legal theories about equality, individual rights and liberation" and have "knocked the legal and social system off of balance".

Off balance?  You bet. 

In the US today, 50% of first marriages end in divorce, and 60% of second marriages. 40% of children are born out of wedlock and single parent homes have increased 4X since 1960. (3) And these marriage statistics don't even account for the saturation of co-habitation and it's commitment-less, promise-less, covenant-less instability. Dragging along after those staggering numbers is the collateral damage, like child depression having increased 1000%. (3)  And adults are not unscathed. This is totally unscientific, but my observation is that those divorced and divorcing are racked.

Elder D Todd Christofferson cited such a compelling essay by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a German theologian born in 1906. (4)  It trumpets out so clearly that marriage is not wholly about an individual and his happiness.  It is not even exclusive to two individuals and their love for one another. Listen:

“Marriage is more than your love for each other. … In your love you see only your two selves in the world, but in marriage you are a link in the chain of the generations, which God causes to come and to pass away to his glory... In your love you see only the heaven of your own happiness, but in marriage you are placed at a post of responsibility towards the world and mankind. Your love is your own private possession, but marriage is more than something personal—it is a status, an office. Just as it is the crown, and not merely the will to rule, that makes the king, so it is marriage, and not merely your love for each other, that joins you together in the sight of God and man. … So love comes from you, but marriage from above, from God.” (5)

So what does that mean?   

It says, in my book, that the World Congress has legitimate permission to plead with humanity to save traditional marriage.  And that starts with the 99% of men and women who have entered into marriage already, clinging to that promise that they made in front of witnesses.  They without, compulsion, promised that they would love and cherish.  They took on that "responsibility to the world and mankind" to perpetuate stability in our societies.  They agreed that the union was more than "personal" or self-serving, nor only for "your own happiness", but instead an "office" to create a union that was concerned about others (a spouse, children, a community, a world) above personal-autonomy.  It was a promise that with life's bumps and skids, or even a partner or children who disappoint, that the promise holds. 

How is that possible?  Because the marriage is God's, and He is everlastingly a partner, which adds peace, healing, forgiveness, long-suffering, mercy and joy to the union.

Marriage partners need the long view.  Statistics from americanvalues.org say that 50% of divorced people wish that they had never ended their marriage. That figure ought to haunt us.  Also, "...among those who had rated their marriages as “very unhappy,” nearly 80% said they were happily married five years later. These were not bored or dissatisfied whiners. They had endured serious problems, including alcoholism, infidelity, verbal abuse, emotional neglect, depression, illness, and work and money troubles." (6)

Divorce splices you as your conflicted psyche tries to reconcile times of happy history and great love, with present hurt and hate.  It leaves you wounded.  It leaves a spouse damaged.  It leaves children confused, stripped of security, and bisected.  Hurting, injured families equals impaired, unsound societies. 

Now, this is where I insert deep compassion and love.  While I think that it needs to be possible to talk about the ideal with great passion, we also have to acknowledge that there are always exceptions.  There is no judgement here.  I know that I am ill-qualified to jump inside and understand any relationship but my own.  It is most important that we care about each other in our pains and disappointments. Family relationships are work.

Marriage is intentional exertion. It is chivalrous and benevolent. It is like Prince Charming and Cinderella whose polestar is building in each other worth and happiness. It must be full of forgiveness and mercy. Marriage is a daily vow to loyalty.  It is offering your spouse the boundlessly empowering security that oozes out of a commitment to stay--- no matter what.

Recently, Richard and Linda Eyre wrote an article in the Deseret News saying that, in marriage, commitment, in and of itself, is a powerful ally. That there is “magic in synergy” where the determination of longevity makes the marriage greater than it’s parts-- meaning the day to day.

“We knew of a very successful coach who seemed to be able, every season, to create a winning team out of mediocre talent. When asked how he did it, he said, “It’s all about the commitment.” Commitment, in his mind, meant loyalty, teamwork and unwavering determination. Total commitment, he said, was much more rare than talent. Commitment meant you never gave up, no matter what the score, no matter how long the odds. Commitment meant you cared more about the team than about yourself. To that coach, courage, risk, devotion and determination were all manifest in the concept of commitment. It was what got you through tough situations. It was what freed you from doubt and from second-guessing. …It can be the same in marriage.”

The power of commitment?  Wow.  Yes.  Loyalty. Unwavering determination. No matter the score or the odds. Caring more for the team than for yourself.  Devotion. 

What the World needs is to recommit to marriage.  It needs millions of two-determined-partners willing to be true no matter what obstacles arise.  It needs couples that believe that together, they have the ability and the responsibility to bring stability to our society. 

Saving marriage is the heart of humanity.


(1) http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2015/October/World-Congress-Backs-Traditional-Marriage-Natural-Family/
(2) Bruce C Hafen's  “Marriage, Family Law, and the Temple,” which was a speech originally delivered at the J. Reuben Clark Law Society Annual Fireside January 31, 2014
(3) as cited by Bruce C Hafen's  “Marriage, Family Law, and the Temple,” which was a speech originally delivered at the J. Reuben Clark Law Society Annual Fireside January 31, 2014
(4) as quoted by D Todd Christofferson, "Why Marriage, Why Family", General Conference, April 2015
(5) Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison, ed. Eberhard Bethge (1953), 42–43.
(6) http://winteryknight.com/2014/08/20/new-study-50-percent-of-divorced-people-wish-they-had-never-ended-their-marriage/
(7)  Richard and Linda Eyre, September 15, 2015,  http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865636842/The-magic-of-total-commitment.html

Wednesday, February 11, 2015

Courts of Love

My newsfeed on Facebook is all lit up by news of a North Logan man's excommunication from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. News like this gives me a heavy feeling in my chest. Even though I don't know the guy, I miss him.  I feel an "empty chair".
ugh.

One of the discussions that I remember from my youth, was a lesson on Church Discipline where I was taught that the process was a "Court of Love".  That phrase has stuck with me for all these years and, especially on a morning like this one, I believe it is the absolute truth.

Let me explain.

I was teaching the kids in Senior Primary last Sunday and we took a few minutes to understand the words that they sang out so powerfully, "I belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  I know who I am.  I know God's Plan.  I'll follow Him in Faith."

I drew a picture for them on the board that looked like this:

To become a member of this Church, one must present himself to a Bishop, who is a Judge in Israel.  You declare testimony, you witness to your worthiness and you state your intention to walk in obedience to God for the rest of your life. The Bishop judges your worthiness and sincerity and signs his name next to yours on a recommend witnessing that he believes that you intend to keep your promise.  Then you are able to be baptized, which is an outward sign of your inward commitment.   This same process is repeated when making all of the covenants of the Gospel.

At this point, one is now responsible for submitting and following and keeping the promise that was made.  One is also responsible to halt or turn or backtrack, and ask for forgiveness when he falls short.  It is a true gift from Christ to be able to repent, become clean through the Atonement, and then continue on the covenant path.

So back to that phrase, why is the cancellation of that covenant through Church Discipline called a "Court of Love"?

A person who has violated their covenants through serious sin or apostasy meets with a Judge in Israel and the person is invited to repent.  A Bishop or a Stake President will remind the person of promises made and will help set a path of return.  They will meet with you, counsel you, cry with you, rejoice with you.  I'm told that it is usually an unparalleled outpouring of strength, unity, patience, love and compassion as the Atonement of Jesus Christ is applied.

But, over time, if the person is unrepentant, willful, and rebellious, then the next kind and loving thing to do is to release him from the covenants.  The ordinances that the person performed to seal the deal on promises he made with God and in front of witnesses, are cancelled.  It's called "excommunication", which sounds scary, but it has compassion and mercy at it's very core.  No longer is the person responsible for the covenants he made.  It is as if he never made them.

The option for repenting is still there.  The hand of the Lord is still outstretched.  A repentant, humble person can be re-baptized-- making a new covenant.  But until he is ready, it serves him best to be released from his promises and thus, his accountability to God for what he is not willing to keep. 

Now while he is free of obligation, it is also true that he no longer qualifies for priceless blessings.  That blessing-part is why I feel so sick to my stomach this morning.  To me, it sounds awful to be cut off.

But, ultimately, if a person chooses that path, it is best to release him from his covenant.  There's no element of surprise.  It doesn't come out of the blue. The person is not left wondering why. And, the way back is clearly marked.  I hope that that becomes the desire for Mr Dehlin and for ALL those who choose this diversion.  I hope that they get homesick and return.

It is also good to remember that there is no trophy for the Judge.  The process for the priesthood holder presiding is heart-wrenching.  I don't know him either, but I have a prayer in my heart today for President King of that North Logan Stake and all who surround him.

In the hub bub of news and the spirited debate on social media, I feel the desire to state that Church discipline equals love.

Sunday, September 14, 2014

Is There a Word for That?

My Dad recommended a talk by Sharon Eubank, the Director of LDS Charities, that was given a week ago at a FAIR conference.  ("This is a Woman's Church", by Sharon Eubank, August 12, 2014)  FAIR is a group of Mormon apologists, or folks on a mission to defend our LDS-ness and our doctrine to the world.  They asked Sister Eubank, a smart, powerful, successful, mid-50's, single, impressive woman, to address some recent Mormon news-- the Ordain Women movement.  The talk was beautiful.  I have read it many times and listened to it, too.  The ideas have been rolling around in my head since last Friday.

There is material in the talk for several posts here on this blog, so this just might be a series, but the first I want to discuss is this story and an idea from Sister Eubank:

"..As I want to talk about these kinds of things (women and their role in the Church), I find that I don’t have the vocabulary. There are no terms to talk about the things I want to talk about. I had a friend. She was an elderly woman. She was from Estonia. She was translating the Book of Mormon into the Estonian language, even while it was still behind the Iron Curtain. And she had dictionaries, and she had grown up under Communist rule and she was struggling with how to talk about certain terms in there because they had been stripped out of the Estonian language by the Communists. They had taken those words and removed them from practice and speech and from books and there were no terms anymore to talk about priesthood, for example. The words didn’t exist for that and she really struggled with “how do I translate the Book of Mormon without these concepts?” And if you don’t have language, you don’t have an understanding of the roles.  I think a really good example of this is: we don’t know what to call a mission president’s wife. And we don’t know how to describe the role that she plays. We know in our gut that there is a role, and that it is indispensable and that nobody else is filling it if she isn’t there, but we don’t even know what to call that...so much of our language is missing because we don’t know what to call things."

I am fascinated by the idea that our LDS lexicon does not have all the words we need to describe what a woman does. Julie B Beck gave us "Motherheart", which is a wonderful word to describe the feelings bumping around in our chests that provoke us to minister to God's children.  Sister Eubank mentioned "Temple Matron" as a good one, too.  But still, it isn't quite comprehensive.  I mean, we all understand "Bishop", but what word describes "The Bishop's Wife".  We know what it means to be a Stake President, but how do you capture in a concept the gal he is married to.

I agree with Sister Eubank that our vocabulary as a Church does not perfectly include words that can describe very well the marvelous roles of women.  And it's not because women don't have roles.  I feel like this Church uses me and challenges me to grow through the things I am asked to do. (We'll talk about that more in the next posts.)  It also develops me by the things Greg, because we are a "Divine Pair", is asked to do.  I believe that it is all fair and it is all the way that God is working on both halves of the whole in Supreme brilliance.

And truly, most of the time it doesn't really matter about that word-thing. I mean, I know what I do and I know what is expected of me and I want to give that freely without title.  But if you (or me) were struggling to know who you were and what value you brought to the equation, then a word just might help.  And Sister Eubank offering this as one reason why the Ordain Women movement exists, is just really interesting to me.  In summary, it's not because women don't have key roles in God's Plan and in our Church, it is because there are not words in our Mormon dictionary for what we do.

So I have given it some thought.  OK, a lot of thought.  And I am not quite there yet, but I am going to share my initial "words" for the women of this Church and probably women everywhere--

* Patriot of Kith and Kin
Because "Patriot" means:  "...a person who loves, supports, and defends his or her (little, personal, homemade) country and its interests with devotion."  And I think that this describes the altruistic reason why we do things and it captures my feelings of allegiance and fervor.

* Director of the DEMA
(which stands for Domestic Emergency Management Agency, which is like our national FEMA.  Ha.)
This title is because I do the pre-work and am the pre-arranger of life-saving preparations for impending storms. I am in charge of buttoning down the hatches to keep us all safe.  And I am the rescue arm when there's a man down or when one is stranded on his roof surrounded in flood.  There I am with my motor boat and ladder.  I work prevention.  I work clean up.

* Editor in Chief
Which means that I boil down the kids and the home into a palatable, concise reduction and serve it to Greg at the end of the day so that he has a taste of the doings the family.  This way he feels part of the unit even when away. I am a colander, or a sieve or a filter catching what is important.  I am also the "study it out" arm of our companionship on things pertaining to the family.  I dig and research, make the calls, gather the info and go to him with a presentation, of sorts.  Then, quickly, we can make a final decision together. I also dream up the story of our tribe, work it, then write down our family history.

* Grand Oversee-er
This one means that my world is a great, big umbrella.  I see what's in front of me, and I see what is away from me and I try to decipher it all, take care of it all, and keep it all collected under one eye.  I know where each member of the family is and where they need to be next.  I work Saturday activity spreadsheets and tricky calendaring.  I also work to see the kids' potential in a big picture, keep track of it, and teach to it.

* Family Foreman
This title means that my work is to create a home with a total environment of support, love, and order-- a house of prayer, fasting, faith, learning, glory, order, a house of God. I clean and organize. I orchestrate work. I charge a crew. My finger is on things inside and out.  Test me on where the red football is, the Nike jacket, the iPod charger.  I know.  And I just painted furniture, so I get bonus points on the literal this week.

* Matron of Teflon
Which title means that with mothers, things don't stick to you.  You can be hated and freaky and crazy.  You can be pulling out your hair and pounding your head, but you love anyway.  Because when you see that little person lying with closed eyes and tucked into a puffy bed of your making, all you remember is that they are your boy and you love them with every molecule of your existence.  You just can't resist pushing back the hair from their brow and kissing their little heads.  They push, and you love on.  They get rascal-y, and you love on.  You let things go.  You forgive quickly and generously.  You love no matter what because every one needs a mother who thinks that they are wonderful and God has endowed you with the ability to be that for them.

* Resident Rector
This word because I am a religionist who is in charge of a congregation that we call our family.  I iron shirts and keep Sunday clothes clean. I load the family mini-van for Sunday meetings, youth activities and Early Morning Seminary.  I lead my congregates in praying and studying. I try to have something spiritual brewing in my head so that I draw things back to the inspiring in conversation.  My greatest desire is to facilitate things so that faith can grow.  And sometimes I kneel at the bedside of reluctants with New Era stories and scriptures and words from the prophets, night after night.  And I pray over my little flock.  A lot.

So there is my first attempt to try to put caption on unnamed woman-ish concepts.  Thanks, Sister Eubank for inspiring me to look for "words". I feel empowered.

Tuesday, June 3, 2014

A Little Story about Tomato Plants....and Kids

About Tomato Plants--
I went to Matkins Nursery a couple of weeks ago and bought Creole tomatoes-- a Louisiana variety that is supposed to love the heat and humidity. I have been very excited and have big plans for them-- salsa and salads and BLT's and fresh slices. I picture a big yield.  I'm a little conflicted on where to plant them though.  My garden only gets morning sun so that means my harvest is always small.  That is not acceptable to me with these fancy plants, and I have been trying to get the courage to put them in a pot where they can gather optimal sun.

While I was thinking about where to plant them, the tomatoes were not happy in a paper box on the driveway.  They were hard to take care outside in their little plastic, root-bound home and they ended each day thirsty and hanging their heads droopy.  I brought them into my kitchen sick and they have been there for more than a week.  They seem to be happy-- all taut and upright.  It is a great, safe place where I can keep tabs on them and monitor them carefully. I have discovered that they are a lot easier to take care of captive under a faucet then they were outside in the elements.

I wish that I could just keep them in my kitchen sink, but I know that they will never produce me tomatoes there.  They will get tired of living in that little carton.  There is nowhere for the roots to go. They need a chance to spread out. And my plants will miss the sunshine.   I know that the best place for them will be sun-bathing in a pot on my deck, but, I can't get over the risks. There's lots of uncertainty in a planter pot, and it sure feels snug to have them under my watchful care.

About Kids--
I went visiting teaching the other day and we discussed an April 2014 Elder Eyring quote from General Conference, "Never force righteousness because righteousness must be chosen."  I think that there was consensus among the ladies that it is scary to watch our children make choices.  That sounds really silly because agency is at the heart of God's Plan for our probation, but it doesn't feel that simple.  It feels risky. What if they don't follow your example?  What is they don't heed your teaching and your urging?  What if they miss something because they opted out? What if they make a bad choice? Pride...will that make me look like a bad parent?  What if they fail? They could wreck their life! Shouldn't we be there to catch before a stumble, to divert trouble, and to save them from themselves?

Shouldn't we just keep them in our "kitchen sinks"?

We can't.

I don't mean that we stop teaching, urging and inspiring.  That we check out, become hands off, or that somehow this idea releases us from our familial disciplining duties.  But, what I am learning is that we need to trust that our children have their own conscience.  That not only do they have our love and our good advice, they have the light of Christ and the Holy Ghost's promptings. That God sends angels into their lives.  That He pricks their hearts with words, teachings, music, and experiences just like we know He does for us.  That even more than they tell us, they know much and are learning much.  That they have their own little thinkers and are their very own persons.  That they come to us at birth with character and spirit that is well developed. That there are some things that they will just have to learn by doing, or by not doing.

I admit to fretting sometimes....seeing disappointing choices as a hopeless slippery slope....not wanting children to choose anything that may look like the first step to indifference or worse...feeling, quite incorrectly, like you have partial ownership in a child's chance at life.

Walking in faith means setting aside these fears.  It is trusting that God's Plan comes with scary, temporary risks, but ends in mandatory personal growth and development.  It is in believing in a long view which includes a marvelous "harvest" because of beautiful, Divine redemption and salvation.

Today is the day I plant outside.