knowyourneighbor

Do unto others

Yes, there's the P.T. Barnum school of thought "say whatever you like about me, just spell my name right".

But because being a member of The Church of Jesus Christ is such an important part of my identity, it is difficult for me not to be hurt by religious barbs. Conversely, when people are kind, I am happy and grateful, as was the case with John Bogert's editorial this morning.

Link: Why can't personal beliefs stay personal in politics?.

Bogert begins the article referring to the questions that arose about JFK's Catholicism, and Bogert's own childhood discomfort in the face of bigotry. He then writes:

"Some people and more than a few commentators seem to fear Mitt Romney, who happens to be a clean-cut member of a Christian sect that doesn't allow boozing, drug use or even coffee drinking. Plus they raise unfailingly polite kids who, unlike most of our rotten offspring, willingly spend a couple of years of their lives getting doors slammed in their faces for the faith."

In addition to my gratitude, there are two key takeaways:

1) Mr. Bogert refers to a man by the name of Ken Driggs who Bogert describes as "one of the smartest guys I know and a devout Latter-day Saint." As Ammon taught, when people know Latter-day Saints (it seems especially in small numbers), misconceptions often dissipate.

2) Perhaps more importantly, because of Bogert's experience as a 10 year-old boy, he was able to step into the shoes of Latter-day Saints, and defend, even endorse the good people that we are trying to be.

Indeed, despite a potential backlash, he has reached across the aisle.

So here are my questions:

Do you and I know enough of the goodness of our neighbors and community that we would feel compelled to endorse, even defend them?

In other words, as we have had Mr. Bogert do unto us, can we do unto others?

The Five Minute Challenge

Kara Hess, community relations for St. Louis Missouri Stake Public Affairs, is on the advisory board of the Grace Baptist Church’s Teach Them to Fish program, designed to teach self-sufficiency to inner-city youth and families.

How did she learn about the organization?

I read about it in the newspaper.

Bishop Wallace called Reverend Scott of Central Baptist Church when their roof collapsed from a recent storm. He offered our ward building as a place of worship for the congregation until their building could be repaired. The Reverend had already accepted another invitation, but he expressed heartfelt gratitude for Bishop Wallace’s offer. And they discussed meeting to learn more about each other’s respective ministries.

How did Bishop Wallace know about Central Baptist’s disaster?

I read about it in the newspaper.

I am not boasting, but making a point. Reading the newspaper can be one of the easiest ways to learn about opportunities to enjoy the fellowship of our community.

Still, many Latter-day Saints tell me they resist reading the newspaper.

I hear two arguments:

1) “The newspaper reporting is biased and does not reflect my views.”

Yes, it may be. But I still find useful information about what is going on in the community and I become inspired about how Latter-day Saints can help.

And, as I learn the opinions and views of others I see another’s perspective, enabling me be a more effective servant and teacher.

Consider Ammon. He learned King Lamoni’s view of God - or the “Great Spirit”, as he says - and was able to build understanding based on the King’s experience. But Ammon first learned what the King already understood.

President Gordon B. Hinckley reads five newspapers each day. We have heard him, in conference talks, quote stories that he has read in the newspaper. 

Mike Wallace, reporter for 60 Minutes television news show, does not consider President Hinckley to be “stodgy”.  I interpret his remark as suggesting that for a man of many years, President Hinckley is not dull or stuck on the past, but knows current affairs and trends – in short, he’s “with it”. And this may be one reason why President Hinckley can relate to all ages and cultures.

Is it because he reads the newspaper?

I believe it can only help expand his capacity to serve.

2) “I don’t have time to read the newspaper.”

Neither do I.

So I don’t take much time. I take, most days, only 5 minutes. I scan the headlines and read what is of most interest to me and get a general feel for the top stories. I skip or skim the sports section – for lack of interest – but I pay attention if our local team is heading to the World Series.

When I saw the article about Central Baptist’s roof collapse, I read it. Then I made a quick call to Bishop Wallace who followed-up. It took only 5 minutes and the rest, as they say, is history.

If a story captures my interest and I don’t have time to read, I cut it out and stuff it in my purse for downtimes in my day, such as waiting in the doctor's office.

Reading the newspaper.

I was not always on board with that idea. But I am a convert now. If I do nothing else all day to enjoy the fellowship of my community, I at least read the newspaper.

Take the 5 minute challenge, if you haven’t already. Subscribe to the newspaper or read it online. You’ll be surprised how connected you will feel!

Mourning Virginia Tech

I thought it was just the weather; we'd had four straight days of rain.

But when I read Kat Duffey's poem late that evening, I realized I was also mourning the loss of life in Virginia.

When we suffer trauma or loss, in order to heal, we need to share our story, or bear witness, of that loss.

My profound thanks to Kat for writing and sharing her poem "the moment". For in doing so, she has given voice to our own stories of loss. And as we mourn together, we too shall be comforted.

the moment

for Virginia Tech…for 9-11

what is this part of us
that yearns
to “mourn with those that mourn?”

that aches to touch the
pain
of so many
so far away
whom we do not know?

it stretches forth
from us –
a silken thread of
connection
weaving a cloth of sympathy
to help absorb the tears
of those who were
closer
than
we.

we stand back –
we dry our empathy –
we draw a sigh of relief…
“there but for the grace…” we say –
feeling safe.
feeling spared.

for the moment.

Catholics and Mormons on Common Ground

Is there really common ground to be found amongst the various religions?

Absolutely.

In the New York Times Magazine article Keeping the Faith, reporter Russell Shorto outlines Pope Benedict's central theme:

Secularism may be one of the great developments in history, but the secularism that holds sway in much of the West — that is, in Western Europe — is flawed; it has a bug in its programming. The mistaken conviction that reason and faith are two distinct realms has weakened Europe and has brought it to the verge of catastrophic collapse.

Note how similar the Pope's views are to President Faust's pronouncement in General Conference of October 2005.

Secularism is expanding in much of the world today. Secularism is defined as “indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations.” Secularism does not accept many things as absolutes. Its principal objectives are pleasure and self-interest. Often those who embrace secularism have a different look about them. As Isaiah observed, “The show of their countenance doth witness against them.”

There may be only c. 13 million Mormons, but there are over 1 billion Catholics. Isn't it wonderful to know that "they that be with us" in stemming the tide of secularism are far more than we had supposed?

Giving a face to our faith

Relationships create the environments that allow humans to extend their circles of caring. Mary Pipher

One of my friends (I'll call her Emily) told me of a recent conversation with one of her dearest friends (I'll call her Thea). Emily and Thea's daughters, both eight-years-old, became fast friends while in kindergarten, and their mothers soon followed suit. Thea, originally from northern Europe, had been an exchange student in New England some years ago. Now married to a fellow European, and having settled in New England, she remains in contact with her host family parents whom she affectionately refers to as mom and dad.

As Emily and Thea have grown closer over the years they have often spoken of religion; Emily is LDS and Thea is Catholic. Through their friendship, they have shared their beliefs with one another. Thea attended Emily's daughter's baptism, bringing her roses to celebrate the occasion, and in turn Emily attended Thea's daughter's first communion.

At Christmastime, Thea's family was visiting her host family, and as conversations often do, theirs turned to politics and the possible presidential contenders. As Thea and her mother spoke of the possible candidates, her mom commented, "Mitt Romney's a Mormon. Mormons are so weird. How could he even think of running?"

The purpose of this blog is not to promote presidential candidates, but to speak of the positive ramifications of extending ourselves beyond the comfort of our Mormon faith. Which in the case of Thea and Emily was at least two-fold. Not only have Thea and Emily and their daughters developed friendships that make the world feel a safer place, when the LDS church was innocently maligned, Thea immediately came to its defense, telling her host mother that Mormons are good people, not weird at all.

And yes there's more.

Several weeks after Thea's Christmas visit, her host mother called her, and shared that she had recently read an article in the press which explained what Mormons believe; she had learned that we not only have a strong focus on the family, we are also Christians.

Her mom ended by saying, "Maybe I could vote for a Mormon after all."

What can we learn from Thea and Emily's story?

1. Emily and Thea became friends because they were able to find common ground, which was initially that their daughters were friends. While Emily did share a Book of Mormon with Thea at one point, when Thea and her husband chose not to learn more, nothing changed in their friendship. Their love and respect for one another extends to supporting one another in their respective religious traditions.

2. If people don't have a point of reference in real experience, the discussion about our faith is academic, even clinical, and more likely than not our detractors will have the final word.

3. If these same individuals can put a face to our faith, especially as a result of true friendship which involves inviting one another into our homes and hearts - our friends will come to our defense when our faith is vilified, because the discussion is no longer academic, it's personal.

4. While the low-touch approach of generating positive press about our faith is certainly important, the high-touch approach is crucial, as we saw in Emily and Thea's experience. For a more in-depth discussion on the high-touch approach, see The Spirit of Ammon.

Thank you Mr. Ellsworth

Each of us is a public affairs chairman. Hugh W. Pinnock

In response to a recent editorial cartoon in Massachusetts Metro-West Daily News, there appeared the following letter to the editor.

“Shame on Dave Granlund; his Wednesday editorial page cartoon was vicious and not at all funny. I worked for a Salt Lake City based high-tech start-up for three years. It was owned by two brothers. They both tithed - large amounts of money. They were active in the Mormon Church - both elders. One resigned from his company to return to missionary service in Africa. And, they both were and are monogamous.

To portray Mormons in general, but Mormons for Romney in particular, as bigamous hayseeds is untrue, egregiously so. Worse, it is an uncalled for insult. Mormons are almost universally courteous. They do not drink, smoke or curse. They are unfailingly polite, and the worst language that I ever heard from the entire company in the three years I worked with them was "drat." Finally, they are monogamous.

Granlund - shame on you. You have betrayed, certainly, your ignorance but, perhaps also, your bias. This cartoon is not funny, it is egregiously vicious.” John Ellsworth, Ashland, Massachusetts

What would I want us to learn (and do) after reading this editorial?

1. Recall what Ammon teaches. Having been befriended by, and worked alongside Mormons, Mr. Ellsworth freely endorsed and defended Mormons to the press and the community.

Do you remember what the servants said when the King inquired about Ammon’s feats: “Whether he be the Great Spirit or a man, we know not: But this much we do know…that he is a friend to the king.” (Alma 18:3)

2. Recommit to a high-touch approach within our communities. John Ellsworth was willing to defend the church, not because of positive press about the church, but because he had worked alongside members of the church and had good experiences with them.

A church-sponsored survey taken in 2002 further underscores the effectiveness of the high-touch approach. Respondents were asked two questions: (1) When you think of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, what do you think? and (2) Does your top-of-mind response generate positive or negative feelings? Of the 8% who had a Mormon acquaintance, nearly 100% had positive feelings.

3. Say thank-you.

How wonderful it would be if the members of the church that live in Ashland sent Mr. Ellsworth a note, or better yet, invited him to one of their homes simply to say thank-you. After all, to a small degree he sacrificed his time and imperiled his reputation on their and our behalf.

They that be with us

And the Lord opened the eyes of the young man…and he saw…the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire. 2 Kings 6:17

Recently my 10-year old son asked me why he and my daughter are the only Mormons in their school (or two-percent of the student body). After explaining that with 2% of the U.S. population being Latter-day Saints, they were accurately represented, I went on to say, There may be only two Mormons, but most of the kids in your school want to be good and do good, just like you do.

That there are many who want to do good here in Massachusetts was clearly evident this past week.

As you may recall, in 2003, the Supreme Judicial Court in Massachusetts ruled that the state Constitution guarantees same-sex couples the right to marry. This ruling was historic, not just because it legalized same-sex marriage, but because it dealt a tremendous blow to religious freedom. While three judges dissented (their socially liberal views notwithstanding) on the grounds that such a momentous decision should be left to the proper legislative and judicial processes, not imposed by judicial fiat, four judges violated the spirit of their appointments by unilaterally reinterpreting the constitutional definition of marriage.

The constitutional end run didn’t stop there. In 2006, when the voters presented the state Legislature with a petition signed by more than 170,000 (3x more than necessary) to put a Protection of Marriage amendment on the ballot, they were constitutionally bound to at least a “yea” or “nay” vote”. Because of successful lobbying by the opposition, this simple yea or nay vote was postponed in May, July, and again in November.

I’ll confess, I didn’t believe the vote would take place on January 2, 2007 either. Had there not been a vote on the last day of this legislative session (or less than 50 “yea” votes), the amendment would have been quashed, taking its proponents back to square one – re-collecting petitions, with the attack on the freedom to say and teach what we believe continuing unabated.

But the vote did happen. And not only did rule of law prevail, the 50 votes needed to advance the measure were obtained: 61 lawmakers voted in favor, 132 against. Now just one more hurdle, a similar yea or nay vote will take place sometime in 2007-2008, before the amendment can appear on the ballot in 2008 for a statewide vote.

What does this have to do with Latter-day Saints – and the seeking out of common ground?

Earlier this year, the First Presidency urged members of the Church to contact our lawmakers in support of the traditional institution of marriage. But with only 25,000 members of the Church in Massachusetts, accounting for 4 out of every 1,000 people, Latter-day Saints alone could not tip the scales in this situation.

Thus, while I am grateful for the handful of Latter-day Saints who have done more than their fair share, and to Senate president Robert Travaglini who displayed considerable courage in calling for a vote, I am especially grateful for the Massachusetts Catholic Conference (the public policy office of the Catholic church in MA) and Massachusetts Family Institute (an organization with strong support from the Evangelical community). Without these religious leaders encouraging their congregants to urge their legislators to put the question to a vote, the vote would not have happened.

Paraphrasing Elder Orson F. Whitney -- God is indeed using more than one people to carry forward His great and marvelous work here on the earth, a work that is far too vast and arduous for one people.