A "Visitors Welcome" Sign I Believe In

On my way to church in girl mode and thinking about what kind of reception I might receive when I passed this church:

Walking into this congregation wouldn't cause me any stress at all.

Thoughts on Queer People as part of the Eternal Family

That word "the" is important! In our church we usually speak of eternal families like there's a bunch of individual ones and we're hoping to turn our earthly family into one of them. But in LDS theology, we are all linked together to form the great family of God.

“For we without them cannot be made perfect; neither can they without us be made perfect.” (D&C 128:18). Everyone talking about being exalted without their LGBTQ+ family members WON’T BE. Our theology is one of inclusion, expansion, and progress. Our work is not done. If same-gender couples and trans people aren’t exalted, NO ONE will be. We cannot be pro-family and anti-LGBTQ+ at same time. 100% of LGBTQ+ people are from families and are part of God's eternal family. 

Being a queer member of the LDS Church means I tense up a little every time I hear the word "family" spoken in church, but it shouldn't be that way. I try to remember that Jesus didn't create a single traditional family during His lifetime. He never performed a marriage. He didn't get married. He didn't have children. Instead, Jesus redefined family by constructing a chosen family. Jesus created a new way of doing family, one which could include everyone.

Unfortunately, this chosen family approach isn't the model of family emphasized in our church, which means all the goals in our church are designed for straight people, and that's not me so it feels like I will never measure up. Our church has a doctrinal gap about what happens to anyone in the afterlife who isn't in a man+woman marriage, including singles and queer people. I believe I'm included in God's plan, just not in the Church's version of God's plan. 

Humans crave to love and be loved, to have companionship, we have a God-given sex drive (this is not meant to dismiss my aro/ace friends, I'm speaking in generalities). How cruel for people to be created this way and then told these things are not for us and we are to shut down these fundamental parts of who we are. We're to be miserable in this life for a shot a happiness after death. Does this sound like the plan of a loving God? Especially when everyone else is offered a win/win proposition to find happiness in this life and it will carry over to the other side. 

I have a feeling that Latter-day Saints are going to be deeply surprised at who all makes it to the Celestial Kingdom, and at how loving our Heavenly Parents are, and how family structures & sealings are going to be far more inclusive than many currently believe. What I know is God is in charge, ultimately God will win. The Godly approach in attitude, whether it’s on matters of race, gender, or sexual orientation, God will win and we will be the one eternal family because that’s the way He’s designed it. We won’t be pushing others away and singling them out as “them.” It’ll be “us.” In the interim, those of us who are deemed “the other,” whatever the “other” is, need to recognize that God will win. 

Religious fundamentalism: The process of isolating out a religion’s core doctrine and investing it with ultimate authority while rejecting all later developments as superfluous or heretical; e.g. Salafi Islam, Karaite Judaism, fundamentalist Christianity.

Religious conservatism: The preservation of a religion and its customs as they have been passed down over the centuries by the clergy and wider society; e.g. traditional Catholicism, Orthodox Judaism, Hindu traditionalism.

Religious modernism: Altering a religious tradition to adapt it to new social, political, cultural, and scientific developments; e.g. modernist Christianity, Reform Judaism, ‘neo-Hinduism’, Islamic modernism.

Fundamentalism and conservatism do not have anything inherently to do with religious politics and likewise modernism does not necessarily mean the removal of religion from public life. I will get to politics soon.

A better way to visualize these than discrete categories might be something like this, sorry for the image quality:

They are processes and tendencies, things you do to your religion, which can absolutely bleed together and coexist.

Today the official position of many religious institutions (e.g. the mainstream Catholic Church or LDS Church) falls somewhere between conservatism and modernism. Conservative and Modern Orthodox Judaism are also good examples – of being willing to bend significantly in some areas while upholding tradition in others.

The Islam of Muammar Gaddafi, the Hinduism of Dayanand Saraswati, and arguably the State Shintō of the Meiji Restoration (though Shintō isn’t scriptural) exemplify a different trend: that sometimes the most effective way to modernize is to fundamentalize. If your goal is to radically reshape the tradition, then stripping it down to the fundamentals can give you more latitude to innovate, and delegitimizes the conservative clergy who have a stake in keeping the tradition the way it is, all while framing your project as in fact the most orthodox.

More commonly though, fundamentalists will make common cause with conservatives. Christian fundamentalists in the U.S., with a few radical exceptions like Reconstructionism, have more or less always considered themselves a type of conservative, and there is a strong resonance between fundamentalists and conservatives in Islam – Saudi Wahhabism takes a fundamentalizing approach in law and culture while upholding ecclesiastical and monarchical power, and was instrumental in the rise of more categorical fundamentalisms like al-Qaeda (though even bin Laden cited medieval scholarship when it suited him). In a similar sense some on the Jewish Orthodox right, especially Kahanists, have a fundamentalizing emphasis on returning to the Torah given at Sinai but remain bound to the later rabbinic tradition – “aspiring fundamentalists within a framework that poses challenges to achieving such a thing” in @boffin-in-training’s words.

I would also mention the tendency for an old fundamentalism to calcify into a new conservatism, almost cyclically. The Protestant Reformation was in many ways a radical fundamentalization of Christianity, but today Protestantism is its own religious tradition with its own conservatives. Again, see Saudi Wahhabi Islam for what Michael Cook calls an “eighteenth-century fundamentalism” that evolved into a “puritanical conservatism”.

Religious politics: Any use of religion for the purposes of modern politics, e.g. political Catholicism, Islamism, Hindu nationalism.

Religious nationalism or ‘religio-nationalism’: Religious politics with primarily nationalist, ethno-territorial concerns linking religious identity with national identity; e.g. most Balkan nationalisms, Hindu nationalism, Buddhist nationalism, the Muslim League, Zionism. There’s a subtle difference between religious identity as national identity, such as in the examples above, versus a national church playing a strong role in cementing an existing secular nationality, e.g. Anglicanism in England or Catholicism in Spain and Poland.

Fascisms which define the ingroup religiously belong here. They are still technically secular and prioritize national and cultural identity above all: the Sangh Parivar has a Muslim wing and the Ustaše even tried to set up their own Orthodox Church.

Religious dominionism or clericalism: Religious politics trying to expand religious control over the government to impose certain values on society, whether in a fundamentalist or conservative (or even modernist) spirit; e.g. Islamism, the Christian right, integral Catholicism, Israel’s Orthodox right. These could be divided, on the model of Salafism, into ‘activist’ or ‘political’ movements which try to win elections within the existing system, and ‘insurgents’ who want to overthrow godless governments and install ones of their own.

Both names have drawbacks: dominionism suggests fully-fledged theocratic rule whereas I mean it much more broadly, while clericalism implies the role of a clergy even though many fundamentalists and modernists are explicitly anti-clerical. Certainly it would seem odd to describe Hassan al-Turabi or Muammar Gaddafi as ‘clericalists’.

Clerical fascism: Given what I just said it might be most accurate to use ‘clerical fascism’ as Roger Griffin does, to refer specifically to the collaboration of clergy with fascist movements (e.g. the stance of the Catholic Church in Italy, Croatia, Brazil, etc), especially through genuine ideological fusion like in the work of Emanuel Hirsch. Theoretically this is distinct from (quasi)fascist movements which incorporate dominionism on their own, like the Kahanist ‘halachic state’ or the League of the South’s intention to run independent Dixie on Biblical law. None of the original clericofascisti or Deutsche Christen had such extreme goals.

This post brought to you by:

Ancient Religions, Modern Politics: The Islamic Case in Comparative Perspective, Michael Cook

“The appeal of Islamic fundamentalism,” Michael Cook

“The New Religious Politics and Women Worldwide: A Comparative Study,” Nikki Keddie

Salafi movement – Wikipedia

“The ‘Holy Storm’: ‘Clerical Fascism’ Through the Lens of Modernism,” Roger Griffin

My attempt at a typology of fascist religious discourse with @anarchotolkienist’s helpful addition, and a later one which sort of anticipated this post although with some different terminology.

And a very interesting conversation about Cook’s work with @ boffin-in-training in the fash study Discord.

"On the Great Alkali Plain" part 2, from Letters from Watson, arrived in my inbox this morning, bringing with it a predictable cloud of dust from approaching horses (since this isn't a George R.R. Martin novel, so we're not going to introduce characters just to kill them off immediately).

But what a caravan! When the head of it had reached the base of the mountains, the rear was not yet visible on the horizon. Right across the enormous plain stretched the straggling array, waggons and carts, men on horseback, and men on foot. Innumerable women who staggered along under burdens, and children who toddled beside the waggons or peeped out from under the white coverings.

Either we're running late on the Oregon Trail (since Doyle did not have social media to live-blog progress across the dusty waste) or the year 1847 is important, and these are Mormons.

“Shall I go forward and see, Brother Stangerson,” asked one of the band.

These have got to be Mormons.

“Nigh upon ten thousand,” said one of the young men; “we are the persecuted children of God—the chosen of the Angel Merona.”

Tell me you're a Mormon without telling me you're a Mormon.

“We are the Mormons,” answered his companions with one voice.

OMG, they're Mormons.

This makes the geographic names a little dicey -- the Mormon Trail ran through Wyoming, similar but not identical to today's I-80, so the Rio Grande River should be nowhere nearby -- but Doyle didn't have access to Google Maps, and it's not like his readers in the UK would go factcheck. Even with the Transcontinental Railroad completed back in 1869, most places in the Great American Desert were still remote in the 1880s, and California on the far end was still feeling the effects of isolation. Doyle also misspells the Angel Moroni and uses a masculine-ending name on a Sierra, so he's working from popular myth and the memory of things he's read. I wonder how many letters with corrections he received.

(At the time Doyle was writing, "Mormon" was the term used by the group themselves. Since about the 1980s, church leadership started urging the use of "Latter-Day Saints" instead. When I lived in Phoenix, that's near a big LDS population in Mesa, so I wince at using the older term. From here on out, if I'm quoting Doyle, I'll use "Mormon," but if I'm talking, I'll stick to LDS.)

The big reason the LDS wagon train is headed west is because they practiced polygamy at the time, and this was considered both illegal and immoral in larger U.S. society. (That's not a critique of polyamory today, when enthusiastic concept and clear rules are normalized.)

So far Doyle's account of the LDS party is generally positive -- they're organized, efficient, knowledgeable about their surroundings, prepared for danger, and responsible toward people needing rescue, if a bit holier-than-thou -- but I can't believe he's going to handle polygamy with anything other than distaste.

Polygamy is the thing LDS have been known for (to their chagrin after the mainstream LDS church banned it), so at the end of this section, Doyle's original audience is split into two groups:

Readers who have no real idea what a "Mormon" is and accept it as just one more crazy American thing, who now figure Lucy is rescued and wonder what goes wrong later to lead to murder; and

Readers who know about polygamy and are feeling dread for Lucy.

The few times I’ve overheard them when my husband answers the door is “are you Brother (last name)” and my husband says “no they’re not here at the moment” and then some excuse of “I’m actually just going up to bed/it’s not a good time etc”. He wants nothing to do with religion as a whole so he doesn’t want to talk to them to begin with but they’ll just stand at the door for 10 minutes straight to make damn sure that nobody is home before they leave, so it’s faster to just open the door and send them on their way

One time I was upstairs watching out the window and there was a third person in their car with a computer or an ipad or something in their lap with the brightness all the way up. Once my husband got them to leave, I went around and made sure every door and window on the first floor was shut and locked. Like you show up where I am, after dark, AND I’m not expecting you? I’ve seen too many episodes of Criminal Minds for that, thanks.

Apparently they show up just to talk to my ILs, idk if it’s for actual church goodwill reasons, like how the church that I grew up in used to do home ministry for people that couldn’t physically make it to the building, OR because my ILs don’t go to any mormon church out here and the overarching church wants to keep tabs on them, like you said. I lean toward the second one but I’ve never been at their house when they’re home and the mormons show up (nor do I want to be, I don’t need them knowing who I am to stalk me like that)

Omg the mormons I was trying to ghost did the same thing, it was always young men in their mission outfits and they would stand outside for FOREVER, like 15 or 20 minutes after knocking. And listen, if I'm not expecting someone and they don't look like the mail person or police or someone official, I usually don't answer (the only people who'd do that around here are trying to sell you something). If there's no answer, most people leave in like 30 seconds so it legitimately did freak me out when I'd walk by the a window 10 mins later and catch these guys out of the corner of my eye (and hide lol).

I totally agree, in your ILs case I'm definitely leaning toward the second explanation too. It sounds like the same kind of behavior bc in my case, they were trying to get me to come back after the recruitment thing, and in their case maybe it's the same protocol for mormons who the church knows are in a certain area with a church but not attending.

I don't blame you for not wanting to engage. Don't get me wrong they're usually perfectly friendly, but they have a very vacuum salesman approach once you start a conversation. You have to really be firm and say no so many times, esp if it's not a first time thing and you're involved with the LDS somehow.

Thank you for sharing! That is genuinely so interesting, I wonder what their deal is...

Is joining the church right for me?

I mean, I don’t know you, anonymous friend, and I have no point of reference for what would be right for you. This should be a matter of prayer between you and God, both of whom will deliver a much wiser consultation on the question than I can.

I’m sad to say that I can’t offer my unalloyed endorsement to join with the Latter-day Saints, that our conduct as an institution and the conduct of our members means there are many asterisks involved. It would be easier to recommend if we, as a people, had nurtured any talent for repentance—but we are still in an adolescent phase of asserting our infallibility and sticking our fingers in our ears when approached with the problems we have created for ourselves (or, at least, this is the official line from corporate). We are still at a place where we hurt too many of God’s children too easily. If your local congregation is more kind, more tolerant, more given to reconciliation, and more pragmatic than average—in short, more saintly—then joining with them could be a great choice for you. I think having the insights of converts improves LDS wards as a rule and makes them at least a little better and more curious than they would otherwise be, so it would be splendid for them to have you, I think—but your question is if this is right for you.  And any answer there is dependent on details that I simply do not have.

1, 4, 11, 18, 22 🧐

ohhhhh thank you 🫡🫡🫡

1) is there a story you’re holding off on writing for some reason?

answered here. also i was thinking about that answer more and the experience i know is such a specific experience of protestant churches. all the really loud headasses are like eastern orthodox or evangelical or lds, which is so far out of my wheelhouse and nothing i think i could approach with sensitivity. so it really is a story that has to live in a box on the top shelf of the closet for a while until i find some guy to stick in a medium-sized nondenominational protestant church that hates him in some ways but loves him in others

4) favorite character you’ve written

god i had SUCH a blast with roope and jason in get a read on me. just so much fun writing two guys who don't know how to talk normally. i also love writing other people's experiences of ryan graves. i mean i love writing ryan graves too but i love writing other people experiencing him. oh and kyle criscuolo was fun as hell to write, i miss you bisexual short king

11) what aspect of your writing do you think has most improved since you started writing?

god i've been writing since i was a kid so basically everything, but i think the last couple of years i've gotten really good at editing and really good at....idk how to explain it. but here are two really good examples: playoff hockey in summer time (2019) vs get a read on me (2023). on paper, very similar stories of joyful ensemble chaos and morons falling love. however i find playoff hockey unreadable for a number of reasons and while get a read on me still definitely has that new shininess to it, it's also just...idk a cleaner? tighter? fic. playoff hockey is so loose at the seams, there's so much random shit that doesn't need to be in there and doesn't move the plot forward, there's very little said about setting, very little ground work to establish character, all the side characters are basically set pieces, and there is zero internal rhythm or tenor. get a read on me reads as a much tighter work - everything pushes the emotional arc forward, everything serves a purpose, there's a cadence to it, every character has some kind of internality (to me at least) even the ones that are just in the background...like everything that's in that fic is in it because there's a reason for it. when i gave my first draft to beryl and they went 🤨 one of the things i did while editing was go through and ruthlessly kill so many of my darlings. just absolutely hacked the shit out of it. if i loved it but it served no purpose? gone. out. if i wanted to keep it? i had to rewrite it to give it purpose. and the work ended up much cleaner.

so i mean the real answer is: having a good beta lol, but mainly i think my writing is a lot tighter and cleaner now.

18) were there any works you read that affected you so much that it influenced your writing style? what were they?

every ghibli movie i have ever seen has influenced how i write rhythm and how i worldbuild i think and not just when i'm writing urban fantasy. i also think the two months i spent in my freshman year of high school reading like 6 different john irving novels did incalculable damage to both my psyche and me as a storyteller. also the number of times i read catch-22 as a teenager probably did some damage too and is probably why i love writing ensemble fic 😩

22) are there any subjects that make you uncomfortable to write?

i can't say i would NEVER write any particular trope or theme because i've made a fool out of myself MANY times saying that and then writing it. winner's room fic hello?? however it is highly unlikely i ever write any stories about dead parents or cancer narratives (or anything that involves terminal illness) because it's too painful on a personal level. also cisswap makes me uncomfortable when i think about writing it, either bc women's hockey players have so little fic that cisswapping them is just a dick move, and cisswapping male hockey players invites my psyche into a place i don't want to be :/

hi um im on anon for now but

basically im an agnostic (?) queer person who was raised in a lds family and ive been reading a lot about the fucked up stuff that actually goes on. as someone who has almost no support circle outside the church, i would love to know if there are any online resources i can get to learn more about the hidden aspects of the church and possibly connect with other ex lds members for help (i heard theres a subreddit?) because frankly im fuckin terrified right now

thank you so much in advance!

Hi! Sorry for the late response I'm admittedly not on here very much anymore. the CES letter is a really classic place to start. I also used to love the podcast No man knows my herstory. I admittedly don't really hang around many exmormon groups anymore due to some annoyances I have with antitheistic approaches to life so I'm not really sure of a great jumping off point anymore for finding community. You're also more then welcome to message me if you ever want to talk about anything I realized I didn't believe in Mormonism anymore when I was 14 (in about 2016-2017) and am almost 21 now and have been living separate from my family for almost three years so I have quite a bit of experience both in actively living with your Mormon family as well as when your not and navigating that and am always happy to talk. It's really fucking terrifying at first ❤️

peacefuldumpling DOT com SLASH i-left-the-mormon-church-cult

lmao gosh do you genuinely think anything in this essay is a surprise to me. Like. I know, my dude. Do you really think... lmao

Apparently you think this is shocking to me or something. I know Joseph Smith did horrible things. Shockingly, sometimes humans are capable of both good and horrible things.

Why do you think he was killed by a mob? I've got an inkling it's 'cuz he, uh, did horrible things. The gospel regularly teaches that anyone who abuses their authority will be removed from that authority. So, he was. I understand that's not the church's position, but I don't need it to be; I've prayed about it, and that's good enough for me. Guy shouldn't have lusted after teenagers. I wish I could sit down with Emma and let her unload over cups of tea.

Similarly, I believe that Brigham Young did good and horrible things. The church would not have survived Smith's death had it not been for Young and his stubbornness. Unfortunately, in addition to his being stubborn as a mule, Brigham Young was also a racist, a colonizer, and a bully. (And that's not even getting into his misogyny! Woof!) (Of course, he wasn't killed. When I get to Heaven, regardless of what degree of glory I'm in, I hope Heavenly Father & Mother give me a day pass to go and punch Brigham Young in the throat. He will most assuredly proceed to kick my butt, because Brigham Young was yoked, but it'll be worth it.)

The LDS church is not perfect. It is run by human beings, who are not perfect. I don't expect it to be perfect. I am deeply, deeply saddened by that fact that so many members interact with the gospel dogmatically. The gospel is so beautifully complex and unknown, and weird. It's so weird! I love it! What a weird and beautiful and complicated thing we've been given a glimpse into!

I'm equally saddened by the fact that so many non-members and ex-members interact with it dogmatically. Both approaches are an exhausting way to live.

The leaders of the LDS church have done horrific things in the name of the church. The Mountain Meadows Massacre is horrific. Joseph Smith's sexual assault of children is horrific. Brigham Young's allowance of southern members to bring their slaves to Utah (and all of the atrocities associated with that) is horrific. Joseph Smith's exhumation and parading about of a native person's skeleton is horrific. (Didja know about that one?? I do!) The blood oath that used to be a part of the endowment ceremony was... well, idk if I'd go as far as say horrific, but it was weird af, wasn't it? (And not in the fun, kooky way.)

More recently, the POX was horrific. The church's "indirect" support of Prop 8 was horrific. (lmao @ all of my fellow members who defended that tooth and claw because it 'came from God' and then had nothing to say when it was retracted a few years later, because, DUH, it SURE DIDN'T COME FROM GOD, DID IT?) The abuse of children hidden by a system that encourages keeping things within the system is horrific.

I'm not an idiot. I'm not a naif, either. And incredibly, even reading over that person's blog post, I'm not in a cult; because nothing they've described makes the church a cult. (Their argument is basically that Utah is a cult, and frankly, that one I have no issue with lmao. Utahn LDS culture is not my cup of tea. I find it stifling. [I grew up adjacent to Utah -- imo it was worse, because we had to be even MORE self-righteous, to make up for the legalized gambling and hookers.] Speaking with non-US members of the church is absolutely illuminating, because their cultural touchstones are completely different, and many of them approach the gospel differently than we do in the States. Some of my most cherished learning moments have come from non-US members. Relatedly, I miss going to the Sunstone Symposium.)

I wish the person in that blog post had been raised to understand the dangers of dogmatic thinking, and had been taught discernment. It is tragic that they experienced a faith crisis like that; not because they left the church, but because the crisis part of it was entirely unnecessary. They were not properly equipped by their parents, their family, or their community, and that's just... sad. It's deeply sad. They were failed by those who should have taught them (and based on their writing, their parents were failed as well. It's failure all the way down... which, Utah, so. I'm not surprised).

If you're an ex-member and you feel compelled to bash the church, I get it. You were raised to believe in everything that was taught to you without question, and that questioning itself was a sin. When you learned something awful, your worldview fractured. And now you've found a community of people who feel similarly to you, in an inverse of the church community you once had; where you are uplifted and edified, and you're able to righteously tirade against the Other, who has wronged you. (And I'm not discounting you've been wronged. I've met truly awful people at church. I've been told awful things. I have been hurt. Unfortunately: humans. I am not looking forward to Elder Bednar's eventual rise to prophet. Hopefully he'll get the same treatment from HF/HM that Benson did, in that he'll at least mercifully shut up about his bigotry.)

I would ask you to consider what use that dogma has to you. Comfort? Community? Purpose? Figure it out, and deconstruct the dogma. Dogmatic thinking is by definition strict. It's exhausting, and it perpetuates its own destruction. It's not worth it.

Your linking me this blog post is your reacting from a place of dogma, expecting my own dogmatic thinking in response. Nah, friend. I don't need the church leaders to be perfect. I don't need the church to be perfect. Frankly, the Book of Mormon could've been written while Smith was high on shrooms and mummia, and I'd still say it's divinely inspired. (I'm not a historic BoM person. My husband is. We have fun talking about it.)

My testimony is not based on the historicity of the church or its teachings; nor is it based on the infallibility of leadership. It's based on Jesus Christ and my Heavenly Parents.

I hope you have a lovely evening wherever you are, and that your bed and room are the exact temperature you want them to be.

Headcanons for Utah

Whoop!!! I'm back again. Headcanons for the Best Snow on Earth, Utah (their words not mine)

(below the cut because it's longer and I feel bad for people's dash.)

Utah was born in the summer of 1850, a month or so before he became an actual territory. He was called Deseret at the time and was nonreligious, lived on a small cattle ranch.

I have a personal headcanon that the LDS church has had a separate personification since the 1830s when they started preaching full time.

LDS himself is the white pressed shirt man with the elder tag and the hate for using "The Lords name in vain". Utah picked it up from him. (LDS lived in New York, Ohio, Illinois, and Missouri before going to Utah.)

Utah was brought up by the LDS church, and as such joined the church when he was still a new being.

He attempted to go on missions to outposts within the state but was shot down because he wasn't "good enough". Basing this completely on the team spirit idea that a personification can't be away from their people for too long, and that they didn't know quite the reach of said territory. (Cred to @icestarphoenix)

During the Utah war and following conflicts with polygamy, Utah himself was not part of the decision. The LDS church had an iron grip on the guy and was calling shots for him.

Utah met The Army in fall of 1857 when he joined the Nauvoo Legion to meet them

Between the 1850s and 1890s was when I HC Utah as taking most of his mission trips.

Utah met his first wife in 1869 after the completion of the transcontinental railroad, a woman named Emma Bradshaw.

Not making a headcanon for her, but Utah was always monogamous. He only had about 3 kids with this union, 1 of which died shortly after being born.

Utah drinks his respect women juice sometimes (has had women's suffrage since the 1870s) (but outlaws abortion so he's been slacking)

Utah became a state in 1896 and his first meeting with the other states was held that same year. I'm inclined to think he was probably excluded from meetings before then because a lot of Mormon policy was seen as Un-American and I have a feeling Gov didn't like the religion controlled territory all too much.

Utah and the National Park Service became good friends in the 30s during the depression, with the creation of the Mighty Five parks.

Utah is a big outdoors person, and likes snowboarding, hiking, rock climbing, and skiing.

During WW2 he managed to join the army and stormed Normandy. Frequently had to go back to his state because of Team spirit stuff.

In the 70s Utah got in trouble with Gov about his racist policies concerning the church, and that is when I headcanon Utah to start to fall away from the church.

Utah never really liked computers all that much when they were being created, but loves the GPS. He doesn't really need it thanks to the grid system, but he holds a certain fondness for the automated voice.

Utah met his second wife, Ilithiya, in November of 2006 and were married in May of 2007. The states were all invited and only like 20-ish came.

All of my headcanons on Ilithiya come from @firsttraintovictoriaville 's work Worth Praying For because she is beautiful and I love that work

Utah's six kids were born as follows: Jaxon(March 21st, 2008) Kayleigh(March 21st, 2008 +3 minutes) Kingsley (September 9th, 2011) Kayden (December 2nd, 2013) Jayden (August 16th, 2015) Brayden (July 30th, 2016)

Utah and the LDS church have weird strained relationship. The LDS (not typing out church every time) has a lot of say in what does and doesn't happen in the state. I see their relationship as a teacher and a student, LDS being the teacher and Utah being the student.

Utah has a lot of issues with church doctrine, mainly on the books of Abraham and JST.

When Utah approached LDS with these issues in the early 70s. LDS was quick to come up with excuses and reasons as to why those concerns were silly and Utah was just being a bad Mormon.

From then on Utah was more of a laid back Mormon, obvi didn't quit the church because he still has the suit and tie, but he doesn't follow every guideline to a T now.

Personally, I don't see Utah as the super ultra "Do you know Jesus loves you?" Guy, but more of a guy who was raised with really strict parents and struggles to venture outside their standards very often because that was how he was raised.

He has a no alcohol policy because Florida, as well as a no coffee policy because Georgia. No tobacco because Mississippi, and no weed because Colorado.

Utah is a big tea person. Not early gray, but herbal teas? All of about them. As a collection of different fruit teas and caffeine free beverages.

He cannot watch movies with any sort of romance or sexy stuff. Turns away from the screen during kissing scenes because it "feels like a violation of privacy".

The kind of person to say "Hate is a strong word 😃" and proceed to complain about a single person for 2 ½ hours.

Utah strikes me as a big dog person. I think he'd have a good dog for kids, like a golden retriever or an Australian shepherd. Just a dog that would be okay to go on adventures but also sit by the kids when they pass out from playing.

Has a Google phone because he hates Apple.

Yeah! Those are all the headcanons I have stored in my noggin. Would love to hear if any one else has any thoughts, or if I wrote something that is just Straight Up Wrong.

Also apologies to anyone offended by the Mormon stuff, I'm an exmo myself and it's kinda venting on my part with that. Totally willing to edit!

This week's artwork in the Come Follow Me manual is "The Love of God" by Sabrina J Squires. From the LDS Church Website:

In Squires’s image, a tree provides the framework for a colorful display. "To me," Squires ponders, "these rainbow shards represent God’s excitement and awareness in creating diversity." The tree seems to move and expand, making room for all who desire to approach. The figures at the tree not only partake but collect and gather the white fruit, ready to share God’s abundant love.

"Only when all of the colors of the rainbow are combined does white appear—the hue representing purity and peace."

The LDS Church is selling this journal for 2024 through Deseret Book. The cover has a painting of the Tree of Life from Sabrina Squires.

On a website selling this artist's works, it includes this description:

"All are alike unto God."--I chose to address this concept on a cultural level, attempting to address the pain that racism causes many individuals. The tree and its fruit represents the love of God, and people from different races collect the glowing orbs. The snowy branches of the tree provide a framework for a myriad of colors. To me, these rainbow shards represent God's excitement and awareness in creating diversity, and that all the colors must work together for optimal beauty. Only when all of the colors of the rainbow are combined does white appear--the hue representing purity and peace. The tree is large and all-encompassing, providing and making room for any who desire to approach and gather. God's love extends to all of His children, and He gives us the opportunity not only to partake of His love, but to share its abundance. "

I love that the cover of this journal has artwork displaying that All Are Alike Unto God.

The story of the Tree of Life says that there is a white tree full of fruit which is also white, and the fruit was sweeter than all other fruits, and partaking of it fills one with great joy. The fruit represents the love of God.

In order to have a white tree and white fruit, it requires all the colors coming together. The painter specifically mentioned race, but there's other ways humans are diverse, and God's love is there for ALL of us.

Third Wheel: Peculiar Stories of Mormon Women in Love (Part 2)

Pilot Program by Melissa Leilani Larson

4/5 Stars

A play discussing one of the main things Latter-Day Saints try hard not to think about.

Summary: in a hypothetical future, Abigail and her husband Jacob as asked, by the leaders of the LDS church, to participate in an attempt to reinstate polygamy. They decide to invite Abigail's friend Heather to join their marriage. There is joy and struggle and acceptance while they all try to understand how to make a polygamist marriage work.

One thing I appreciated about Larson's approach to this topic is that Jacob was never painted as misogynistic or power hungry or evil for having two wives. He was a kind, generous, and thoughtful man who genuinely wanted to best for everyone involved. I feel like within the LDS church people often assume polygamist men must have viewed their wives as property and tried to collect as many as possible. Larson imagines that if polygamy were to be instituted within modern LDS culture, that would certainly not be the case. Equality among everyone was a prime concern throughout this play.

Well written: 4 stars. I thought the subject matter was handled well, and the language of Abigail's monologues was very poetic and beautiful. There were aspects of the plot that I felt didn't entirely make sense though. Maybe if I saw in on stage I would understand character's motivations more.

Fun level: 4 stars. It's a slice of life piece. There is tension but it's a low vibration throughout the text. It's a wonderful story but I don't know if I'd call it fun.

Complex faith: 3 stars. Each characters' faith and commitment to the LDS church is never questioned. It's clear that Abigail is working based on an almost blind faith in the desires of The Brethren. As soon as Heather feels the spirit, she lets go of her protests and decides to move forward with dating. Heather is a typical strong independent woman, but she admits that she is not completely happy single. Abigail feels her life is incomplete without children. They are women living outside of the ideal LDS life, but they both wish they had that ideal life we're all told we are supposed to want. There is certainly complexity and I don't you could in any way call this propaganda, but it also doesn't question if this was, in fact, what God desired of them.

Homophobia scale - 2 stars (5 being not homophobic at all). They never mentioned anything LGBTQ. Heteronormativity was assumed, even when broadening that into a 3 person relationship. I would've loved to see how this story would go if Abigail was a bi woman.

Mormon Weird - 4 stars. Just the presence of polygamy gives this a big boost in this area. That, and the causal mentions of calling, relief society, bishops, the description of a temple sealing etc. It may be strictly realistic fiction, but it's certainly not a story that any protestant could insert themselves into, it's a specifically Mormon story.

Diversity of Characters -3 stars. Like the last play, no ethnicities are ever mentioned, so this play could potentially be portrayed with a racially diverse cast, although I don't know if that's what the author had in mind. As mentioned above, there are no queer characters.

Other problematic elements - It is written as through the concept of polyamory doesn't exist, or at least the characters are not aware of it.

Conclusion: I love that this play exists and I wish that more people knew about it and talked about it. I have met girls who shudder in horror at the thought of polygamy, with good reason, but I think that it's an aspect of our history that deserves to be grappled with. Additionally, thinking about how LDS families would look if we embraced modern day polyamory is an interesting discussion. It's just a good story that asks a lot of good questions, and doesn't shy away from the fact that sharing a marriage is hard work.

Blacks in Mormonism: When and Why Did the Ban on the Priesthood End?

The history of blacks in Mormonism is a complex narrative that includes periods of both inclusion and exclusion. One of the most significant chapters in this history is the ban on black individuals holding the priesthood within The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS). This article delves into the timeline and factors that led to the eventual end of this priesthood ban, shedding light on the journey from discrimination to inclusivity.

The Origins of the Priesthood Ban

The ban on black individuals holding the priesthood within blacks in Mormonism traces its origins to the mid-1800s. During this period, church leaders began to implement policies that prevented black men from being ordained to the priesthood. This decision was grounded in a combination of religious beliefs, societal attitudes, and cultural influences of the time.

Doctrinal Rationale and Interpretations

The doctrinal rationale behind the priesthood ban was largely rooted in interpretations of biblical passages and LDS scriptures. The "curse of cain" doctrine, often used to justify racial hierarchy, was also employed within blacks in Mormonism as an explanation for the exclusion of black individuals from priesthood ordination. This doctrine was based on a misunderstanding of scriptural texts and contributed to perpetuating discriminatory beliefs.

However, it's important to note that not all church leaders supported or upheld the priesthood ban. Throughout the history of black Mormons, there were individuals who questioned this policy and sought a more inclusive approach, recognizing the inconsistency of a discriminatory practice within a faith centered on principles of love and equality.

Shifts in Societal Attitudes

As the 20th century progressed, societal attitudes towards race and civil rights began to change. The LDS Church found itself facing increasing scrutiny for its racially discriminatory policies. With the civil rights movement gaining momentum, pressure mounted on the church to reconsider the priesthood ban within the context of black Mormons.

In this evolving landscape, some church leaders began to question the validity of the priesthood ban and its alignment with the teachings of Jesus Christ. The gap between the church's stance and the shifting societal norms raised internal discussions about the need for change.

The 1978 Revelation: A Turning Point

The turning point for blacks in Mormonism and the priesthood ban came in 1978. At that time, Spencer W. Kimball, the president of the LDS Church, received a revelation that extended the priesthood and temple blessings to all worthy male members, regardless of their race. This revelation marked a seismic shift in the church's stance, bringing an end to a policy that had persisted for over a century.

The revelation was accompanied by a formal statement in which church leaders expressed their collective belief that the ban had been a policy rooted in the times rather than a doctrinal mandate. This acknowledgment marked an essential step towards addressing the past discrimination and rectifying the historical injustice faced by black members of the LDS community.

Conclusion

The story of when and why the ban on the priesthood ended for blacks in Mormonism encapsulates a broader narrative of the LDS Church's evolution and its engagement with social progress. The ban's origins in misguided interpretations of doctrine and the societal attitudes of its time underscore the complexities of reconciling faith with cultural norms.

The eventual end of the priesthood ban in 1978 demonstrates the capacity of religious institutions to adapt, evolve, and correct past injustices. The recognition that discriminatory practices are inconsistent with the core principles of love and equality underscores the importance of being open to change and willing to embrace inclusivity.

While the history of the priesthood ban within blacks in Mormonism is not without its challenges and contradictions, it also serves as a testament to the potential for growth and transformation within religious communities. By understanding the timeline and factors that led to the ban's end, we gain insights into the power of revelation, the influence of societal change, and the ongoing pursuit of a more inclusive and compassionate faith.

New lds scriptures

#NEW LDS SCRIPTURES UPDATE#

#NEW LDS SCRIPTURES MANUAL#

#NEW LDS SCRIPTURES FULL#

Whether you're looking for a special birthday quote for your sister, a meaningful birthday quote for mom, or a heartfelt birthday quote for your husband, one of these messages is sure to apply, and the recipient will treasure the words you chose for him or her.Īnd if you're celebrating your birthday, know that you are one of a kind and the only one who gets to be you, celebrating a birthday today. There’s perspective and hope for the future year ahead, love from a God who’s made you unique in every way, and security in knowing He’s been there since you were born and will be there till the end. The scriptures are chock-full of encouraging words for celebrating those yearly milestones. (Trust us: No one wants another "over the hill" joke.) This year, look to the Bible for words of wisdom to share on the special day. Another year older, another year better, right? Still, sometimes it can be difficult to find just the right words to write in a birthday card for your friend or family member. You can even purchase a leather sample sheet to see all of the colors before you make your purchase.Ĭlick here to view the entire collection.Birthdays are a time for joy and reflection.

#NEW LDS SCRIPTURES FULL#

Three Witnesses Angel Moroni Mormon Hill The Golden Plates (Reconstruction) CONTENTS: This new Kindle edition of the Mormon LDS Scriptures contains the full an unabridged texts of the three canonical works: 1) The Book of Mormon 2. Custom LDS Scriptures mission is to offer attention to detail, honesty. ILLUSTRATED VERSION: Contains more than 10 illustrations depicting key events, prophets, witnesses and monuments of the Church including Joseph Smith, Jr.

#NEW LDS SCRIPTURES MANUAL#

The most popular colors are Lavender, Light Pink, Blush Pink, and Violet. Its a significant event in the New Testament because His baptism marks the. 100 Scripture Mastery Passages, New Testament Seminary Teacher Manual (2016). These new color scriptures are launching July 26, 2022. How do these new scriptures differ from our best-selling hand-bound leather scriptures Check out the chart below.

#NEW LDS SCRIPTURES UPDATE#

Right now, the company offers hand-bound Bibles, Quads, Triples, Large Bibles, Large Quads, and Large Triples. The last update to English scriptures the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price of The Church of. Our leatherette scriptures are made from the softcover scripture editions as printed by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. each major book of scripture (Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon. Adding to the canon of scriptureEdit April 6, 1830: When the church was organized it is presumed that the Bible and Book of Mormon were unanimously accepted as. that would spark the formation of either wholly new religions (as the LDS. Each one is made by hand and can include ribbons, custom name embossing, and more. The approach to the scriptures taken by the average Latter-day Saint focuses. The new visions of Smith and Gill produced new scriptures the new visions of. , a small, family-owned business headquartered in Orem, Utah, hand-binds scriptures in over thirty beautiful colors. One company hopes to bring affordable artistry back to printed scriptures. These are the 5 Scripture Podcasts: The Old Testament The New Testament The Book of Mormon The Doctrine and. However, personalized colored scriptures are a great way to feel inspired to study the word of God. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. This change was brought about “in an effort to simplify and standardize products in an increasingly global church environment.” With the advent of digital scriptures and increasing production on printing standardized scriptures in multiple languages, this change makes sense. This included all colors except for black. In 2019, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints announced it would be discontinuing multiple printed scripture styles and sizes.

Mary Lucille Perkins Bankhead (August 9, 1902 - June 16, 1994). She grew up on a homestead originally granted by President Ulysses S. Grant. She was a lifelong member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. According to her, the relationship among neighbors was characterized more by camaraderie than by racial tensions, though she certainly found racial tension in her LDS congregation. She maintained a close but complicated relationship with the LDS Church throughout her life. Her father and husband were Mormons, but both had refused to attend church. Her husband participated in social engagements and charitable activities sponsored by the church and accompanied her to meetings. Rather than attend these meetings, he would wait for her in the car in cold weather or storms. She challenged the legitimacy of white supremacy on several fronts. A Utah state senator proposed to relocate Salt Lake City’s black residents to a different side of the city to obtain black-owned real estate. She and members of her arts and crafts club went to the capitol and sat in the gallery for several hours. She and her group were able to stop this land repossession. She served as secretary for the Daughters of Utah Pioneers, she was set to deliver a speech. As she approached the entrance of the meeting hall, the doorman closed the door. He expected her to enter through the kitchen, but she managed to have the door opened for her and delivered her speech as planned. When the Genesis Group (a support group for African American Mormons) was organized, she became the president of its Relief Society (the women’s organization). She participated in the proxy endowment (an LDS temple ordinance) of Jane Elizabeth Manning James, an African American woman close to LDS founder Joseph Smith. She was a featured speaker at the first annual Ebony Rose Black History conference. #africanhistory365 #africanexcellence https://www.instagram.com/p/ChCVTnbr8IwFnfNyxe4YYX-UVNI2yFRMzpX9Yc0/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=