Mormon Matters

What is science? What is religion? What are the methods/disciplines and underlying assumptions that animate each? What does each investigate? What practices and institutions does each have in place that lead to self-correction and ensuring that they truly are working for truer, deeper understandings of the universe? Should science and religion remain separate from each other? How much can each say fruitfully about the other’s "realm"? Can science teach us how to live more richly? Can religion be trusted as a guide in any way to how the universe "works"? In this episode, Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Matthew Nokleby and Steve Peck dive into these questions and more. Why do each orient toward science and religion the way they do--Matt as an atheist who honors spiritual life while rejecting religion’s explicit claims, Steve and Dan as remaining more open to engaging and valuing the resources within religion? The also briefly discuss the matches and mismatches between the theology and the rhetoric of Mormonism toward the value of science.

What is science? What is religion? What are the methods/disciplines and underlying assumptions that animate each? What does each investigate? What practices and institutions does each have in place that lead to self-correction and ensuring that they truly are working for truer, deeper understandings of the universe? Should science and religion remain separate from each other? How much can each say fruitfully about the other’s "realm"? Can science teach us how to live more richly? Can religion be trusted as a guide in any way to how the universe "works"? In this episode, Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Matthew Nokleby and Steve Peck dive into these questions and more. Why do each orient toward science and religion the way they do--Matt as an atheist who honors spiritual life while rejecting religion’s explicit claims, Steve and Dan as remaining more open to engaging and valuing the resources within religion? The also briefly discuss the matches and mismatches between the theology and the rhetoric of Mormonism toward the value of science.

This episode examines the status of the claim that the Book of Mormon teaches that dark skin is a curse from God, that because of their wickedness God cursed a group of people and actually brought about a miraculous change in their skin color so as to make them seem "loathsome" and not enticing to a more righteous group with whom they were in conflict. This claim relies upon a literal reading of various passages in the Book of Mormon that seem to draw this conclusion, as well as an extremely strong view about prophetic and scriptural inerrancy. But is this the best way to read the text, and the only real plausible conclusion to draw concerning God’s use of skin color as a marker of either disfavor or favor? Brian Dalton, the creator and star of the videocast series Mr. Deity, thinks so, and it has led him recently to create a new episode of one of his side projects, The Way of the Mister, that he titled "Mormonism is Racism." In that episode, Dalton spells out the ways in which he believes Latter-day Saints are forced to hold to such contemptible racist beliefs because they can neither jettison the Book of Mormon nor the idea in it about skin color being connected to righteousness. Through this episode and the logic he employs in it--that this conclusion about God and skin color is "so essential to the Book of Mormon story that to get rid of it would be to undermine the entire Book of Mormon and thus the entire Mormon faith," that Joseph Smith suggested the Book of Mormon could only be read literally, that because of the LDS teaching that its leaders speak directly with and for God, "you’re either all in you’re all out"--Dalton urges people everywhere to confront this vile message by exposing its centrality in Mormonism. He claims that because it’s a religious belief, "Mormons have gotten a pass," and he is adamant that this kind of religious cover for blatant racism should not be allowed to stand any longer. "Mormons have to be held accountable--even those running for high public office." In this two-part Mormon Matters episode, Brian Dalton joins Charley Harrell and host Dan Wotherspoon in a lively discussion of the Way of the Mister episode and its claims.

This episode examines the status of the claim that the Book of Mormon teaches that dark skin is a curse from God, that because of their wickedness God cursed a group of people and actually brought about a miraculous change in their skin color so as to make them seem "loathsome" and not enticing to a more righteous group with whom they were in conflict. This claim relies upon a literal reading of various passages in the Book of Mormon that seem to draw this conclusion, as well as an extremely strong view about prophetic and scriptural inerrancy. But is this the best way to read the text, and the only real plausible conclusion to draw concerning God’s use of skin color as a marker of either disfavor or favor? Brian Dalton, the creator and star of the videocast series Mr. Deity, thinks so, and it has led him recently to create a new episode of one of his side projects, The Way of the Mister, that he titled "Mormonism is Racism." In that episode, Dalton spells out the ways in which he believes Latter-day Saints are forced to hold to such contemptible racist beliefs because they can neither jettison the Book of Mormon nor the idea in it about skin color being connected to righteousness. Through this episode and the logic he employs in it--that this conclusion about God and skin color is "so essential to the Book of Mormon story that to get rid of it would be to undermine the entire Book of Mormon and thus the entire Mormon faith," that Joseph Smith suggested the Book of Mormon could only be read literally, that because of the LDS teaching that its leaders speak directly with and for God, "you’re either all in you’re all out"--Dalton urges people everywhere to confront this vile message by exposing its centrality in Mormonism. He claims that because it’s a religious belief, "Mormons have gotten a pass," and he is adamant that this kind of religious cover for blatant racism should not be allowed to stand any longer. "Mormons have to be held accountable--even those running for high public office." In this two-part Mormon Matters episode, Brian Dalton joins Charley Harrell and host Dan Wotherspoon in a lively discussion of the Way of the Mister episode and its claims.

Studies are showing a huge increase in the number of people who claim hybrid spiritual identities, in which their religious lives include a combination of practices and emphases from different traditions. Mormons are no exception, with many, and for many reasons, supplementing their LDS lived religion with meditation, energy work, channeling, nature spirituality, participation in Freemasonry, and with many more things. In this two-part episode, we discuss the research of Doe Daughtrey into LDS women who, to use a term coined by Janet Bennion, "double dip"--that is, they draw on resources in both Mormonism and another tradition in their quest for spiritual fulfillment. We also hear from two Mormons--Patrick McCleary and Katie Langston--who are very active and happy as Latter-day Saints but who practice Freemasonry and mindfulness mediation, respectively. What led them and the women Daughtrey studied to attempt these ideological and ritual syntheses? How does some of Mormonism’s rhetoric lead them to explore additional paths? What resources within Mormonism do they draw on for strength and affirmation as they choose to add other things to their LDS practices? How do they talk about their practices and spirituality with family, friends, and ward members? What types of reactions do they receive?

Studies are showing a huge increase in the number of people who claim hybrid spiritual identities, in which their religious lives include a combination of practices and emphases from different traditions. Mormons are no exception, with many, and for many reasons, supplementing their LDS lived religion with meditation, energy work, channeling, nature spirituality, participation in Freemasonry, and with many more things. In this two-part episode, we discuss the research of Doe Daughtrey into LDS women who, to use a term coined by Janet Bennion, "double dip"--that is, they draw on resources in both Mormonism and another tradition in their quest for spiritual fulfillment. We also hear from two Mormons--Patrick McCleary and Katie Langston--who are very active and happy as Latter-day Saints but who practice Freemasonry and mindfulness mediation, respectively. What led them and the women Daughtrey studied to attempt these ideological and ritual syntheses? How does some of Mormonism’s rhetoric lead them to explore additional paths? What resources within Mormonism do they draw on for strength and affirmation as they choose to add other things to their LDS practices? How do they talk about their practices and spirituality with family, friends, and ward members? What types of reactions do they receive?

The Word of Wisdom has been in the news again, triggered by a claim about caffeine made on a network news show, which led to an official LDS Newsroom statement clarifying the church’s position, which led to fascinating discussions and events, including hilarity at BYU over its policy of serving only de-caffeinated drinks, as well as some church members exulting that now they have an official statement that they can use to tell others to back off when they try to force their "spirit of the law" Word of Wisdom interpretations on them. What is it about the Word of Wisdom that makes it both so central to Mormons as an identity marker as well as such a divider? Is it primarily a "commandment" or the "Lord’s Law of Health"? Is it a "sin" for a Mormon to break the Word of Wisdom (requiring "forgiveness" through Christ's suffering), or more a rejection of teachings that lead to blessings? Clearly the Word of Wisdom is ripe for fresh discussion, which is what Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Jared Anderson, Kenton Karrash, and Les Gripkey attempt in this two-part episode that covers (and cuts through some of the mythmaking concerning) the historical background of the revelation and how it was (and was not) practiced during the church’s first eighty-plus years, social and identity issues and inconsistencies in how it is viewed by church members (Part 1), some of the theology and doctrine surrounding Section 89, and, finally, how science and health experts evaluate today the effects of the various food and drink items mentioned in the revelation (Part 2). Among the most interesting features of the discussion is a look at the differences between how the Word of Wisdom would have been understood at the time it was given (based, for instance, upon an entirely different model in the early nineteenth century for what caused disease) versus today, and the consequences, both positive and negative, for our tendency to reflect on it through contemporary lenses. The panelists also each share parts of their own journey with and views about the Word of Wisdom.

The Word of Wisdom has been in the news again, triggered by a claim about caffeine made on a network news show, which led to an official LDS Newsroom statement clarifying the church’s position, which led to fascinating discussions and events, including hilarity at BYU over its policy of serving only de-caffeinated drinks, as well as some church members exulting that now they have an official statement that they can use to tell others to back off when they try to force their "spirit of the law" Word of Wisdom interpretations on them. What is it about the Word of Wisdom that makes it both so central to Mormons as an identity marker as well as such a divider? Is it primarily a "commandment" or the "Lord’s Law of Health"? Is it a "sin" for a Mormon to break the Word of Wisdom (requiring "forgiveness" through Christ's suffering), or more a rejection of teachings that lead to blessings? Clearly the Word of Wisdom is ripe for fresh discussion, which is what Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Jared Anderson, Kenton Karrash, and Les Gripkey attempt in this two-part episode that covers (and cuts through some of the mythmaking concerning) the historical background of the revelation and how it was (and was not) practiced during the church’s first eighty-plus years, social and identity issues and inconsistencies in how it is viewed by church members (Part 1), some of the theology and doctrine surrounding Section 89, and, finally, how science and health experts evaluate today the effects of the various food and drink items mentioned in the revelation (Part 2). Among the most interesting features of the discussion is a look at the differences between how the Word of Wisdom would have been understood at the time it was given (based, for instance, upon an entirely different model in the early nineteenth century for what caused disease) versus today, and the consequences, both positive and negative, for our tendency to reflect on it through contemporary lenses. The panelists also each share parts of their own journey with and views about the Word of Wisdom.

The LDS Church recently announced changes in the ages that young men and women can now serve missions. Will this announcement usher in a new age in missionary work? A new age for Mormonism itself? In this Mormon Matters episode, host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Adam Jacobsen, Hannah Wheelwright, and Maxine Hanks speculate on just that. What are the far-reaching implications for missions and mission culture, for women’s leadership both there and post mission, for LDS dating and marriages, and, most importantly, for the way women view themselves as valued for their own spiritual gifts and strength and abilities far beyond motherhood? In Part 1, the panel looks primarily at the nature of the announcement itself--the lack of downplaying it as a "revelation" and instead as more pragmatic and practical: leaders aren’t exactly sure how it will unfold, how they will handle the sudden influx of new missionaries (especially sisters), etc. On the other hand, in the messaging that followed the announcement, leaders did not hesitate to emphasize that this change can be read as a "hastening" of the Lord’s work, that the changes are not for the missionaries but rather the work of bringing souls to Christ itself. This first part also discusses some of the likely reasoning that led to some of the decisions made, especially an effort to prevent some of the loss of young people during that one-year (for men) and three-year (for women) gap before mission eligibility. The panel also seeks to find a middle position between skepticism that the church desires stronger indoctrination and deeper commitment to it and its goals versus the desire to offer more of its young people the wonderful "rite of passage" that missions provide, including intense opportunities to really learn to really rely on God and serve others--so often so different from any one the young person might ever encounter--and grow in spiritual strength. In Part 2, the focus is on the what the change in women’s service age from twenty-one to nineteen might mean and bring. How will this affect how women growing up in the church will see themselves and gifts in relation to men, in terms of greater independence in spiritual matters, etc? Will this be heard as a message of (more) equal valuing and partnering in the work of growing the kingdom? What might the cumulative effect of more women serving be on more returned missionaries marrying other returned missionaries (and the ways of relating within marriages themselves), on dating practices, on the kinds of partners they seek? Will there ever be a stigma attached to sisters choosing "not" to serve a mission similar to what one finds for young men who don’t serve? The panelists also get a bit more speculative in trying to predict how this change in service ages (and very likely gender balance of missions) will affect greater sharing of leadership roles and duties in local wards, possibly leading to more explicit gaining of priesthood or, as panelist Maxine Hanks suggests, understanding (more fully "excavating") the parallel paths (and even convergences) of men’s and women’s priesthood orders already embedded in LDS doctrine and practice.

The LDS Church recently announced changes in the ages that young men and women can now serve missions. Will this announcement usher in a new age in missionary work? A new age for Mormonism itself? In this Mormon Matters episode, host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Adam Jacobsen, Hannah Wheelwright, and Maxine Hanks speculate on just that. What are the far-reaching implications for missions and mission culture, for women’s leadership both there and post mission, for LDS dating and marriages, and, most importantly, for the way women view themselves as valued for their own spiritual gifts and strength and abilities far beyond motherhood? In Part 1, the panel looks primarily at the nature of the announcement itself--the lack of downplaying it as a "revelation" and instead as more pragmatic and practical: leaders aren’t exactly sure how it will unfold, how they will handle the sudden influx of new missionaries (especially sisters), etc. On the other hand, in the messaging that followed the announcement, leaders did not hesitate to emphasize that this change can be read as a "hastening" of the Lord’s work, that the changes are not for the missionaries but rather the work of bringing souls to Christ itself. This first part also discusses some of the likely reasoning that led to some of the decisions made, especially an effort to prevent some of the loss of young people during that one-year (for men) and three-year (for women) gap before mission eligibility. The panel also seeks to find a middle position between skepticism that the church desires stronger indoctrination and deeper commitment to it and its goals versus the desire to offer more of its young people the wonderful "rite of passage" that missions provide, including intense opportunities to really learn to really rely on God and serve others--so often so different from any one the young person might ever encounter--and grow in spiritual strength. In Part 2, the focus is on the what the change in women’s service age from twenty-one to nineteen might mean and bring. How will this affect how women growing up in the church will see themselves and gifts in relation to men, in terms of greater independence in spiritual matters, etc? Will this be heard as a message of (more) equal valuing and partnering in the work of growing the kingdom? What might the cumulative effect of more women serving be on more returned missionaries marrying other returned missionaries (and the ways of relating within marriages themselves), on dating practices, on the kinds of partners they seek? Will there ever be a stigma attached to sisters choosing "not" to serve a mission similar to what one finds for young men who don’t serve? The panelists also get a bit more speculative in trying to predict how this change in service ages (and very likely gender balance of missions) will affect greater sharing of leadership roles and duties in local wards, possibly leading to more explicit gaining of priesthood or, as panelist Maxine Hanks suggests, understanding (more fully "excavating") the parallel paths (and even convergences) of men’s and women’s priesthood orders already embedded in LDS doctrine and practice.

In this episode of Matters of the Heart, Joanna Brooks reads an excerpted version of her Ask Mormon Girl blog essay about the October 2012 announcement that the LDS Church has changed the age at which women can serve missions. As Joanna shares her joy over this announcement, it's clear that this marks more than just a change in age limits: Mormon girls will now live in an entirely new narrative. Imagine possibilities with her!

One of the most difficult things for many who have begun to think deeply about religion--their own as well as others and the relationship between them--and want to maintain a positive relationship with the idea of religion is the specter of exclusivism: claims that one’s views or one’s church is "the" Truth, or the "best," while others are not or are lesser. Many religions make this claim either explicitly or tacitly, with Mormonism belonging to the first category, boldly declaring its special place as the possessor of priesthood keys and being the only church authorized by God to perform certain saving ordinances. One hears it quite often in LDS services and classes, and frequently in conjunction with language found in a particular scriptural passage, D&C 1:30: "And also those to whom these commandments were given, might have power to lay the foundation of this church, and to bring it forth out of obscurity and out of darkness, the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased, speaking unto the church collectively and not individually…" But do LDS scriptures really support a position of exclusivity? Does this passage really refer to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as "the only true and living church" with which God is pleased and through which Deity works to save people, or does LDS scripture actually point to something much more broad? In this episode, Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Kristine Haglund and Charles Randall Paul complicate the idea of LDS exclusivity as even being scriptural (for so much else in Mormon holy writ suggests God has a much broader project in the works than what can be accomplished through just one organization) and challenge such a straightforward reading of the "only true and living . . . well pleased" passage. It’s an episode full of wonderful alternatives that reveal Mormon scripture to be much broader and LDS doctrines to be much more expansive and beautiful than we sometimes think they are. It’s definitely worth a close listen.

Grace is one of the central concepts in all of Christianity, yet also one of its most contested. What is it? How does it work? Do we as human beings have to do something first for it to perform its healing work? Can we even turn from sin without Grace first being extended to us? What, exactly happened in the Garden of Eden (literally or metaphorically) that caused separation from God (a Fall), and what are its effects on (or the state of) our souls that requires the transformative action of Grace? Certainly, the concept of Grace is no less debated in Mormonism--or at least, as is suggested in this podcast, it is beginning to now enjoy more focused attention. Is Grace a substance/thing that fills in the "gap" between a standard of perfection that God sets forth and everything we can do on our own in showing our desires and faith? Is it the suffering in the Garden and on the Cross that satisfies the demands of an eternal law of Justice? Is it more like an event--our "getting it" regarding God’s love and our worth that leads us to transformation and a new life in Christ, one in which we yield ever and ever more fully to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, becoming godlike in our compassion for all? And what about all the Grace vs. Works passages we find in both in the Bible and Mormon scriptures? Is Paul’s meditations in Romans about his own sinful nature and the need for Grace the key text for viewing Grace and our own human abilities to respond to God? What are alternative readings of those passages or others within wider Christianity? And, for Mormons, how might one read what seems to be the key passage in the Book of Mormon that declares we are saved by grace "after all we can do" (2 Nephi 25:23) in different ways? Is it really a temporal "after" (feeding into the God filling the "gaps" model)? Is this really what Nephi is saying? And does this interpretation even jive with other Book of Mormon passages on Grace? All these ideas and many more are discussed in this terrific discussion among Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists John Morehead, Katie Langston, and Joe Spencer.

Too often today’s political discourse reduces politics to partisanship, whether one affiliates with this or that political party. It’s a much broader topic, however, encompassing big notions about citizenship in a society, how we as a group of people make decisions, how we navigate our responsibilities to each other, to our government, and to our consciences and deepest religious convictions. When we weave in a particular group of people, such as Mormonism, it becomes even more clear that the political sphere is ever evolving--that even as certain themes maintain some influence in how each period of history unfolded, change concerning what Mormons wanted both for and from government was and is always the norm. Mormonism has a wonderful history of thinking fresh about government, about economic forms such as cooperative economies versus free-market capitalism, in wondering about how heaven is governed and if the way it is governed here on earth is truly the ideal. For any who think today’s super-conservatism or uber-Republicanism is built deep in the fabric of Mormon theology or thought is deeply mistaken--yet even as our history tells tales of great latitude, Mormonism really hasn’t yet articulated a clear sense of what it means to approach the political sphere as a Mormon, to live in community, to live in peace. It’s a much needed project! This two-part episode features three wonderful Mormon historians and social thinkers telling the kind of broad stories about Mormonism’s political past that are very needed if we are to ever find our way out of thinking primarily in partisan boxes. Ben Park, Matthew Bowman, and Patrick Mason join Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon on a tour through four major periods in LDS history--Joseph Smith’s political thinking as manifested during his life, the exodus and early Utah period with its continued experimentation with theo-democracy, the period of political assimilation leading up to Utah statehood and on through the middle of the twentieth century, the rise of and shift toward conservatism and on to the present day--noting major themes and shifts, as well as what from each period and ways of thinking about the political sphere still find voice in today’s Mormonism. When came the rise of Latter-day Saint views about the U.S. Constitution as an inspired document--and were early attitudes toward it the same as we find now? When did it shift primarily from political expediency to align with American forms of government and values to actual embrace of them? How does Mormonism’s past steeped in radical millennialism still influence it today? Does it? How have views of "Zion" shifted through the tradition's 180-plus years? How and why have Mormon views of what constitutes moral goods shifted to concentrate mostly on the individual and domestic sphere versus the wider social one? Are there any signs of possible shifts on the horizon?

Too often today’s political discourse reduces politics to partisanship, whether one affiliates with this or that political party. It’s a much broader topic, however, encompassing big notions about citizenship in a society, how we as a group of people make decisions, how we navigate our responsibilities to each other, to our government, and to our consciences and deepest religious convictions. When we weave in a particular group of people, such as Mormonism, it becomes even more clear that the political sphere is ever evolving--that even as certain themes maintain some influence in how each period of history unfolded, change concerning what Mormons wanted both for and from government was and is always the norm. Mormonism has a wonderful history of thinking fresh about government, about economic forms such as cooperative economies versus free-market capitalism, in wondering about how heaven is governed and if the way it is governed here on earth is truly the ideal. For any who think today’s super-conservatism or uber-Republicanism is built deep in the fabric of Mormon theology or thought is deeply mistaken--yet even as our history tells tales of great latitude, Mormonism really hasn’t yet articulated a clear sense of what it means to approach the political sphere as a Mormon, to live in community, to live in peace. It’s a much needed project! This two-part episode features three wonderful Mormon historians and social thinkers telling the kind of broad stories about Mormonism’s political past that are very needed if we are to ever find our way out of thinking primarily in partisan boxes. Ben Park, Matthew Bowman, and Patrick Mason join Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon on a tour through four major periods in LDS history--Joseph Smith’s political thinking as manifested during his life, the exodus and early Utah period with its continued experimentation with theo-democracy, the period of political assimilation leading up to Utah statehood and on through the middle of the twentieth century, the rise of and shift toward conservatism and on to the present day--noting major themes and shifts, as well as what from each period and ways of thinking about the political sphere still find voice in today’s Mormonism. When came the rise of Latter-day Saint views about the U.S. Constitution as an inspired document--and were early attitudes toward it the same as we find now? When did it shift primarily from political expediency to align with American forms of government and values to actual embrace of them? How does Mormonism’s past steeped in radical millennialism still influence it today? Does it? How have views of "Zion" shifted through the tradition's 180-plus years? How and why have Mormon views of what constitutes moral goods shifted to concentrate mostly on the individual and domestic sphere versus the wider social one? Are there any signs of possible shifts on the horizon?