tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-61032882011-07-14T17:31:48.959-04:00Kaiminoreply@blogger.comBlogger591100tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1149108744426330522006-05-31T16:51:00.000-04:002006-05-31T16:52:24.436-04:00

The blog is down -- we're not quite sure why. We're looking into it.

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1111431792808651822005-03-21T14:01:00.000-05:002005-03-21T14:03:12.810-05:00

We moved to a different host over the weekend. We're having some problems, and our new location suspended the page. We're working on it. We may just point the DNS servers back to the old location. Or we may get things worked out at the new place. Hopefully, we'll have a resolution of some sort, relatively soon.Sorry for the inconvenience.

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1090006795256415612004-07-16T15:38:00.000-04:002004-07-16T15:39:55.256-04:00

Everything is just fine.    If that changes enough to warrant use of this back-up site, a new message will be posted.

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1090005644898150172004-07-16T15:14:00.000-04:002004-07-16T15:20:44.896-04:00

This was the original location of the Times and Seasons blog, which is now available and thriving, at its web address, www.timesandseasons.org .   Since the move to the new address, we had not used this blogspot site for anything.  (It did/does serve as an interesting archive, but that's about it).  That site has had occasional technical difficulties, and it occurred to me that this location

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069963792905437972003-11-27T15:09:00.000-05:002004-01-13T15:08:45.983-05:00

Times and Seasons is now located at www.timesandseasons.org. You can click on the link, or wait to be redirected there shortly . . .

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069962687616255982003-11-27T14:51:00.000-05:002003-11-27T14:51:36.093-05:00

Just returned from the Turkey Bowl: Young Men v. Elder's Quorum. Fortunately, we had a missionary on our team who had played for Dixie JC prior to his mission. But the star of the show was ... my wife!!! She was the only woman in the game, and once the game was through, the other team was accusing us of bringing a ringer. She batted down several passes and snagged one of only three interceptions

Gordon Smithnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069962196382202292003-11-27T14:43:00.000-05:002003-11-27T14:43:24.976-05:00

I survived the Turkey Bowl: Young Men v. Elders. Fortunately, we old men had a missionary on our side who played football for Dixie JC prior to his mission. But the star of the show was ... my wife!!! The only woman in the game. She was an awesome defender, knocking down multiple passes and snagging one of only two interceptions in the game. Favorite play: Elders with the ball on the YM's one

Gordon Smithnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069873669920326552003-11-26T14:07:00.000-05:002003-11-26T14:08:16.560-05:00

I one-up David Brooks' attempt to spread the Power of Marriage at The Buck Stops Here.

Matt Evansnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069863121792545152003-11-26T11:12:00.000-05:002003-11-26T11:15:48.680-05:00

We Gather Together (Prayer of Thanksgiving) We gather together to ask the Lord's blessing; He chastens and hastens His will to make known; The wicked oppressing now cease from distressing. Sing praises to His name; He forgets not His own. Beside us to guide us, our God with us joining, Ordaining, maintaining His kingdom divine; So from the beginning the fight we are winning; Thou, Lord, wast at

Russell Arben Foxnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069861155027674692003-11-26T10:39:00.000-05:002003-11-26T10:39:23.380-05:00

Gordon Smith writes, in comments to Nate's post on the Historian's letter: "While the Historian is right about the official Church position -- that the Biblical text is not inerrant -- you would never guess that this was the Church's position if you were an anthropologist visiting wards and seminaries. In my experience, many members of the Church have embraced the erroneous views of so-called

Osvaldonoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069858132000591962003-11-26T09:48:00.000-05:002003-11-26T13:46:49.500-05:00

I admit it -- I started this whole mess, in part because I was quite surprised by some of the Historian's comments. (This post will include some text which is in the comments section of Nate's earlier post, for purposes of putting my discussion in one place). The Historian wrote about: "a supposed Mormon belief that Native Americans were descended from Israelite origin. . . . Informed Mormons

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069821874072655432003-11-25T23:44:00.000-05:002003-11-25T23:47:19.676-05:00

I have to confess that I am a bit surprised by the reaction of folks in the comments on the section from the Metaphysical Elders' Historian's remarks. However, I guess that I shouldn't be. It is probably an empirical fact that most Mormons think that virtually all Native Americans came from the Lamanites. I also think that this is the position taken by most early church leaders and has been

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069806329526336022003-11-25T19:25:00.000-05:002003-11-25T19:32:12.326-05:00

In the post immediately below, Nate draws our attention to a letter written by the Historian at The Metaphysical Elders. The letter makes reference to the "supposed Mormon belief that Native Americans were descended from Israelite origin," then states: Informed Mormons have shown for over sixty years on the basis of the Book of Mormon text itself that it does not teach that Native Americans are

Gordon Smithnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069801904834347622003-11-25T18:11:00.000-05:002003-11-25T18:11:53.370-05:00

The Historian over at The Metaphysical Elders has posted an extremely interesting letter that he wrote at the request of a non-Mormon New Testament scholar asked to participate in the production of an anti-Mormon film on LDS beliefs about the Bible. The Historian writes: Beliefs about the Bible are as wide-ranging within Mormonism as any other church. The most that can be said officially is the

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069791464036972322003-11-25T15:17:00.000-05:002003-11-25T15:20:35.706-05:00

This is an 1857 photograph of the Nauvoo Legion in Utah. The Mormon militia was known as the Nauvoo Legion until it was disbanded by the federal government in the 1870s (I think). 1857, of course, was the year that the United States sent Johnston's Army to invade Utah and put down the "Mormon rebellion." Thus, this is what the Utah resistance would have looked like. What other American

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069785267234294102003-11-25T13:34:00.000-05:002003-11-25T13:38:00.410-05:00

Utah has the dubious honor of leading the nation in personal bankruptcy rates. According to the Salt Lake Tribune 1 in 37 households in Utah is insolvent. I suspect that this high level of bankruptcy filings may be what has been behind some recent words on debt in general conference. In 1998, President Hinckley counseled: I urge you, brethren, to look to the condition of your finances. I urge

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069781229209166692003-11-25T12:27:00.000-05:002003-11-25T12:27:17.463-05:00

I have put up a page introducing myself. (You can also access it via the link on the right). If folks like this format, I could put together similar pages for the other T&S correspondents.

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069778954516477752003-11-25T11:49:00.000-05:002003-11-25T11:49:22.476-05:00

In a mad attempt to throw together Kaimi's post on the "Christian Right" and Nate's post on natural law, while also tossing in a bit about Catholic and Protestant theology... A few years ago I dug a little into a group called the World Congress of Families. It, like United Families International, has its roots in a loose network of politically conservative churches that saw the United Nations as

Russell Arben Foxnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069743299131189222003-11-25T01:54:00.000-05:002003-11-25T02:56:32.700-05:00

One of my favorite former professors, Noel Reynolds, dropped by and left some very interesting comments on natural law. He begins by faulting the Thomistic natural law tradition for beginning its analysis with Aristotelianism rather than the scriptures, noting that in the scriptures it is either God's command or our covenant with him that provides moral direction, not nature. Noel goes on to

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069708190657248862003-11-24T17:08:00.000-05:002003-11-24T17:11:24.853-05:00

It seems to me that church members are becoming enamored of the political groups which are often identified "Christian Right" -- politically powerful, vocally conservative groups like the Family Research Council, American Family Association, and Focus on the Family. I receive many e-mail messages from family members, forwarding petitions or other communiques from such groups. Matt Evans, of our

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069709634546027482003-11-24T16:33:00.000-05:002003-11-24T16:34:02.613-05:00

Russell's post below implicitly raises the issue of natural law and Mormonism. I just wanted to point out an essay written by the mysterious Lawyer of the Metaphysical Elders, which discusses (and ultimately rejects) the possibility of Thomistic natural law within the context of Mormon theology. You can check it out here.

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069706767950111532003-11-24T15:46:00.000-05:002003-11-24T16:04:02.280-05:00

Hello all. My thanks for Nate for inviting me (if only for a while) to participate in this blog, and thanks for the introduction Kaimi. Speaking of such, I notice that Times and Seasons started off without any general explanations or identifying comments. Is that a policy, or just because it was assumed that most everyone who might read this blog would know who all the participants are? Either

Russell Arben Foxnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069703801720670082003-11-24T14:56:00.000-05:002003-11-24T14:57:35.000-05:00

"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Why art thou so far from helping me and from the words of my roaring?" (Psalms 22:1)

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069701022611328462003-11-24T14:10:00.000-05:002003-11-24T14:13:41.846-05:00

We are happy to announce that Russell A. Fox will be coming aboard as a guest blogger for the next few weeks. Professor Fox teaches political philosophy, and posts at his own blog, Wäldchen vom Philosophenweg. He should be a welcome non-lawyer voice on the blog. And remember -- statutes may prohibit one from rustling cattle (scroll down to 402(e)), but the common law may intervene* should one

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069695673358912622003-11-24T12:41:00.000-05:002003-11-24T13:01:40.060-05:00

Kaimi's post on gay marriage prompted some thoughts on the hierarchy of sin. Some Southern Baptist friends once told me that all sins were equal in God's eyes. Mormon theology has some similar strains. We are taught that no unclean thing can enter into the kingdom of God, and presumably any sin makes one unclean. Nevertheless, the scriptures indicate a hierarchy of sin. For example, Matthew 12:31

Gordon Smithnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069692835454494082003-11-24T11:53:00.000-05:002003-11-24T11:58:15.530-05:00

That was the headline in a British newspaper when Utah became the state that pushed the repeal of prohibition over the top. At the time, President Heber J. Grant was urging the Saints, via the Deseret News to keep prohibition in place. Grant had been a dry clear back into the 1890s, and was horrified that Utah would pound the final nail in the coffin of prohibition. (For a full discussion of

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069692683512998012003-11-24T11:51:00.000-05:002003-11-24T11:54:05.236-05:00

I was just at The Wiggles web site (The Wiggles is a television show that my children watch sometimes). The site has a prominently displayed Net Nanny approval sticker ("This Site is Safe for Kids"). It also has a prominently displayed link to the Australian Breastfeeding Association (careful: link includes breastfeeding pictures). Huh? A Safe for Kids approved site which is a click away

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069690045691706722003-11-24T11:07:00.000-05:002003-11-24T14:33:00.926-05:00

David Brooks recently laid out a conservative argument in favor of gay marriage. While Brooks echoes and expands on many arguments which have been floating through the blogosphere, his commentary is important for at least two reasons. First, Brooks is a well-known and identified conservative, with credentials including lengthy gigs at the Wall Street Journal and the Weekly Standard. It would

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069672680487641152003-11-24T06:18:00.000-05:002003-11-24T06:18:08.510-05:00

Nate's post on John Taylor is interesting, and he is certainly right that the Taylor sermon contains an "unfortunately racist passage." But let's not make it worse than it is. The passage did not say that “a negro, a Hottentot, or an Indian” had “nothing Godlike in them.” When Taylor said, "There is nothing Godlike in them," he appears to have been referring to swearing and drinking (identified

Gordon Smithnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069648083021619392003-11-23T23:28:00.000-05:002003-11-23T23:28:10.950-05:00

I had an experience today related to Kaimi's discussion of race and hymns. I am the new Elders' Quorum Instructor in our ward, which like Kaimi's includes a substantial number of recent, African-American converts. I was teaching from the first chapter of the John Taylor manual, and during my preparation, I decided to pull the full text of the sermons that are quoted in that chapter. It turns

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069547229319408902003-11-22T19:27:00.000-05:002003-11-22T19:29:47.380-05:00

Greg's recent post about hymns made me think again about an issue I've been reminded of every several months for the past two years. I live in the Bronx, and my ward has somewhat unusual demographics. It is probably 60% African-American, including the Bishop and First Counselor, which I had never seen in a U.S. ward before. It is also very much a mission-field ward, with maybe a third of its

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069539213608802032003-11-22T17:13:00.000-05:002003-11-22T17:19:05.463-05:00

According to Mardell suing the church is about broken legs and not church doctrine. I am not sure that I completely agree. Mardell's response appeals to one aspect of our current tort system, namely its function as an insurance mechanism. Under this theory, the church should be made an insurer for its own negligence just like any other actor. This, I think, is correct. However, tort law is

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069538215049236192003-11-22T16:56:00.000-05:002003-11-22T16:59:15.420-05:00

FARMS seems to be putting up more of its materials on the net for free. Previously, you have had to be a FARMS subscriber to get electronic versions of all of the FARMS periodicals. For example, the entire run of the FARMS Review (aka The FARMS Review of Books, aka The Review of Books on the Book of Mormon) is now up. Perhaps the most important part of this new development, is that you can now

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069526337133528652003-11-22T13:38:00.000-05:002003-11-22T13:39:04.413-05:00

The invitation to the Holiday Party for my law school faculty was in my mailbox yesterday. It's scheduled for a Sunday. This is completely predictable. Even though academics have more than a month away from the classroom in December and January, we cannot seem to have these holiday parties on any day but Sunday. At my prior law school, I begged the Dean to have the party on another day because it

Gordon Smithnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069525521391249462003-11-22T13:25:00.000-05:002003-11-23T13:35:47.186-05:00

I don't see it. You view Paulsen's position as a "rejection of the idea that God the Father had a father who then had a father and so on ad infinitum," but nothing in the excerpts you have quoted seems inconsistent with that notion. Perhaps you are resting on this statement: "There is only one ... fount of divinity." Obviously, Paulsen is attempting to respond to the idea that Mormons are

Gordon Smithnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069510865841691872003-11-22T09:21:00.000-05:002003-11-22T09:22:07.723-05:00

Given his influence on Joseph Fielding Smith and Bruce R. McConkie, and through them the CES, the theology of Orson Pratt has always been there, just below the surface. I doubt most members are even aware of the development, but of late there has been some very interesting work done on the philosophy of the Mormon concept of God. The leader in this has been David Paulsen of BYU's philosophy

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069443615460077832003-11-21T14:40:00.000-05:002003-11-21T17:08:36.640-05:00

Dave's Mormon Inquiry Weblog had this to say about us:A Great Disturbance in the Force. Yes, a powerful new weblog has appeared in the blogosphere, Times and Seasons. Go check it out. Try the Mormonism and Nature post, which includes a reference to Nafanua: Saving the Samoan Rainforest, by Paul Alan Cox, . . . Such eclectic tastes suggest an interesting future for T&S.

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069441481794048002003-11-21T14:04:00.000-05:002003-11-21T14:06:52.513-05:00

I am teaching Seminary this year, and we are covering the Old Testament. We are currently working our way through the Book of Leviticus (at least the highlights), which is great fun for a lawyer. (I can hardly wait to get to Deuteronomy!) The students seem to be enjoying it, too. Today we covered the cleansing ritual for lepers. We in the United States sometimes forget that leprosy is still a

Gordon Smithnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069427721505741742003-11-21T10:15:00.000-05:002003-11-21T10:15:28.816-05:00

I like Kaimi's qua distinction, but I think he takes it too far. In my relations with the church in any capacity, I would be reluctant to treat the church as mere employer or mere tenant, etc. Instead, I would think that one should first try to solve it as a family matter. Only when other members have made it clear by refusing to compromise that they see the relationship as landlord-tenant or

Osvaldonoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069426325345447782003-11-21T09:52:00.000-05:002003-11-21T12:13:18.320-05:00

Adam asks if suing the church might place one in the category of "groups that oppose the church." He raises a question which, I think, does not have a yes-or-no answer. My intuition is that the answer involves repeated use of the word qua. (See also here, third joke down, for the use of qua). To wit: The church may be sued qua employer (put that aside for now). It may be in many other

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069425294837058122003-11-21T09:34:00.000-05:002003-11-21T09:35:01.990-05:00

I loved Greg's post below contemplating a personified reason, staring flummoxed into space. Here is another possibility: Reason meets often with Revelation to discuss current events. This is an ongoing, though not unbroken, discourse. One day, someone who looks like Revelation shows up and announces, "In heaven, parents are single!" Reason has been wrong before, so he is cautious about

Gordon Smithnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069420784940074252003-11-21T08:19:00.000-05:002003-11-21T08:19:52.173-05:00

What about the question about being a part of groups that oppose the Church? Would a client and her legal team be a group that opposes the church? Maybe we are to understand this opposition as only applying to essential church doctrines, and functions like proselyting. In any case, even though the Church no longer requires it, I would feel wrong about taking a brother or a sister or the church

Osvaldonoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069420600962822632003-11-21T08:16:00.000-05:002003-11-21T08:20:35.296-05:00

Thanks for the tip, GSmith. The article is well-expressed and I'm sure I'll use it. Just one point: You say that "spirituality and environmental sensitivity are directly correlated." Perhaps its because I grew up in the rural West, but the most spiritual people I knew had very little environmental sensitivity. Of course, neither did the most unspiritual people.

Osvaldonoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069397644395366632003-11-21T01:35:00.000-05:002003-11-21T02:08:04.566-05:00

A couple of weeks ago I was perusing that paragon of journalistic integrity, the New York Post (today's cover: "JACKO: Now Get Out of This One!), and saw a phrase that I'd previously only heard sung (much too slowly) in church. The lead of George Will's column was "Of capital punishment, Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney says: 'It makes reason stare.' Indeed it does." First of all, what does this

Andrewnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069391389595710432003-11-21T00:09:00.001-05:002003-11-21T01:04:49.520-05:00

My wife (without the impediment of legal training) was reading Nate's post regarding whether church members might be disciplined for suing the church and immediately suggested a line of reasoning that cuts to the chase: Mardell: Let's go back to the temple recommend interview questions. "Have you sued a church member lately?" is not one of them! Me: Is that following and obeying the leaders,

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069391345782883202003-11-21T00:09:00.000-05:002003-11-21T00:10:40.093-05:00

Immediately below, Adam inquires about a Mormon perspective on the environment. Andrew B. Morrison addressed this issue in 1971 (see "Our Deteriorating Environment," Ensign 64 (Aug. 1971)), one year after the first Earth Day: I believe that pollution and environmental deterioration are primarily moral and spiritual problems, rather than problems of technology. Technology is mindless—a

Gordon Smithnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069379460770338362003-11-20T20:51:00.000-05:002003-11-20T21:22:26.973-05:00

Christians have applied the unique resources of their faith to understanding the environmental question, with varying degrees of sophistication. Ad campaigns have asked whether Jesus would drive an SUV (see here and, comically, here), while scholars have drawn on the resources of scripture and of doctrine. It is well. Christianity ought to infect the culture, even the banal culture. I

Osvaldonoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069379448397763362003-11-20T20:50:00.000-05:002003-11-20T20:50:55.090-05:00

The case the Gordon found below reminds me of a woman in my previous ward. At her baptism, she slipped and fell. She subsequently sued the church for negligence and the church settled. As I understand it, she was bullied into suing the church by her then husband. No disciplinary action of any kind was taken against her, but I wonder if as a general matter suing the church can have any effect

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069377743204441072003-11-20T20:22:00.000-05:002003-11-21T20:25:10.960-05:00

I haven't had any gossip either, except from the non-payer themselves. I've occasionally had people tell out of the blue that they didn't pay tithing, and I didn't know what to say. I've also had the missionaries be a little loose about investigators and new members, maybe because I help out a lot with missionaries so they see me as an insider, part of the club (this may explain Kaimi's

Osvaldonoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069373894727373012003-11-20T19:18:00.000-05:002003-11-21T00:53:20.030-05:00

Kaimi’s post about tithing and confidentiality prompted the lawyer in me to wonder whether members who pay tithing have any legal expectation of confidentiality. If a bishop or financial clerk disclosed information about a member’s tithe paying, would the member have a cause of action against the individual who disclosed the information or against the Church? Hmmm. Close call. Confidential

Gordon Smithnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069373000038339412003-11-20T19:03:00.000-05:002003-11-20T19:07:28.216-05:00

Nate doubts that many people gossip about tithing, as I had previously suggested. Let me explain a bit more (this is awkward to discuss). It's certainly hard to pin down for me where I am being told information due to my calling, or where there is an over-sharing going on. I will give a few general examples of situations where it often arises: Situation 1: Asking for help in callings. Me:

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069370807883420752003-11-20T18:26:00.000-05:002003-11-20T18:26:54.970-05:00

I have to confess that I just don't buy Kaimi's argument about tithing confidentiality and gossiping. I admit that much of what he says is right about the penchant of people to share secrets and confidences. On the other hand, not once in my experience have I ever been told whether a fellow member is or is not a full tithe payer. Of course it may just be that I am not popular enough in the

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069367788814290472003-11-20T17:36:00.000-05:002003-11-20T17:36:35.803-05:00

(Note: This is a cross-post with Seeking for Righteousness. I am joining in the trend of cross-posting, as others have done, as a temporary means of jump-starting the blog.) Several people have posted online about Utah and generosity. There are posts by David Sundwall, here and here, a post by Nate Oman over here, an update by the very busy Matt Evans (who apparently has time to promote a

Kaiminoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069367058523628892003-11-20T17:24:00.000-05:002003-11-20T21:56:43.806-05:00

Others abide our question. My wife alone is free. She once again has proved herself to be a from a better plane of existence. She gave a presentation at the nursing school of St. Mary's, the all-girl sister school to Notre Dame. Her topic is a history of our child, her cancer and other ailments, and her medical experience. Her message is that the nursing they do will pass, but the examples of

Osvaldonoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069366580806715972003-11-20T17:16:00.000-05:002003-11-20T17:16:27.913-05:00

Prime Minister Chretien, who has played a prominent role in Canada's move to gay marriage, is also an active Roman Catholic. When asked how he reconciled the two, he explained that, uh, he didn't. (See link at Christus Victor). I admit that the a religious person might permit gay marriage on certain religious views of the role of the state. But it looks like Chretien doesn't have those views

Osvaldonoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069356894984276752003-11-20T14:34:00.000-05:002003-11-20T14:40:42.626-05:00

Andrew Sullivan has a take down here of recent crooning at the New York Times about HBOs forthcoming production of Tony Kurshner's Angels in America. Angles is a play that chronicles the AIDS epedemic in the 1980s, and won a Pulitzer Prize in the 1990s. What is interesting to me is that the play has a Mormon character (to be played on HBO by Patrick Wilson) -- a closet homosexual -- who in one

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069354693507445202003-11-20T13:58:00.000-05:002003-11-20T13:58:20.830-05:00

In the spirit of getting some content on this site, I offer the following from the archives of A Good Oman: A thought on First Unitarian Church of Salt Lake v. Salt Lake City Corporation, 308 F.3d 1114 (2002), the Salt Lake City Main Street case: In his wonderful book The Sacred and the Profane, Eliade discusses the idea of sacred space. According to Eliade one of the things that religion does

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069343187054920982003-11-20T10:46:00.000-05:002003-11-20T18:22:52.503-05:00

Adam suggests that we adopt "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" as our moniker. Alas, that joke is already taken by a group of Jewish bloggers out of Boston. Given that they are Jewish, I don't think that we should begrudge them the irony.

The Lawyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16827086515162302487noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6103288.post-1069294011104889292003-11-19T21:06:00.000-05:002003-11-19T21:23:53.626-05:00

"Whatever I say three times is true." Thus Lewis Carroll. And where Carroll went yesterday can we avoid going today? I'm afraid not. As much as we'd like to, I think that the human condition carries with a tendency to believe what is often repeated and widely believed. Vice is a monster of such frightful mien . . ., etc. At root, this tendency to believe people may even explain the appeal

Osvaldonoreply@blogger.com0