From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #686 Reply-To: aml-list Sender: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk aml-list-digest Monday, April 22 2002 Volume 01 : Number 686 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 09:26:41 -0600 From: "Paris Anderson" Subject: Re: [AML] Good LDS Fiction "Kim Madsen" What happens when I want to add them to my own collection? Can one purchase > these titles still? Where? My bookgroup women will want to own their own > copies too...what are we to do? You could try ordering them on-line. Many LDS publishers, distributor and book and gift stores have web-sites. There are used LDS bookstores that make their living off the internet. Just dig a little deeper. There is a saying: When the student is ready the master will appear. When you are ready the books will find you. Don't worry about it. Paris Anderson - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 09:51:55 -0600 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: Re: [AML] Gen. Conference > On a recent visiting teaching trip, > one of my "ladies" said that she was on her second year of never missing a > day of reading the scriptures (come illness, come hospitalization, come what > may). Very Dutiful! Or prideful? I don't know about you, but I've had it up to here with people who seem to brag about their righteousness. You hear this all the time in Church ("Last week, in the temple," "During morning study of the scriptures, I.."; ."When my husband was a bishop...") I want to just stand up and remind them all about the parable of the Publican who publically announced his righteousness in his prayers and what the Lord said about such persons. But then, I realize that, were I to do so, I would be no better than the persons I would be rebuking. Thom Duncan - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 10:46:05 -0700 From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: RE: [AML] LDS Nature Writing Alan wrote: >>But in the meantime, I've put together a 40 question quiz on the environment that I would be glad to offer the AML group to see how well they understand the nature around them. Would the group be interested? I'd be interested in your 40 question quiz, Alan. I too have delayed answering that original question about "anti-environmentalist" leanings in the church. As a long time primary attendee (chorister for 15 years until my recent release), where the teachings of the church are found in their most innocent and pure form..."the prophet said to plant a garden" and "life began within a garden". I am an avid organic gardener. I only have a 1/4 acre square and boring suburban plot, but I've done my best to bring as much nature to it as it can hold. My personal goal was to create a suburban sanctuary. I have a waterfall, stream and pond in the front yard that's not chemically treated in anyway, but encouraged to have a healthy biosystem of plants and fish. I have NO lawn anywhere in the yard. To my mind it's the height of hubris to keep up a chemically enhanced green sweep of lawn in the middle of the desert (Utah). Talk about expensive both in terms of money, time and environmental impact. I have vegetables, flowers, grasses (such as mondo grass, Japanese blood grass etc...think the top of the new conference center), vines, arbors, benches, paths, decks, patios, porches--all sited to allow me to sit and drink in nature...while reading GOOD LDS fiction, of course. And I came to this passion for digging in dirt, tending to plants, creating a garden, from literature. Fifteen years ago, I was reading Corrie Ten Boom's THE HIDING PLACE and was impressed by her description of the healing process concentration camp survivors went through; working with the earth and being close to nature was a large part of it. I needed healing. It worked for me. Now it's a passion that ranks up there with reading. I agree, the world has an excellent tradition of nature essayists (Henry Mitchell is my personal favorite, but I prefer ones about small and personal experiences instead of a huge view of saving the world...you know, the one child, one village at a time point of view), but the Mormon culture does not. Perhaps that's because those who really dig around in the dirt, like you and I, Alan, and the people who settled the SL Valley, have been too busy digging in the dirt to write about it. That's one of my personal goals...to record "how gardening changed my life". (Hey, Anna Quindlen already did it for reading...) Kim Madsen [MOD: Speaking for myself, I think it's a fine idea--and relevant to the discussion at hand...] Alan Mitchell - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 10:27:45 -0700 From: "Shelly Johnson-Choong" Subject: Re: [AML] POTOK, _Old Men at Midnight_ (Review) In response to my post, Lisa wrote: But Potok also > produces the "grand work" with equal success and depth in his book > _Wanderings_, which never fails to move me to tears. It's a wonderful > complement to his novels. Ahhh. I didn't see that in the bookstore when I was Potok shopping. I'll have to take another look. Thanks for the clue. I would love to see how Potok creates a "grand work". Shelly (Johnson-Choong) > - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 11:47:06 -0600 From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] LDS Nature Writing On Thu, 18 Apr 2002 21:03:40 -0600, Todd Petersen wrote: >Some LDS folks like Terry, Elder Featherstone, and a historian named >Thomas Alexander have been writing about this stuff, but I'm surprised. >Lots of folks on this list have been indicating that they think Mormons >are pretty environmental.=20 > >My thought is that if they were, wouldn't it be more obvious in their >writing?=20 This question is what doesn't make sense to me. This is not a simple dichotomy wherein you are either actively concerned about environmental issues or completely dismissive of them. If writers in general write = about the issues most important to them, then all this proves is that most of = our writers don't see the environment as the most compelling issue in their lives. It doesn't say anything about the relative level of their commitments to the issues they're *not* writing about. We've also been talking about Mormons in general, not just Mormon = writers, who are a much smaller minority of the population. Maybe some of our = most committed environmental thinkers are expressing their views by creating desert-tolerant gardens and landscaping. (Though someone here in my West Valley neighborhood told me that it's illegal to landscape with rocks and cacti instead of grass, the way people do in the Southwest. Whether this= is true or people only *think* it's true, it implies an outside limitation = on what people here are able to do to conserve resources.) Setting aside these specific issues, I do have an opinion on why more LDS writers aren't typical environmentalist writers. Something Jonathan = wrote in another post got me thinking about this: >I wouldn't guess that we'd see many, if >any, individuals leaving the Church "because of environmental issues"; >rather, what I suspect we may see is environmental issues playing a role= in >developing a worldview that doesn't go along with traditional Mormonism >very well. (Liberal social politics and feminism would be other common >elements of such a worldview.) >In most places, I think you have to get in with a fairly sophisticated >group before you discover people who are politically liberal but active = and >committed Church members, or environmentalists, or peace activists, or = who >talk about feminist ideas as part of the gospel. Community identity is a powerful motivator in almost every person's life, whether they are consciously aware of it or not. Members of a community = who exhibit traits that are different from the majority are either suspect or shunned, depending on the traits and the rest of the community. This applies EVERYWHERE, not just so-called conservative groups; notice the depressing homogeneity of teens who dress wildly to stand out, but only succeed in looking like every other rebel teen of their era. Communities provide not only identity, but comfort; and people who are different from the "norm" are like sand inside your bathing suit--more or less = irritating depending on how much is there and where it's located. I suspect that most Mormons perceive the communities Jonathan referred to above as incompatible with the "mainstream" LDS community. For the = people who grow up within the Mormon community, it must take a very strong motivation to leave that behind for a different community, and it is (as = he points out) difficult to find a place where you can both remain in the larger community and hold on to the ideals that shape your personal identity. I think Mormons who are strongly committed to environmental causes may be invisible for one of two reasons: 1. They are environmental activists in the mold of Terry Tempest = Williams and believe their church community would be hostile to them if they made their ideas public. They fear losing their place in their religious community. or 2. Their environmental concerns aren't in line with the strictures of environmentalism as it's represented in the press and by environmental activists. They don't see a place for themselves within that community, = and believe that this means there's no outlet for their ideas at all. The identity problem may be even worse for Mormon *writers*, many of whom are already perceived as outsiders simply because of their profession. = (Or it might mean that they feel they have nothing left to lose.) But it's important to remember that while community identity is powerful,= it is usually not so powerful as to erase all signs of individuality. It's = not logical to assume that *only* members of a particular community--such as active environmentalists--care about the key issues that define that community. Or that writers whose focus is, for example, the = disintegration of the nuclear family do not also care about other things as well. Melissa Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 10:48:56 -0700 From: "Jeff Needle" Subject: Re: [AML] Gen. Conference - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gae Lyn Henderson" To: Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 5:23 PM Subject: RE: [AML] Gen. Conference > I have yet to meet anyone personally who came to a > > point of repentance after listening to Conference. > > > > > > ----- > > Jeff Needle > > Ah, Jeff, you have not been in Relief Society recently. (This is my best > guess because you are both male and not a member!) > Good guess! > In my ward some of the women were actively PREPARING for General Conference > by praying, fasting, looking for the messages that they needed to hear. > Careful notes were taken and then goals were set for the coming 6 months. > > I was not one of those persons I will admit. > > You really have to be into 1) heartfelt humility, or 2)"competitive > righteousness" mode to comprehend this intense, super-achieving kind of > serious spirituality that is practiced. On a recent visiting teaching trip, > one of my "ladies" said that she was on her second year of never missing a > day of reading the scriptures (come illness, come hospitalization, come what > may). Very Dutiful! > > Gae Lyn Henderson > > Competitive righteousness?? What a wonderful turn of phrase! Thank you for it! I'm off to Sunstone in about an hour -- I'll see you all next Monday. [Jeff Needle] - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 11:53:30 -0600 From: "Todd Petersen" Subject: Re: [AML] LDS Nature Writing I know that this is getting into the area of doctrine, but the example I gave and the one Tracie gave seem to me to point to others. I don't imagine that these folks are alone. The fact that members are getting it wrong seems to me to be reason enough to say something to correct the fault. It's never enough for me to say that people are just dumb, and that's their fault. The Church hasn't made a statement, which is a lot like what Martin Luther King said about not stopping an evil being as bad as perpetrating it. We all know that our church's attitudes are not often the result of doctrine. Envrionmental issues are one place where people don't often come from a doctrinal perspective, but a political one, one that is often rolled over into a religious perspective BECAUSE there is no one really talking about the issues. I think there should be more LDS writing creative or otherwise that takes up these issues from all perspective, but I don't see it, and with the polarization that this discussion is causing, I don't see why there isn't more out there. Melissa said that people should put a stop to people drawing stupid conclusions from existing doctrine. I agree 100%, and it seems like writers could help in that area, but they aren't really right now, not in my estimation - -- Todd Robert Petersen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 12:06:55 -0600 From: Melissa Proffitt Subject: Re: [AML] LDS Nature Writing On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 15:42:16 -0600, Thom Duncan wrote: >> >> The reasons, (although some already stated), that I would be >> reluctant to embrace the environmental movement whole-heartedly is >> that people like me grew up hearing we'd be out of air, trees, water, >> oil, land, you name it by the year 2000, if not before. > >And the reason we are still going is because some groups listened back = then >and did things about it. The EPA for instance, Congress passing laws >against pollition, etc. All the harping back in our day did some good. = So >instead of being cyncial, you should be grateful. Because this would take us off topic, I will only point out that not all = of the doomsayers' predictions were "solved" by political and social intervention. Some people made predictions that were genuinely = unfounded, and then wrongly claimed that because they sounded the warning, those catastrophes didn't come true. Kathy is right in citing the general weariness of many people with the constant doom-and-gloom rhetoric that increasingly seems to be just a tool to scare the public into accepting = the latest policy, rather than encouraging us to evaluate its potential effectiveness. But that's probably just the Cynicism Monkey talking, not me. Melissa Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 12:33:12 -0600 From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: RE: [AML] Money and Art The reason this is a compelling argument is simply that we all support the = statement 'I support the arts' without actually having thought much about = it. My point, though, is that if the arts are going to be supported, then = what needs support is, well, 'art.' And we don't really think much about = what that means. A few days ago, I was honored to be able to attend the annual Mormon Arts = Retreat, in which some fifty LDS artists hung out together for a weekend = to see each others' stuff and to talk about what we saw. It was a = wonderful weekend, and I enjoyed it very much. But part of what impressed = me was the variety of art works represented there. Igor and Vesna = Gruppman, for example, played some of those marvelous Bartok violin duets, = based on folk dancers, which Igor introduced by saying that Bartok was one = of the world's first ethno-musicologists. A number of painters showed = slides of their most recent work, which included the realistic Bible = paintings of Greg Olson and Liz Swindle, but also works exploring = post-modern variations on abstract expressionism, constructivism, = neo-primitivism, and so on. We heard excerpts from various works of = fiction, including some non-rhyming poetry. We heard a lovely new = composition from Kurt Bestor, a kind of contemporary classical/neo-romantic= piece. Now, these were pretty successful people, pretty commercially = popular. But look at how radical and avant-garde and bizarre all those = works would have seemed in earlier days! Look how much we owe to those = horrifically offensive and dangerous and lunatic fringe artists of the = past! Poetry that doesn't rhyme! Music based on folk tunes! Shock and = horror! Now, of course, all those avant-gardisms are readily and widely accepted. = But there was a time they led to riots in the streets. And many many of = the artists who created them received support from their respective = governments. Bartok was able to research folk melodies on government = grants. Ibsen, the most radical of all Victorian writers, received = substantial government assistance during his formative years. And = remember, the notion of governments supporting theatre companies (espeicall= y radical and different theatre companies) originated here, in the States. = The Federal Theatre Project predates the British National and the RSC. The works of art that need support are precisely those with the greatest = potential for shock and outrage initially. If we support Art (capital A), = then we need to support the IDEA of art, which includes the notion that = art can and should be dangerous and radical at times. And in the US, most = people do support the idea of governments supporting the arts. Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 13:21:28 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: [AML] LDS Activism (was: LDS Nature Writing) - ---Original Message From: Jonathan Langford > (Liberal social politics and feminism would be > other common elements of such a worldview.) > > In most places, I think you have to get in with a fairly > sophisticated group before you discover people who are > politically liberal but active and committed Church members, > or environmentalists, or peace activists, or who talk about > feminist ideas as part of the gospel. Not that those people > aren't out there, but they generally don't talk about it much > in a Church context. > So what does everyone else say? Am I talking through my hat, > or does this phenomenon (people drifting away from the Church > at least partially for environmental reasons) really exist? I think the trend you see exists, but I think it is tied to activism and not ideology. Or, rather, it comes from the ideology of activism and not specifically Feminism, Environmentalism, or Liberal Social Politics. The specific tenet of activism that drives people away from the church is "the personal is political" and the activities that leads to. In essence, I believe that if you make the personal become political, you are essentially increasing the importance of the political beyond what you normally would allow. Since there is no limit on "personal" the temptation exists to raise your politics ever higher in importance. Eventually, your political convictions overcome and replace your religious convictions and you "drift" away from the church. Those who you called "sophisticated" politically liberal and yet active and committed Church members are those who have sought out their own borders and put limits in place so that they can keep their politics from overwhelming their membership. Personally, I think that this struggle may be more obvious with liberal politics (because of the mainly conservative Church population), but I think anybody who is politically (or academically, or any other area that involves strong philosophies and/or beliefs) active has to do the same. i.e. they must seek out and achieve a balance, a boundary or limit, that puts their activities in perspective with regards to the Church. The thing is, unless you privilege the Church above your own Philosophy, your Philosophy will eventually conflict with the Church and you'll distance yourself from the Church. Even if you remain a member, you'll find a wedge between yourself and your fellow members--a wedge you'll need to either overcome or allow to come between you and the love and service you could provide. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 12:35:08 -0700 From: harlowclark@juno.com Subject: [AML] Tone in Persuasive Writing (was: Book of Mormon & Archeology) [MOD: Okay, Harlow, you've successfully bridged the gap... sigh...] On Thu, 18 Apr 2002 Jonathan Langford writes, in a Moderator's note to Barbara Hume's post: > [MOD: I feel like we've been getting off-topic a lot recently, so > with apologies to Barbara, I'd like to request that anyone with a > response to her query send it to her directly. This isn't a topic > that I think is terribly on-target for AML-List.] While Book of Mormon archaeology may not be on-topic, there are a lot of issues around it that are. Consider the comment, "He sneers when I suggest that one should not base one's religious beliefs on archeological reports." That's closely related to the thread on Sanitized LDS history, particularly Thom Duncan's comments on testimonies founded on history or the church or some celebrity like the Rock rather than The Rock. Another issue very much on-topic is the rhetoric and rhetorical devices we use in talking about Book of Mormon archaeology. F.A.R.M.S. (The Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, originally an independent group, now part of BYU) publishes some excellent research (go to www.byu.edu and follow the links to F.A.R.M.S.), but it is sometimes strident and angry. I occassionally thumb through _The F.A.R.M.S. Review of Books on the Book of Mormon_ (now called _The F.A.R.M.S. Review of Books_, I think), but I find it quite difficult to read because the tone of almost every article I've seen is either self-righteous, or sneering or angry. Granted, seeing a few nasty-toned articles doesn't mean that every article in the Review has the same tone--I would assume Ed Snow's don't--but when almost every article I've looked at has approximately the same argumentative tone as the anti-Mormon articles I collect at General Conference, I don't want to keep looking. Let me give you one example. Reed Durham gave a famous presidential address for the Mormon History Ass'n called "Is There No Help for the Widow's Son?" which has been widely reprinted. I haven't read it, but I gather Durham's thesis is that Joseph Smith's words from the windowsill at Carthage Jail were an attempt to give the Masonic distress call, "Oh Lord, My God, is there no help for the widow's son?" and that Durham touches on the relationship between Masonic and LDS ceremonies. Anyway, a _F.A.R.M.S. Review_ article I looked at started by stating that Durham's peice had been reprinted without his permission, was ill-informed, and had "given aid and comfort to the enemy." I don't know if the authors were aware that that last is the classic definition of treason or if they just found a nice phrase to use. I suspect the latter because the tone of the article is condescending rather than angry. You don't see the kind of anger you might expect if someone was accusing someone else of treason. Instead it portrays Durham as a kind of innocent dupe who just didn't know enough to know that those silly ideas about Masonic elements in the temple ceremony have been thoroughly discredited. Thus the tone, the open disrespect towards another scholar, helped me decide I would rather read Durham's article. That's a profoundly literary question: What effect does the tone of our apologetics have on the people they're putatively supposed to help convince? And it's worth noting that most work on Book of Mormon archaeology is decidedly apologetic (or decidedly argumentative if coming from a source that doesn't believe there's any archaeological evidence). I compare that with something like Biblical Archaeology Review, which I haven't read much of either. I had a student several years ago who did a term paper on where the Ark of the Covenant might be. He cited some articles from BAR which sounded quite different in tone from most of the _F.A.R.M.S. Review_ articles I've seen. That may be because Biblical archaeology is a respected academic field, and few scholars feel any need to convince their colleagues that the Bible is a historical record, whatever one feels about the miracles. What I've seen of John L. Sorenson's book on BofM geography, something like, _A Meso-American Setting for the Book of Mormon_, seems to me fairly non-apologetic, though I haven't read much of it. So while I like a great deal of what F.A.R.M.S. does (particularly the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley (which I haven't read much of either), I'm wary of its tone. I think we could have some good discussion on tone in LDS writing, and its effects on audience, particularly since we produce so much apologetic, hortatory, didactic and devotional writing. Harlow S. Clark ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 15:15:52 -0600 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: [AML] Announcing: Center Street Theater Fellow AML-ers: We will be putting out an official press release real soon, but I wanted you guys to be the first to know. Today, we took possession of a space at 50 West Center Street in Orem for our All-Mormon All-the-Time Theatre, to be named (oddly enough) the Center Street Theatre. We are finalizing our first season but starting in August of this year, we will have a 7-play first season consisting of all original and previously produced LDS plays (and one musical). When I say "we" above, I of course mean to include Artistic Director Scott Bronson and Business Manager Paul Duerden. Just today someone, knowing I was on my way to sign the lease for the space, asked me how I felt undertaking this venture. I said, "A mixture of excitement at starting something knew, and fear that it won't work out, but faith that we can make it work." "Kinda like marriage," he said. And that's what it is. In this case (interestingly enough) a polygamous marriage where the three husbands have long shared the same dream, that of operating a full-time live stage theatre dedicated to production of original LDS plays and musicals. - ---- Thom Duncan General Manager The Nauvoo Theatrical Society "Mormon artists exploring Mormon life through theatre" - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 14:18:51 -0700 From: "Kathy Fowkes" Subject: Re: [AML] Gen. Conference Subject: RE: [AML] Gen. Conference > I have yet to meet anyone personally who came to a > > point of repentance after listening to Conference. > > ----- > > Jeff Needle > > You really have to be into 1) heartfelt humility, or 2)"competitive > righteousness" mode to comprehend this intense, super-achieving kind of > serious spirituality that is practiced. On a recent visiting teaching trip, > one of my "ladies" said that she was on her second year of never missing a > day of reading the scriptures (come illness, come hospitalization, come what > may). Very Dutiful! > > Gae Lyn Henderson Gae, That term, "competitive righteousness" makes me cringe. Are you sure it's an outward show, a competitive spirit about it, or is it just that the sisters in your ward have caught a vision of the same thing Jerry Tyner pointed out, and are seeking, with the help of their ward sisters, to 1) increase their obedience and thus their blessings and preparedness for what is coming, 2) lift, strengthen and inspire others by sharing their goals, and perhaps even 3) rejoicing in the wonder of overcoming weaknesses and feeling a greater closeness to Heavenly Father and the Savior? I sure hope it is a combination of the above, and not a sense of competition (unless with oneself) or else any changes are unlikely to be heart-deep. Which leads me to my literary connection to Jeff's observation. I've been in the church long enough to have seen a mighty change take place when Pres. Benson admonished us all to read the Book of Mormon. I still hear that particular Conference mentioned in meetings, and about the blessings that have come to the sister or brother which obedience to that counsel brought about. I've been hearing about the 6 Bs ever since President Hinckley talked about them, and about the inspiration these have been to the youth and to families who are using them to teach their children. (The 6 Bs, btw, were from a talk Pres. Hinckley gave decades ago, and revised for this new generation. A sisters in my ward found the original talk from the late 60's or early 70's and was telling me about the updates Pres. Hinckley has given it.) We've been encouraged to learn more about the Savior and His atonement in General Conference as well. In my RS, our leadership took this seriously and had very special programs which have helped a great many regain and/or strengthen their testimonies of Christ. My husband and I sure noticed a marked difference in my RS pres's countenance and personal expression of love and testimony, both in word and action since then. Our Stake Presidency has also done some remarkable things with the counsel given at General Conference in their leadership of the stake. We are not a church of showy repentance, and never will be. From my observations, a good many who watch General Conference, or later study the talks, do make powerful changes in their lives, but it's not something they like to advertise. Some eventually share their experiences in talks or even in writing, but most keep it to themselves, or between themselves and their loved ones, or write it in their journals. Others, such as those who fit the profile of abusers Pres. Hinckley described, and who do not repent, well, that talk will be the nails in their spiritual coffin, so to speak. A witness against them at the last day. Kathy Fowkes kathy_f@cox.net - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 15:35:46 -0600 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [AML] Sanitized LDS History? <<< Between my "outburst" (as the AP reporter rightly called it) on August 6 and my day of humiliation and repentence on October 3, I went through another shift in perspective. >>> What exactly happened on Oct. 3? Was it just the standing up in his own ward's Sunday school class, or is he referring to something else? Chris Bigelow - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 15:48:21 -0600 From: "Gae Lyn Henderson" Subject: RE: [AML] Gen. Conference Oops! I think you got me Thom! Gae Lyn > I don't know about you, but I've had it up to here with people who seem to > brag about their righteousness. You hear this all the time in > Church ("Last > week, in the temple," "During morning study of the scriptures, > I.."; ."When > my husband was a bishop...") I want to just stand up and remind them all > about the parable of the Publican who publically announced his > righteousness > in his prayers and what the Lord said about such persons. > > But then, I realize that, were I to do so, I would be no better than the > persons I would be rebuking. > > Thom Duncan > > > > > > > > -- > AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature > > - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 15:48:47 -0600 From: "Marianne Hales Harding" Subject: Re: [AML] Gen. Conference >I don't know about you, but I've had it up to here with people who seem to >brag about their righteousness. You hear this all the time in Church >("Last >week, in the temple," "During morning study of the scriptures, I.."; >."When >my husband was a bishop...") I want to just stand up and remind them all >about the parable of the Publican who publically announced his >righteousness >in his prayers and what the Lord said about such persons. But, Thom, maybe it really *did* happen last week in the temple or during their morning scripture study or when her husband was a Bishop...those things don't necessarily say to me "Hey look at how righteous I am" any more than saying "The other day when I was walking" is bragging about my mobility. Marianne Hales Harding _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #686 ******************************