*********************************BY COMMON CONSENT*********************************Vol. 14, nos. 1-2 March 2008

APRIL CONFERENCECRITIQUEC0unt thechangessinceOctober confer‑

ence: the callingof HenryB.Eyringinto theFirst Presidency to replace the recentlydeceasedJames E.Faust, the death of Presi‑dent Hinckley, the accession of Thomas B.Monsonat Churchpresident (to absolutelyno one's surprise), and the calling of Apos‑tleDeiterUchtdorfasthe newsecondcoun‑selor, while President Eyring took the firstcounselor's place formerly occupied byPresidentMonson. In short, the First Presi‑dency line‐up, so to speak, wi l l presentsome novelties at April conference.

But will the emphasis beon new initia‑tives and fresh voices, or wi l l this new Firstresidency concentrate on presenting aseamless transition and a virtually imper‑ceptible continuation of the accustomed?Furthermore, since a new apostle wi l l beappointedat this conference, wi l l PresidentMonson follow PresidentHinckley'sprece‑dent and appoint a non-North American?And wil l he go outside the Quorums ofSeventy to do it?

Observe, take notes, and participate intheMormonAlliance's semi-annualconfer‑

ence critiqueMonday,April 7,from 6:30 to8:30 pm.in theSaltLakePublicLibrary.Wewill be meeting in one of the conferencerooms on the lower level (right side of themain corridor running east-west from theelevator). Take the elevator just inside theeast plaza-level entry and go down onefloor. JaniceAllredwil l lead this freewheel‑ing and insightfulexchange.

The best parking (thoughnot free) is inthe lot under the building. Go east onFourth South and turn right at the mid‑block entrance between 200 East and 300East.

OCTOBER 2007CONFERENCECRITIQUE

Participants at the Mormon Alliance'ssemi-annual Conference Critique were in‑triguedby theappointmentsofHenryB.Eyringas a counselor in the First Presidency and byElder Quentin Cook's elevation to fill the va‑cancy in the Quorum of the Twelve. Althoughnobody had predicted Elder Eyring's appoint‑ment, one participant commented, "I thoughtPresident Hinckley would pick one of theyoung ones, so it makes sense." Althoughcalling a seventy-four-year-old man youngseems counter-intuitive, "it's all relative," and

M ' s a l u fl gmnamywfim lBIN-lay»xm-yumu R's-dun Hinddey m .Ppmnbd cm ; a Ihe l e u l n «I an. new:mm years Igwms hm .W w.m g “ n m m .W m : h u mW

4 . .» . hug. hum m: C m u m mm. m mbyhppmgiyfin‘on thrhud ma.

. m . m . m 1 d u u m m r pm.

Pump-ampedh l r m l dm x2 m g .m ul luw a r 'unuiunllyaoodmd a m ,y um - I “Tin-uselofiwomsim m m “ :Framer-HIL-mmmmkda l l mu.mm... in wuu... M!

HlnMey am an m. m. «may .0 . 3 “m mm u m m yt h e m ” m a y “ . . .before me Wa n n a . «um whid‘ mwere mm «commuyamwwwm h a m 1. IN [mpm‘lan m m.Ippan-MnuwcnddmlblyHlnddry‘ndug.n mm.» hmolinlly. «mm. on a.c um wild-m.m.c m . " a m m m .m M w i l l : n i p " 0 . . " M y ” . r umm ‑m MAISWW.KimbalL-nnrw-pu‑m, wu u l c d m. .m quorum w h e nmmmm . . .m . mmm . m m , m .mun-nunnhmwemloflkmuvdwmml.1 m mm, mm ems. Alhen sm- u‑mm o Mdu y mm I n k - m g ( a n i .am,mm»mm L‘mkm pew-anywithmm... u m , um Ewing‘s u“ ww m u y m z d a m h n a u p h w w h l z h ew n m l d m n

mam: m . . . “ m a l k d u m m mx Hum-mm u m " u w n s a v l u u ym u m“ m m . . . “ m u l l i n g u n l i lm e u m m w m m a ‘ ma...hamump m . “

m p m mmmm a u m a m - swud " 5 m mUmvmry ...am l l n dm...:5 ama bsihup, hndly i ndWm .50...” m a y “ : mEyn r - Lsm lhm lwmgm ‑

hmm 'ma h i l h Amwa -w fl l“ w w w . m m w m h n wm g l m l w m y m E - z m u fl ‘ k m l m ,' B u l i l w u a l a n w l r y l n m m m zM u i r / m a d :

D a p l m n n n d a n m m l l ym a n a g m m m m m w - ma m p ‐ m u m m m w ma w n i n g - i d e m : m ‘ 5 m . mM u m , m m m m q u . m .fill-li ly « m a .. u m - Far aamplnw m . s . . . n . p m m u m m n mg u m (aha-n Py nuns and manual}.h m . Em limply mm In A:Camp- ' - um r uman I n : m, .mwmmWr - h d n bw lmnwam .Erica-palmn e u m m u W - u uMmm b u fl x w mmm x d ‘ v - Lm ‘ l h m w u m l h e d k p l n y d ‘ hmm. a . m mm « 4 . . z m r... b u m .P M « m a m l m $4 .» . Pm“.d a u n u d k y ‐Nm nm nmmmn fl nm ‘m k i n m e fi n h u d m - I m m h m fl i gmfwuun l -kdum'Maybehem- ‘hm-nm m w m w m m m mp m f fl ’ l l i fl n fl m M M , mm h m m k m w n n m m nm l a m h k m m d b y l k m t p m ‑mammmwa

o...W y n - 1 | m aM a d HuhS n »U m v u m y n ‘ h g m n m a s fl d n f n o k m dm m n ' z d m l m n y p g human;.m mm mummy. m y , m1w l l y ' AnunulpImAp-m Ra l hdg kdufl ym l m b fl m fl d u C a o k m d i w u p k u lMm l m l mm pmm v e s n s w l m a nn l d n h l i fi l m a d l D ’Mknui lypeupkh i p p e d mm umM m y :mmm m , a d d m Indhmh am, and m y «eldLhnnmpfllmlSnQumnnwmkmmbtawwwmuaamnmwmmmnMMm-ddhesodwub "

His talk was seen as"very appropriate tothe occasion--a time to thank everyone, lookback, pledge to doyour best."

Janice Allred, moderator of the livelydiscussion, noted that there were more talksthanusual in this conference (31),meaningthatthe seventies who spoke had less time thanpreviously. "The international presence wasmorepronounced,"commentedanotherpartici‑pant. "More accents, more new faces, manymore stories about conversions or growing upin poverty, or dealing with cultural circum‑stances that were out or’ what we’ve come to seeas the conference mainstream." Participantsagreed that these talks were, for the most part,interesting and inspiring.

Janice also did her usual categorization oftalks into institutional (16),Christian living(8),and doctrinal (an "unusually high" 5). In thelatter category were ElderHolland'sdefense ofMormon views of the godhead and PresidentMonson's on the resurrection. "Even though itwas primarily anextended two-part personalstory, and President Morison nearly alwaystalks on Christian living,there's no way to ‘live'the principle of the resurrection," Janice ex‑plained. Elder Hales's talk on personal revela‑tion, in contrast, was really support of theChurch as an institution since al l of his exam‑pleswere of inspiration in the selectionof stakepresidents ”I assumed that its purpose was toassure listeners that revelation had been em ‑ployedin choosingEldersEyringandMonson,”commented one participant.

Elder Holland's talk generated consider‑able interest, particularly in Company withElder Ballard‘s, which seemed to focus oninstructingmembers in howtodefineMormon‑ismproactivelyrather thandefensively (againstthe ”you're no t Christian" accusation). Bothwere seen as examples of "branding." ElderBallard seemed to deliberately downplay doe

trinal differences "Doctrine is hard to talkabout clearly and succinctly," acknowledgedone participant. "It's things like the Book ofMormon, the First Vision, polygamy, the planof salvation, exaltation to godhood." "And let'sface it," chimed in another, "to most people,doctrine is irrelevant. They want peace. Theywant something that wi l l help them and theirfamilies."

ElderHolland'stalk was, however, seen asa departure from the general trend of pastconferences which have stressed elementsMormonismshares w i th the Christianworld. itgot points for being "aserious and responsiblelook at the Mormon doctrine of the godhead"but some viewers raisedquestions about whatseemed to behis "exasperated" tone at dealingwiththe accusationsof notbeingChristiansandfor sidestepping elements in the Book of Mor‑mon that seem best explained as trinitarian.

One participant commented that the realissue is not the doctrine bu t its consequences.Will one church accept die baptismof another?Mormonism won't. Can Mormons claim to be"saved" according to evangelical criteria? MittRomneyin hissuspiciously conveniently timedNewsweek article said that he accepted Jesus ashis "personalSavior," languagenot characteris‑tic of Mormons but a phrase that Elder Ballardrepeated. One participant who spent someyears in the Midwest said that he routinelyanswered "are yousaved?” questionsby saying"yes” and giving the date of his baptism. Healso commented that he had carpooled with aPresbyterian elder and complained to h imabout a localBaptistminister whowas publiclyaccusing Mormons of no t being Christian.When he told the Presbyterian the Baptist'snameandchurch,thePresbyterianlaughedandsaid, “Oh, him.He doesn't even think the otherBaptists in t own are Christian."

The question came up aboutwhetherElder

Holland'stalkwasmoreclosely linkedtoPresi‑dent Hinckley's address, largely a repeat of his2007 conference address during the JosephSmith bicentennial, which stressed Mormon‑ism's uniqueness. "Both talks seemed quiteaggressive. It‘s asif we've worked for years toget into the Christian tent," commented oneobserver, "and now that we're sitting there,we're saying, ‘But we're different from you-‑and better, because we're right and you'rewrong."'

"Yes," commented another participantdryly. "It hardly seems like the Christian thingto do somehow."

When thediscussionmoved to the addressofReliefSociety general presidentJulieB.Beck,stressing the importance of motherhood, boththe volume and the energy in the roomacceler‑ated. Janice Allred, mother of nine who hasnever beenemployed outside the home, prais‑edPresident Beck's "sincere" voice ("she didn'tsimper”) andalsoher "courage" in tacklingsucha problematic topic, but agreed that the talkwas unsatisfactory in several ways.

One (male)participantexpressed vigorousdelight at the "forthright" defense of mother‑hood. "The basic message was that women arein charge of the next generation, and that'salways been true. Fathers have a very smallrole by comparison." Another (male) partici‑pant acknowledged the truth of the previousspeaker's commentby lookingat"evolutionarybiology" but noted that "we're in a transitionalperiodnowwhere we're trying to get fathers tomake more contributions than being a spermdonor."

An email correspondent (father of severaldaughters) called the address an example of"the Plan of Sappiness" and dismissed it as"simplistic, emotionally based nonsense." Hetook particular umbrage at focus on problemsthat were trivial compared to the literal life‑

and-death risks to children "in Iraq, Afghani‑stan, Sudan, Congo, Rwanda and a hundredother locations around the world where chil‑dren are caught up daily in the crossfire ofwarring adults. [President Beck] would set allright again with...white shirts and missionaryhaircuts!"

Another email correspondent, mother of atoddler and pregnant with her second child,provided a list of problems with which mostparticipants agreed:

1.The youngmothers,who aremost likelyto take her words seriously, without agrain ofsalt, are the least likely to be able to do whatshe advises. (She listed the demands of youngchildren, time-consuming callings, their statusas, in essence, single mothers during wakinghours because their husbands were also jug‑gling full-time jobs or studies plus"time-consuming leadership callings.")

2. It's pretty much anupper-middle-class,First World privileged point of view that sayswomen actually have free time and energy toget all of this work done. (Others pointed ou tthat President Beck made several unlikelyassumptions: that all Mormon women weremarried and, furthermore, to men whose in‑comes were sufficient to support wives andchildren.Theaccompanyingvisualsofmodern,well-equipped kitchens, and double-panedthermal windows reinforced the image ofassumed affluence.)

3. It sends asubtlemessage to LDSwomenthat if they're notbetter homemakers than theirbenighted Gentile acquaintances, they reallyaren't living up to all of the righteousnessstandards. One woman pointed out that the"emphasison custodialduties" seemed to focuson the wrong area, if what Sister Beckmeant tocommunicate was the importance of parentalinfluence on a child's development. Anotheragreed, pointingout that involvingchildren in

doing the laundry or working in the gardenshouldn‘t be ends in themselves, but ratheroccasions for quality time together. "Childrenreallyenjoy helpingwithchores." "Yes," agreedanother wryly, "and that stage usually comesjust before they get any good at it."

While no one argued that housekeepingwasn't important or that children shouldn'twork with parents in household maintenance,others found the idea of a chore-driven,curriculum-heavy "pre-MTC" home environ‑ment unappealing.Other problem areas werethe absence of husbands/fathers from the talk,the lack of historical awareness that teachingvalueshasbeenassignedparticularly towomensince the days of the early United States ("re‑publican motherhood"), and the fact that cur ‑rent housekeeping standards were largelyCreated in the 19505 asa consumer mentalitydriven by advertising with the result that timespent on housekeeping went up, not down, as"labor-saving devices" proliferated.

Singlewomenparticipantscommentedthatit reinforced the already strong message thatmotherhood is not only women's most impor‑tant rolebut,by implication,her only role. "TheMormon lifestages exclude us You matterwhen you're ayouth, then when you get mar ‑ried and have kids, then when you and yourhusband are couple missionaries. But rightnow, you don‘t matter." Another pointed ou tthat this talk "makes targets" of young coupleswho do no t yet have children and validatesothers in asking "intrusive personal questions"about their parenthoodplans.

Despite this laundry list of problematicareas, most participants agreed that the prob‑lemswasn't what Sister Beck had said asmuchas "what--and who--she'd left out," "The factthat she went back more than twenty years topickup quotations fromPresidentBensonsaysthat we've had ageneration of greater sensitiv‑

i ty to and recognition of women's diversecircumstances," commented one participant,"Maybe when it's Sister Beck's turn to speakagain in three years after she's talked to a lotmore women and logged a lot more time out‑side Utah,we'll see ashift."

One participant who had followed part ofthe voluminous discussion on this thread onfeministrnormonhousewives,org was puzzledthat some posters seemed to see Elder Oaks'stalk on good-better‐best as countering SisterBeck's talk. "It just seemed like more things tofeel guilty about." Another older participantgloomily said, "I destroyedmy life trying to doeverything the Church told meto do. I alwaysfelt guilty. I was never good enough-wandnowI 'm supposed to be no t only better but thebest?" An email participant saw it asadding "an e w level of guilt" to members who alreadythink they should "earn their way" intoheaven."The problem is, every time we have a changeof bishop or stake president or YW leader, thedefinition of ‘best' can change, leaving usforever on a treadmill to exaltation." He re ‑ported that his teenage daughter was "filledwi thguilt"by this talk,wondering if she shouldgiveup sports "whichshe loves" to attendmore"poorly planned” Youngwomen activities

Anotherparticipantsaw in it anexampleofthe analogy used by Elder Daniel K. Judd oftrying to attract horses on the farm by rattlingdirt in the bucket instead of grain, Still othersthought the talk was "great" and encouragedlisteners to use it to "decidewhat's best for you.Maybe it's staying home and reading a goodbook."

Relatively few had seen the women'sgeneral meeting,butSilvia Hr Allred's talk hadbeenappreciated "as another Latina voice" andits "real-lifeexamples" of visiting teaching.WasBarbaraThompson'sappointmentanindicationthat "there's now a ‘single' seat in the Relief

Society general presidency? And here's awomanwhohasSpent her career workingwithchildren who need intervention. Maybe she'llinject more realism into policy making." SisterBeck's talk on the importance of motherhoodwas seen asthe introduction to the theme shefollowed up with in her general session.

President Packer's address seemed "verydissonant. He was talking about the basicequality of all members‐-which is good--buthe'ssomeonewho insistson beingtreated withcompletedeferenceandimmediateobedience."One participant wondered if it was a "sourgrapes" talk because he wasn't selected as thenew counselor. Another found startling hisadmission that, after hints for years that hehadhad apersonal manifestation of the Savior, he"all but admitted that hehadn't."

ConcernwasexpressedaboutElderWirth‑lin's tremor that developed to serious propor‑tions while he spoke. About seven minutesfrom the end of the talk, Elder Nelson stoodbehind him, gripping his arm to steady him."Elder Wirthlin was saying some really lovelythings about unconditional love," commentedoneobserver, "andElderNelsonwasthepersonwho wrote that Ensign talk in whichhe arguedthat God doesn't love usunconditionally.SoIfound his behavior ironic." Added anotherparticipant, "I thought it was agreat sermon initself. In fact, I can't remember what he spokeon, but I ' l l remember what he did."

The music, although occasionally exces‑sively slow in tempo, had been a highlight ofthe conference fornearlyeveryone, particularlythe solo section and the numbers that were notjust hymn arrangements. "And there were notalks on why we sing only hymns," approvedone participant. '

A trend that conference‐watchers want toobserve in the future is "what seems to be agreater acceptance of becoming emotional

while speaking. President Eyring has alwaysbeen someone who chokes up,but there seem‑ed to be quite a number of similar reactions inthis conference. Isthis trend intensifying?"Oneparticipant reported sociologist Armand L.Mauss's observation that, when he grew up, aset of scriptures always adorned the pulpit atsacrament meeting. "Now it's always a box ofKleenex."

Although Sister Beck's talk was unques‑tionably front-runner for "worst talk," therewere several candidates for "best talk," includ‑ingbothof President Eyring's, and also BishopRichard Edgley's talk which not only quotedhumorist Robert Kirby (without using hisname) but supplied numerous examples ofneighborly service.

Unlikepreviousconferences, there seemedto be less emphasis on pornography, althoughthose attending priesthood meeting said thatspeakers in that session included frequentwarnings against intemet porn.

Some conversations continued after themeeting had formally closed. Elder Michael I.Teh received kudos, not only for his personalaccount of the transformation of "Uncle Fred"butforhispleasantdemeanor andhisquotationfromC.S.Lewis'sTheScrewtapeLetters.Anotherparticipant quipped that Elder Steven Snow'scharacterization of his mother as "the travelagent for guilt trips" could apply to Sister Beckas well. The "shoe" art accompanying bothElder Oaks's and especially Elder Enrique R.Falabella's touching first-person account re‑ceived special mention. Another participantcommented that althoughheappreciatedElderOctavianoTenorio's personalexperience at thedeath of his first daughter, he could not seehimself reacting so calmly "just because mywife and I were sealed."

"YouAre the Light of the World"HurryRobert Fox

This statement was madeby Jesus to agroup of disciples on whom he had justbestowed his Beatitudes as recorded inMatthew 521-12 Notice that hedid not say,"you ought to be the light of the world" butrather "Youare its light."Yetmostpreacherson this subject have treated Iesus's state‑ment as an "imperative" (authoritativecommand) rather than as an "indicative"(statement of fact) 50 we must ask: Whywas Jesus able to speak thus tohisdisciples?

The answer must be found in theBeatitudes‐context which preceded thestatement in question Those Beatitudeswere spoken in the indicative mood ratherthan in the imperative. That is, instead oftelling his hearers what they ought to be,Jesus, in hisBeatitudes,spoke and relatedtohis hearers solovingly and graciously thatthey were transformed into radiant lights,l i t up* with joyful gratitude for what Jesushad just said and done for themi

It was to these radiant, glowinghearersthat Jesus proceeded to deliver the remain‑der of his Sermon on the Mount in theimperative mood.Only after he had richlybestowedon themhis indicativeBeatitudesdid hethen tell them what God requiredoftheme‐even to loving their enemies! Thus,someone has observed that all of God'simperatives are based on his indicatives.This applies even to the Ten Command‑ments (Exod. 20) In the first verse of thatchapter, God reminds his people of all hehad done for them in delivering them from

Egyptbeforecommandingthemto obeyhiscommandments. Thus, God consistentlybestows His grace-gifts on us before Hecommands our faith-obedience.

Notice how this order operates in theepistles of Romans, Galatians, Ephesians,andHebrews,each of which is divided intotwo sections. The first section is devoted toan articulation of God's gospel of gracewhile the second section is devoted to thefaith-response which is elicited by thatgospel. In this connection,we are remindedof the Apostle Paul's question in l Corin‑thians 4:7: "What do youhave that you didnot receive?If , then,you receivedit,why doyou boast asif it were not agift?"

The most impressive of God’s gifts isthe astonishing truth that, long before anyof us had adequately believed in God orrepented of our sins or asked for forgive‑ness, God forgave usat the precisemomentin whichwe crucifiedHisSonon the Cross!In other words, according to Romans 5:10,"while we were [His] enemies we were rec‑onciledto Godby the deathof HisSon”--notwhenwewerehisobedient friendsbu twereHisdisobedient enemies Couldtherepossi‑bly be any other information that would"lightus up"more than this?‐-and transformus into His obedient children? Such radiantpeople are indeed the light of the world, sosorely needed in today's darkness,

="The context for this phrase is Acts 2:13, in whichthose who heard the apostles on the day of Pentecostcommented: "These men are full of new wine." Theirstatement recognizes that these apostles were radiantlyecstatic w i t h joy regarding the good news they wereproclaiming.Thus, they were practicingwhat the ApostlePaul said in Ephesians 5.18: "Be not drunk With wine . , .

n - m m m s p a ‘ l y u - m ' u s ' uh ‐ t h - Q ‘ W ‘

m m m mMm Kauimn

A m m m w m w u p m fi u l l L - ha y - r h m m m r m h m w d m: - i n C m u m n m . W h :m m m M n . Wm m m a . m w ‐ aMonmdlhnlmddmn‘unum m u .. m I n n p h l m m , ( ‘ n n i u u l m d n p m . mm n v r d h : k a l - h . H 0 w I l M a n m l n d

F a l l w h u m m v h e n m w h ‑m u m - p m :

1 Haldanlwtld Mundane-mam« n a n - W W W .

1 M . . . “ E u l v d e ‐ m n .I l a - A d ma. montydunqm a . . . “wwww4 m p m u y m w m D M D - ( M m ‑

.m wu mun-n1( m mpm...A h fl y h m n m n m fi n m w

t m l A W m m l m - m w m .a m M M M H I H M I M y - n

s m a m . 4 m m m . . .M u p w d l w u h h p w p l - d m h b

M m A I M - MI s u l a b m - S e u uu m o v y m u u s

Inn -Am1 M W M m m - l u a m y

u m m m - m 1 - y a m m v n d ) “w u m l l y m b y fl n m l l uI nn...

I I l h k d m n m w m u m l h r y n ym l n m l n w m m h q m m wm 0! mm m Imnlly m m . “ a,m u n - m m

v m w u u m m w h w ‐ m” m a d m a n ‐ W h a mm u m .

m A d l m q u ‘ dH,mm...m...mu anm y ! in

m : -(mSoulkm mm m. «Mu l tan mu m m m M n d w w w m uwidom

u . m m . . 4 m ‘ 0 4 - u m . “m y m mm m m u n y I n n - wlurks-um

n o n c. . . a . . . “ n . awn b ya m “m - w l m M m

n . . .m. human-Hy,. law mmd u M n m m m d u b l m - m u n m a lm m w w s u m m m ma xm m ; M ma.A .W u mm m y n m '