Monthly Archives: February 2008

Relief Society Magazine: January 1951

LDS History, LDS Organization, Main, Media

And now for something completely different.

One of my treasured books — which I begged of my mother-in-law, and which she generously gave to me — is a bound volume of all 1951 issues of The Relief Society Magazine (Vol. 38, Nos. 1-12). The Relief Society Magazine (TRSM) was a small, semi-glossy official monthly publication of the Relief Society of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Like the contemporaneous general Church magazine, The Improvement Era, TSRM carried paid advertising (Orson Scott Card quipped in Saintspeak that when The Ensign replaced The Improvement Era, the advertising function was taken over by BYU Magazine). Each issue appears to be roughly 70-75 pages long.

I thought I’d reproduce the table of contents of a single issue: January 1951 (Vol. 38, No. 1); I’ve dropped the page numbers and reformatted a bit:

SPECIAL FEATURES

  • A New Year Wish — General Presidency of Relief Society
  • Ernest L. Wilkinson, President of Brigham Young University — Ivor Sharp
  • Award Winners: Eliza R. Snow Poetry Contest
    • Lot’s Wife (First Prize Poem) — Alice Morrey Bailey
    • Old Home (Second Prize Poem) — Julia M. Nelson
    • Pioneer Wagon Wheels (Third Prize Poem) — Ruth Horsley Chadwick
  • Award Winners: Annual Relief Society Short Story Contest
    • “But Covet Earnestly” (First Prize Story) — Mirla Greenwood Thayne
  • Polio Strikes Again
  • Pioneering in the Big Horn Basin — Botilda Berthelson McBlain

FICTION

  • A Christmas Gift for Teacher — Fae Decker Dix

GENERAL FEATURES

  • Sixty Years Ago [these are excerpts from the Woman’s Exponent, 1891]
  • Woman’s Sphere — Ramona W. Cannon
  • Editorial: The Old and the New — Vesta P. Crawford
  • New Serial (“For the Strength of the Hills”) to Begin in February
  • Notes to the Field: Relief Society Assigned Evening Meeting of Fast Sunday in March; Bound Volumes of 1950 Relief Society Magazines; Award Subscriptions Presented in April; Relief Society Not a Selling Agent; Pictures of all General Presidents of Relief Society Available
  • Notes from the Field: Relief Society Socials, Bazaars, and Other Activities — Gen. Sec’y-Treasurer, Margaret C. Pickering
  • From Near and Far

LESSON DEPARTMENT

  • Theology: “The Long Night of Apostasy” — Don B. Colton
  • Visiting Teaching Message: “And Jesus Answering Saith Unto Them…” — Mary Grant Judd
  • Work Meeting: Pictures, Mirrors, and Wall Accessories — Christine H. Robinson
  • Literature: Oliver Goldsmith — Briant S. Jacobs
  • Social Science: The Role of Ancient Israel — Archibald F. Bennett
  • Music: Theories Underlying Singing, Accompanying, and Conducting — Florence J. Madsen

FEATURES FOR THE HOME

  • A Gingerbread House — Phyllis Snow
  • The Low Cost of Happiness — Caroline Eyring Miner
  • From Commode Into Buffet –Rachel K. Laurgaard
  • Crocheting Keeps Her Busy and Happy — Rosella F. Larking

POETRY

  • “The Heart Will Find It” — Dorothy J. Roberts; “Boys Are Dear” — Christie Lund Coles; “Letter From a Daughter” — Calra Laster; “Rosemary” — Margery S. Stewart; “The Wild Geese Fly” — Marvin Jones; “Progress” — Anges Just Reid; “The Dying Year” — Beatrice K. Ekman; “Sketches” — Evelyn Fieldsted; “Recompense” — Matia McClelland Burk; “Mirror, Mirror” — Mabel Jones Gabbott; “My Choice” — Marion W. Garibaldi; “My Child” — Marylou Shaver; “Within My Heart” — Grace Sayer

And here’s the first prize winning poem in the Eliza R. Snow contest:

Lot’s Wife

She merely turned for one last, stolen look
Before her woman’s lingering mind forsook
The home her hands had decked, her smile made sweet,
The memories of her children on the street.
A spirit, set on right, must keep front-face
Forever rigid toward the chosen place
And eyes firm-narrowed in the lane of duty.
No wayside resting place and no lush beauty
Should tempt the soul to longing, no lost
Love or glory, and no treasure mete their cost
In nostalgic indecision, not even pity
For a wanton, doomed, and wicked city,
Lest the will be drawn into the sucking blaze,
Consumed to smoke and ash. The backward gaze
Can bend desire, compel the step to halt,
And slowly, slowly turn the heart to salt.

— Alice Morrey Bailey

All in all, the articles are interesting, and the range of topics is fascinating. Much as with The Improvement Era, the articles are often lengthier and written at a more scholastic level than what you find currently in The Ensign. I also find it interesting that many of the women use as bylines their first names followed by both what are almost certainly both maiden and married names.

Oh, and here’s the scary part: the General Relief Society President at that time (January 1951 — two years before I was born) was Belle Spafford — who was still General Relief Society President when I was an undergraduate at BYU in the 1970s. A different era, indeed.

Comments? ..bruce..

A simple step for Obama

Current events, LDS Society, Main, Politics

OK, Obama won the Utah Democratic primary (quite handily) and has other things to worry about for the next six months than how Utah will vote in the fall (such as, winning the nomination in the first place). But it strikes me that in an Obama/not-Hillary vs. McCain/maybe-Huckabee matchup, Obama could probably flip Utah (and possibly Idaho) from the red column to the blue — and gain support in heavily LDS areas of California and Arizona — with a simple statement along these lines [note: this is my suggested language, not anything that Obama has actually said]:

Republicans seek to divide, seek to exclude, seek to reject those who do not meet some obscure or arbitrary standard. We saw this during the Republican primaries, when an entire church — a uniquely American religion, one whose members are widely admired for their citizenship, their upright lives and their service to others — was repeatedly criticized as being not Christian, in fact as being of the devil. What’s more, this was done those who set themselves up as judges of all things Christian, by supporters of the Republican candidate for Vice-President, Mike Huckabee. Well, to our Mormon sisters and brothers, you who are our Christian sisters and brothers, we say: come home. Come back to the Democratic Party, which you supported through so much of the 20th Century. We have no questions of your Christian faith; indeed, your global humanitarian service, local community involvement, and commitment to religious pluralism are exactly what we want and need, what we as Democrats stand for. It is we, the Democratic Party, not the Republican Party, who say as your founder Joseph Smith said: ‘We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men and women the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.’ We seek to include, not exclude, to accept, not turn away. We are not afraid of your successes as a church; we welcome them and want to learn from them. To paraphrase the late Martin Luther King: we judge you not by the particulars of your faith but by the content of your character. Like many of us, you have known persecution and prejudice, and you cherish freedom and civil rights. And like many of us, you seek to build a better world. As our Christian brothers and sister, come join the rest of us — in all our variety of beliefs, faiths and convictions — in building that better world. Come home.

And with that one, short speech, Obama could well turn vast numbers of US-based Latter-day Saints into supporters, particularly given these factors. They may not change party registration (though I suspect quite a few would, particularly if Obama continued his outreach to Latter-day Saints after election), but I think they would vote heavily for Obama over McCain (and particularly McCain/Huckabee) in the fall.

Of course, if the GOP ticket is McCain/Romney, it wouldn’t matter what Obama said; Latter-day Saints would vote Republican in a big way. ..bruce..

Could Utah go Democratic? [UPDATED]

Current events, LDS Society, Main, Politics

I’ve been saying for some time that there’s a real chance that Utah, considered the most Republican of all states, could actually go Democratic in the Presidential election this fall, particularly if Mike Huckabee is on the GOP ticket. As I pointed out in that previous article, Utah through most of the 20th Century (particularly the 1917-1985 period) elected a Democratic governor and at least one Democratic Senator about 75% of the time.

Now, an article in this morning’s Deseret News reports the following in the aftermath of Romney’s departure from the GOP nomination:

Only 30 percent of Utahns polled in a new Deseret Morning News/KSL-TV survey Thursday said they’d vote for the presumptive Republican nominee for president, Arizona Sen. John McCain.

And nearly as many, 25 percent, said they would cast their ballot for a Democrat, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama. Eleven percent said their choice was another Democrat, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton.

The other Republicans still in the race, Texas Rep. Ron Paul and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, had only minimal support — 3 percent for Paul, a onetime Libertarian candidate for president, and just 2 percent for Huckabee, a Southern Baptist minister.

As I noted before, not just the Huckabee campaign but also (to a lesser extent) the McCain campaign has been involved in anti-Mormon smears while campaigning against Romney. Those should halt now that Romney’s out of the race — but the Republican Party should not underestimate how many Mormons are upset by the anti-Mormon prejudice rampant through the Religious Right portion of the GOP, particularly as it has come out during the campaign. If Obama wins the Democratic nomination and continues his outreach efforts to Mormons, and the GOP puts forth a McCain/Huckabee ticket, Utah could seriously be in play this fall. ..bruce..

UPDATE: While it’s merely anecdotal, here’s a post on an LDS blog that captures what a lot of Mormons are feeling. (Be sure to read the comments as well.)

UPDATE: On the other hand, just to keep perspective, the last time that Utah went Democratic in a US Presidential election was 40 years ago, in 1968, when Utah (like pretty much the rest of the country) went for Johnson over Goldwater.

UPDATE: On the third hand, here’s an experience I just had where a friend — a Utah Republican of long standing — informed me out of the blue that he’s seriously thinking of voting for Obama.

Silliness at work

Current events, Main, Politics

This is somewhat moot now, what with Romney suspending his campaign, but it’s silly nevertheless. Steve Sailer over at VDARE has noted that Mitt Romney has largely been winning in states with caucuses and has an explanation:

That seems to be a pattern — Romney does well in caucuses and loses in primaries. Before today, he won caucuses in Wyoming, Nevada, and Maine, and a primary in his “home” state of Michigan. Perhaps that’s just because the more dedicated, public affairs-oriented individuals who show up at caucuses have carefully assessed each candidate’s positions and resumes and made a responsible choice for Romney.

Or maybe … it’s because Mormons keep packing the caucuses.

Unfortunately, I can’t find exit polls for Colorado and Minnesota, but we do know that Romney’s victory in the Nevada caucus was boosted by Mormons making up 25% of the GOP caucusers and going close to 100% for Romney. So, I have my suspicions about his other caucus victories. If anybody has any evidence one way or another, let me know.

For starters (as I wrote Steve and told him), if you take his article and substitute “Obama” for “Romney” and “African-Americans” for “Mormons”, the article quickly seems silly, if not pointless.

Second, I’m not sure how Mormons would “pack” caucuses. My wife attended the Republican caucuses last Tuesday night; everyone attending was carefully checked against voter registration roles to ensure that they were currently registered for that precinct. (In fact, my wife said a friend of ours — a Mormon, no less! — was turned away because his voter registration wasn’t current.) Since Mormons only make up a little over 2% of Colorado’s population, the idea of Mormons somehow accounting for Romney’s 60% of the caucus votes — other than by simply showing up in their own precincts, as anyone could — seems far fetched. ..bruce..

Dirty tricks in Virginia?

Current events, Main, Politics

I found the following interesting item over at the Washington Times:

Is a conspiracy afoot by an unnamed Republican presidential campaign to draw votes away from former Massachusetts governor and Mormon Mitt Romney?

That’s what one Inside the Beltway reader wants to know, saying that at 7:30 p.m. on the evening of Super Tuesday, two young men claiming to be Mormons knocked on the front door of her Northern Virginia home.

“Interestingly enough, the Virginia presidential primary is one week away,” she notes. “I’m not normally the suspicious type, but it dawned on me that those two young men were not Mormons, but supporters from another presidential campaign … trying to hurt Romney with this religious card.”

She points out that most people “find it irritating to be interrupted during the dinner hour, and I think most door-to-door salespeople know that. I’ve never known any religious door knockers to canvass neighborhoods at night. And besides, these guys were not good looking enough to be Mormons.”

Gotta love that last line. Still, they well could be LDS missionaries. I don’t know exactly where this woman lived other than “Northern Virginia” (which covers a bit of territory; I used to live in NoVa myself), so I don’t know which LDS mission would cover that area and what rules that particular mission might have about tracting at night.

Here are the big questions:

That should be enough to identify them. 🙂 ..bruce..

P.S. OK, wearing Doc Martens isn’t strictly required, but it sure is common. And, boy, do I wish I had had Doc Martens during my two years in Central America back in 1972-74. If you think it’s hard finding size 13 dress shoes here in the States….

Succession in LDS Leadership (part IV)

LDS Organization, Main, Succession

As expected, President Thomas S. Monson has been set apart as the 16th President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. He has retained President Henry B. Eyring as First Counselor, also no surprise. Most interestingly, he selected Elder Dieter L. Uchtdorf as Second Counselor, making him (I believe) the first non-American to serve in the First Presidency in modern times, underscoring the global nature of the Church (President Monson: “He knows every airport in the entire world…He’s an international man.”).

In the meantime, Pres. Boyd K. Packer goes from being Acting President of the Quorum of the Twelve to be President of the Quorum of the Twelve, and thus next in line for succession to the LDS Presidency. Our prayers go with all these men. ..bruce..

[UPDATE: I’ve added the “in modern times” comment, because one counselor in the First Presidency in the early 1900s — Anthon H. Lund — was born over in Denmark, though I’m less clear whether or not he was an American citizen at the time of his calling into the First Presidency in 1901. Interestingly enough, Lund was President of the Quorum of the Twelve and thus next in line in succession to the LDS Church Presidency (behind LDS Church President Heber J. Grant) at the time of his (Lund’s) death in 1921.]

Carter: missing the point?

Belief systems, Current events, Main, Politics, World Religions

Consider the following two quotes. Here’s the first one:

“…But you never asked me what my paper is about! I’m taking the text about growing up to the stature of Christ and working out an idea which I feel sure you’ll be interested in. I’m going to point out how people always forget that Jesus…was a comparatively young man when he died. He would have outgrown some of his earlier views, you know, if he’d lived. I’m going to ask my audience to consider what his mature views would have been. A profoundly interesting question. What a different Christianity we might have had if only the Founder had reached his full stature! I shall end up pointing out how this deepens the significance of the Crucifixion. One feels for the the first time what a disaster it was; what a tragic waste…so much promise cut short.”

I’m sure many of you recognize this quote; it’s from C. S. Lewis’s classic work The Great Divorce; in this particular passage (found in Chapter 5), a ‘Christian intellectual’ refuses to go to heaven so that (among other reasons) he can go back down to his ‘Theological Society’ in purgatory to read this paper.

And now here’s the second quote, in which former US President Jimmy Carter speculates on how better things might have been if Christ had accepted Satan’s temptation to rule over all the kingdoms of the earth and thus — one has to conclude logically — pass up His own crucifixion (from an article by Shawn Macomber at The American Spectator):

What a wonderful and benevolent government Jesus could have set up. How exemplary justice would have been. Maybe there would have been Habitat projects all over Israel for anyone who needed a home. And the proud, the rich, and the powerful could not have dominated their fellow citizens! As a twentieth-century governor and president I would have had a perfect pattern to follow. I could have pointed to the Bible and told other government leaders, “This is what Jesus did 2000 years ago in government. Why don’t we do the same?”

Anyone else see some eerie parallels here? Beyond that, I’m not sure Carter realizes why Satan’s offer was a temptation and why it was a good thing for Christ to refuse it. [UPDATE, based on personal communications from Shawn Macomber] Or maybe he does: Ed Morrisey over at Captain’s Quarters defends Carter and cites the subsequent paragraph from Carter’s book to indicate that the above paragraph has satiric overtones:

But the devil stipulated fatal provisos: an abandonment of God, and an acknowledgment of earthly things as dominant. … Anyone who accepts kingship based on serving the devil rather than God will end up a tyrant, not a benevolent leader.

On the third hand, Carter in this paragraph seems to still consider the idea a great one — he just rejects the “fatal provisos.” Macomber has his own doubts about Carter’s meaning and intent, as does Micah Tilman, a philosophy lecturer at Catholic University. Here’s a full, continuous extract from Carter’s book, so that you can make your own decision:

The devil’s third and final temptation was his offer to allow Jesus to replace Caesar and other leaders as ruler of the entire world. What a wonderful and benevolent government Jesus could have set up! How exemplary the justice would have been! Maybe there would have been Habitat projects all over Israel for anyone who needed a home. And the proud, the rich, and the powerful could not have dominated their fellow citizens.

It is easy to see the attractive nature of this offer. It would have not just exalted Jesus but also set an example for centuries of later rules. As a twentieth-century governor and president, I would have had a perfect patterns to follow. I could have pointed to the Bible and told other government leaders, “This is what Jesus did 2,000 years ago in government. Why don’t we do the same?”

But the devil stipulated fatal provisos: an abandonment of God, and an acknowledgment of earthly things as dominant. Jesus answered, “It is written, ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve only him” (Matthew 4:10). Anyone who accepts kingship based on serving the devil rather than God will end up a tyrant, not a benevolent leader.

Hat tip to Jonah Goldberg at National Review Online for pointing me to the whole brouhaha. ..bruce..

The Hinckley challenge

Book of Mormon, Main, Succession

A group of Latter-day Saints have decided to honor the late President Hinckley by reading the Book of Mormon in 97 days (to commemorate his 97 years of life). They are issuing the same challenge to Latter-day Saints everywhere and have set up a web site where you can register and log your progress.

It’s a great challenge and a fitting honor. I’ve signed up; have you? ..bruce..

UPDATE: Below is my current progress chart.