The n+1th commandment, where n≥0

Seriously, i’m tired of the meme that the first commandment given to Adam and Eve was to have kids. The first one we have record of? Sure. The first one ever? We have no way of knowing. (And that’s even assuming the Garden of Eden story is non-allegorical, which the church has no actual position on, as far as i can find.)

Not better, just different

I’m not a fan of the “my wife is better than me” meme that you hear guys offer up occasionally in sacrament meeting speeches and class discussions. (I’m also not a fan of its less-often-heard “my husband is better than me” analogue.) The truth is, everybody’s better than everybody else, if you focus on an overly narrow slice of characteristics in each case. So your wife’s better than you, and you’re better than your wife. Stop trying to impress us with your fake humility, and you might become even better.

A simple request

Please, y’all, stop apologizing for your speaking skills when you get up to speak in sacrament meeting. It’s not helping the rest of us take you seriously, really it’s not.

Involvement by assignment

As a bit of a transition out of my last few posts, a thought about boy (and especially cub) scouting and the Mormon church.

Boy scouts makes a big deal about how its leadership is drawn from parent volunteers, and in fact that cub scouts is a primarily parent-driven program. However, adult positions within Mormon-church-affiliated boy and cub scout organizations are issued as “callings”—which means that even though those positions are technically filled by volunteers, they’re actually filled by assignment.

This leads to the issue of people being involved in boy and cub scouting who might not want to be involved in it, or in some other way aren’t invested in it. I’m not certain that this is optimal.

Boys and girls: Access to authority

Organizational leaders in the Mormon church get extra-special bonus meetings* on top of the meeting load that comes simply with being an active member of the church. Two of these are “priesthood executive committee” and “ward council”.

Priesthood executive committee is a meeting that includes the bishopric, those holding a couple of administrative positions, and the heads of priesthood groups.** Ward council is a more expansive group, including the priesthood executive committee plus the heads of the “auxiliary organizations”—things like the primary and relief society organizations, the young women’s organization, the Sunday school, and so on.

This means that the head of the young men’s organization attends both priesthood executive committee*** and ward council meetings, while the head of the young young women’s organization attends only ward council, thereby giving the young women’s organization less access to the bishop—and, probably more crucially, fewer opportunities to schedule things—in such settings, and only in a situation where the access is much more diluted. I’ve seen this lead to miscommunications before (never anything major, happily, but it certainly happens).

Of course, you could always do what a bishop i knew some years ago did, and say that since ward council includes everyone in priesthood executive committee, they’d be combined into a single ward council meeting. With our religion’s love of meetings upon meetings upon meetings upon meetings, though, i figure that many would consider that a heretical solution to the problem.

* Yeah, great joy and stuff.

** I seem to recall reading once that church leadership had said that the head of the relief society organization could be included in this group at the option of the bishop, but i’ve never known that to actually happen. Anyone know if that’s just a Mormon urban legend, or if it actually is an official option?

*** Ostensibly as the person in charge of the Aaronic priesthood-age boys, but the bishop is actually the head of the Aaronic priesthood in the ward (according to canon), so i’m not sure exactly what’s going on there.

Boys and girls: Adult investment

The structure of cub scouts with lots of age-defined packs within a single den, and the widespread institutional Mormon desire to split things up into small atomic units,* means that 8–11-year-old boys generally end up with more adults directly invested in their midweek activities than the girls of the same age do.

Concrete example, from a ward i’ve recently lived in: Achievement days has about eight girls who attend regularly, with two adults directly involved in running the program.** Cub scouts has about eight boys who attend regularly, with seven adults directly involved in running the program.***

Yeah, that’s balanced.

* Which i really don’t understand—i mean, given the way a decent number of people in any given ward are unwilling or unable to accept callings, you’d think you’d want to combine stuff, not split it up. But there we go, with tiny numbers of kids in primary classes, tiny numbers of kids in cub scout packs, tiny numbers of grownups in any given Sunday School class (aside maybe from gospel doctrine class), and so on.

** That is, one class, not two. This goes against the trend of splitting things up atomically mentioned above, and i have no explanation for that—but even if that was done, it’d probably only be two classes, and so four adults.

*** And i’m not counting people who work with both cub scouts and boy scouts in the count. The seven are one wolf pack leader plus assistant, one bear leader plus assistant, one webelos leader plus assistant, and one cubmaster.

Boys and girls: Presidencies

Here’s something that’s more an interesting oddity than anything else: Pretty much every organizational presidency or presidency-equivalent (e.g., the high priests group leadership) in a ward involves the bishopric* calling the president, and then getting recommendations for counselors from the newly-called president. Those counselors are then called if the bishopric (or stake presidency, for some organizations) approves.

There is one** exception to this, though: The presidency of the young men’s organization. In that one, the bishopric selects the president and the counselors.

Interesting, and i wonder why.

* Well, in the case of a bishop the calling comes from higher, of course. Also, in some cases, such as an elders quorum presidency, the organizational president is called by the stake presidency upon recommendation by the bishop. However, the general pattern beyond that is the same, it’s just the authority issuing the calls that’s different.

** I think i’m right that this is the only one, that is—i don’t think i’m wrong, but if i am i’d like to hear it. In any event, the presidency of the young women’s organization is certainly not an exception.

Boys and girls: Callings

A few years ago, the church set up policies to protect children from sexual predators. (A good goal, certainly.) Among these, rules were set up for teaching primary classes that required that a primary class be taught by one woman, two men, or a married couple (i.e., a man and a woman). This makes it rather less efficient to have a man called to teach a primary class, since if a man is called to teach a primary class two people have to be called to teach it, not just one.* This means that, in most wards, women are more likely to be called to teach primary than men are.***

I tend to think that the heavy preponderance of women teaching primary classes simply serves to give support to the stereotype that women are the ones who should be involved with children, and that men should feel free to be the aloof father of Bambi type—in my own opinion, not very healthy.

* The policy puzzles me, incidentally. I mean, yeah, the popular stereotype of a sexual predator is certainly male, but there are a lot of female sexual predators out there. So why are women allowed to teach primary alone?**

** And yes, i know that the policy does provide some situations in which a man can teach a primary class alone. That’s certainly not the default, though.

*** This was probably already the case, but the current policy, i think, makes it even more so.

Boys and girls: The purpose of the thing

Once Mormon children turn eight, they get to participate in midweek activities. For the 8- to 11-year-old boys, this means cub scouts—a weekly program with clearly stated aims that moves the boys along in a progressive building of skills with formal recognition of progress made along the way. The 8- to 11-year-old girls are in achievement days, a biweekly* meeting with vague goals that don’t really progress to a specific end and don’t naturally lend themselves to any recognition for intermediate progress.

Of course, my experience with this is in the United States, where the Mormon church and boy scouting are linked to a very high** degree. In some other locations, achievement days is a sex-neutral (though still, as i understand it, sex-segregated) church program. I’m curious how the implementation of the program might differ in those areas.

* In most wards, that is—in my current ward, achievement days occurs weekly. Of course, my current stake has never met a meeting it didn’t like, so this difference makes sense in that context.

** And unhealthy, in my opinion, but that’s just my opinion.

Boys and girls: High adventure

The general policy of the church, as i’ve heard it from multiple bishops in widely dispersed areas, is that a large chunk of a ward’s budget allotment in any given year is supposed to go to the youth. This makes sense to me.

In addition, most bishops try to be fairly evenhanded about the way the budget is allotted*—the same amount of money for the young women as the young men,** or allotting the same amount per individual to each of those groups.

So far, so good. But then there are what might best be called special allotments—and, in my observation, the only one of these for the youth is annual or biennial funding for the priest-age boys to go on a “high adventure” trip.

Yeah, it’s cool that the 16- and 17-year-old boys get to go white-water rafting a few hundred miles away from home, or camping out at a national park none of them have ever gone to, or traveling by horseback through the mountains. But what do the girls get along those lines?

Yep, that’s right—bupkis.

Incidentally, this is a recurrent theme over at the Spanish Fork 401st Ward blog—see, for example, their Young Men/Young Women activities calendar for this past April.

* This is spelled correctly, but doesn’t look like it is to me.

** Not that great of an approach when there are very different numbers of young men and young women, but it’s an easy way of dealing with ward budgets, and having seen ward budgets up close, i’m not going to begrudge making them easier.

Boys and girls: Networking

I am not a fan of boy scouting. Not at all. However, i have to admit that there’s one thing it has going for it: There’s a built-in mechanism for the boys involved in it to meet other boys with similar interests through the institutions of camporees and jamborees.

Girl scouts have similar things, but the church doesn’t sponsor girl scout groups, for whatever reason.* Odd, really, that the church would be linked at the hip with a group that has as a stated purpose the development of boys into strong-willed, independent men, but has nothing to do with a group that has as a stated purpose the development of girls into strong-willed, independent women.

* I’ve heard that this is because of the cookie sale fundraising requirement, but that rings false with me. If fundraising was an issue, the boy scouts wouldn’t be allowed to send people to scout training meetings at Mormon churches to drum up donations—but they do, they most certainly do.

Introducing a theme: Boys and girls

Sometimes i feel like i’m the only active Mormon guy around whose family is done with childbearing and has only daughters, no sons.* Having all daughters, though, has had the result of me being intensely aware of differences in the treatment of girls and boys in church culture and programs.** I have a few thoughts on the subject, and i’ve been wanting to see what happens if i devote a series of four or five posts to a theme—so the next few posts will be on that subject.

We’ll see if it works out well.

* And no, we didn’t keep “trying” to have a son until we gave up. Actually, i only wanted daughters, even before Jeanne and i started having kids—and i can produce witnesses to that fact. The assumption that all daughters was some sort of a disappointment isn’t a Mormon thing, though—i get that from all directions.

** Me being me, that would have probably been the case anyway, actually. Having all daughters and no sons certainly makes it more personal, though.

Buying prom dresses

I’ve heard lots of people complaining lately that “it’s impossible to find a modest* prom dress” these days. This is generally taken to be an indictment of how horrible “the world” has gotten lately.

Well, two problems.

First, i remember hearing precisely the same complaint back when i was in high school (the mid-80s, for what it’s worth), and i’ve seen such complaints in print from the early 60s, and much of me thinks that Ardis over at Keepapitchinin** could probably dig the same thing up from the mid- to late nineteenth century. And even if i’m wrong on that last one, it’s not like this is a new complaint—so exactly why is this surprising anyone these days?

Second, i take issue with the entire proposition. There’s lots of modest (see the first footnote) clothing out there, including formalwear for teenage girls—though i will readily allow that the “prom” section of any semi-randomly selected department store is unlikely to provide many (if any) prom dresses that would be allowed in the door at a church dance. Move to other sections of the same store, and you’ll find a lot of prom-suitable dresses and sets with covered shoulders, knee-length or longer skirts, and so on.

Really, as i see it, the real problem is that people actually believe the branding at their local department stores.*** So please, stop trying to use it to indict people who aren’t you.

* This is using the usual Mormon meaning for the word modesty, which i still think is wrong. Given the context for the discussion, though, it makes sense to use it here.

** An amazing and wonderful blog on, for lack of a better description, the cultural history of the Mormon church. You should add it to your list of regular reads.

*** Well, and that they actually think prom is worth blowing that much money on for a single-use piece of clothing. But that’s a whole nother issue, and beyond the scope of this blog.

Mormon headlines

Photocopier humor, not by me, from an unknown source. I like them, though, so if you know where they’re from, let me know.

Ancient Tins of Wheat Discovered in Garage

Investigator Admits Feeling Tingle in Big Toe, Agrees to Second Discussion

Deacons Quorum Advisor Compares Priesthood to “the Force”

Family Maxes Credit Card at Costco to Replenish Food Storage

Area Man Feels Holy Ghost During Disney’s “Lion King”

C.S. Lewis Rejects Posthumous Baptism

Elders Quorum Instructor Skims Lesson During Opening Exercises

Pioneer Reenactment Reenacted

Family Home Evening Degenerates into Pudding Fight

Spirit Whispers for Area Man to Sell Amway

Prototype of Franklin Planner Found in Nauvoo Dig

Priest Reporting on Campout Says “It Was Fun”

Area Woman Calls for More Stylish Male Temple Caps

Ensign Forgets to Use “Name Withheld” on Sex Abuse Article

Steve Martin Finally Admits to Conversion

Area Man Surprised at How Dirty Temple Slipper Soles Have Become

Richard Dutcher Announces Feature-Length “Johnny Lingo” Remake

Church Approves Hometeaching Via Email

Steed Family Book of Mormon Auctions for $23,000

Scrapbookers Scrapbook About Themselves Scrapbooking

Temple Escalators Remarkably Clean, Area Woman Observes

Ward Has Potluck, No Jello Served

Ward Discovered Where All Sing During Hymns

Sacrament Meeting Speaker Forgets to Apologize for Poor Speaking Ability

First Presidency Issues Letter Asking Members Not To Submit Elvis Presley’s Name For Temple Work Again

Magna 122nd Ward Relief Society Sends White Shirts and Ties to Africa

High Councilor Begins Sacrament Meeting Talk Without Attempt at Joke

New Church Policy Forbids Use of Church Parking Lots for Teen Driver Instruction by Parents

Stained Glass in New Chapel “An Exception”, Says Church Spokesman

Secret Girls Camp Video Spurs Copycat WWF Series

“I Hate Homemaking Meeting Crafts”, Admits Local Mom

Male Primary Teacher Called

Priesthood Holder Completes Home Teaching by 25th of the Month

Local LDS Ward Starts Sacrament Meeting on Time

Elders Quorum Moving and Storage a Real Moneymaker for Church

Ward Boundaries Realigned, Everyone Happy

Elders Quorum Instructor Prepares Centerpiece for Lesson

Bishop Attends Sunday School, Is Welcomed As Visitor

Church Basketball Injuries Fewest In Years

Ward Chorister Sets New Record for Slowest Singing of "Come, Come Ye Saints"

Jewish Family in Provo Confused When Called “Gentiles”

Provo Baptist Family Reports: Never Invited to Sacrament Meeting, Regularly Invited to Dinner by LDS Neighbors

Utah Legislature Passes Bill to Restrict Sales of Cola Drinks to Minors

Ensign Publishes 135th Article with “Legacy” in Title

High Priest Stays Awake in Sacrament Meeting, Wrestles Children While Wife Dozes

Returned Missionary from Hawaii Fails to Reprimand Congregation for Not Responding Loud Enough to His "Aloooooha!"

Sacrament Meeting Talk Ends Early, Bishop Closes Meeting Anyway

Congregation Sings "How Great Thou Art" in Under Two Minutes

Why we should not repent daily

Jeanne and i have been reading through the B.H. Roberts-edited History of the Church together. (It’s taking us a long time.) Recently, we ran across an interesting line from Joseph Smith (on 27 June 1839):

Repentance is a thing that cannot be trifled with every day. Daily transgression and daily repentance is not that which is pleasing in the sight of God.

This goes against what i think is a fairly common Mormon meme, namely that we sin every day, and therefore we have to repent every day. According to Brother Joseph, though, God thinks—or at least hopes—otherwise.

Anyway, just throwing this out there as an interesting item. I don’t have much to say about it in depth right now, though, ’cause i’m still mulling it over.

Against overextension

God seems to be into dietary restrictions without regard to whether it's a health thing or not. (Consider the prohibition on shellfish in the Mosaic code, and on meat sacrificed to idols in the early Xian church.) I think we've done ourselves a disservice by treating the Word of Wisdom as a “health code”—it's not, it's a dietary restriction. Full stop.

Yeah, it probably is just me…

Is it just me, or does anyone else start thinking that they’re gonna be breaking out the Jenna Jameson movies when they hear announcements about the “adult session” of stake conference?

Just a brief rant today

We just had stake conference here, and there were dozens (seriously, dozens) of mentions of the importance of getting 19– to 25–year-old men to serve as full-time missionaries, but only two phrases given in passing that even acknowledged that 21+–year-old women can serve as full-time missionaries.*

Well, as a father of daughters and no sons, i started to get annoyed at having to sit through being told multiple times that i was remiss in my spiritual duties if i didn’t “prepare [my] sons to serve a full-time mission”—so i have this to say:

No, i’m not preparing any sons to serve as full-time missionaries—but i am preparing my daughters to, and i’m preparing them to be better teachers on their full-time missions than your sons will ever be.

* And this is through priesthood leadership meeting, the adult session,** and the general session.

** That reminds me of something. I’ll post it next time.

’Nother thought on Mothers Day

Also, as far as i can tell, there is no directive in the Church Handbook of Instructions for the youth to hand out chocolates or flowers to the adult women in the congregation at the end of sacrament meeting on Mothers Day.

Doctrine vs. practice

You know, there’s no canonical requirement for the Primary children to sing on Mothers Day. Just sayin’, you know?