God Succors His Children

January is traditionally the ward conference season in the Church. Mormons do meetings well. We slice and dice our meetings in lots of different ways -- by the general church membership, auxiliary conferences, priesthood meetings, regions, stakes, wards and branches. Meetings and conferences are us.

President Spencer W. Kimball

A few weeks ago we were attending a ward conference where a deeply devoted stake president was speaking. He told a story I want to share here because it demonstrated so beautifully the principle President Spencer W. Kimball taught many years ago:

“God does notice us, and he watches over us. But it is usually through another person that he meets our needs. Therefore, it is vital that we serve each other in the kingdom. The people of the Church need each other’s strength, support, and leadership in a community of believers as an enclave of disciples. In the Doctrine and Covenants we read about how important it is to ‘… succor the weak, lift up the hands which hang down, and strengthen the feeble knees.’ (D&C 81:5). So often, our acts of service consist of simple encouragement or of giving mundane help with mundane tasks, but what glorious consequences can flow from mundane acts and from small but deliberate deeds!” (Teachings of Presidents of the Church, 82).

This stake president is like so many priesthood and auxiliary leaders in the Church. He's an ordinary man, humble and possessed with a testimony of his Savior Jesus Christ that is clearly anchored in his heart and soul. They, like each of us, are undershepherds of the true Shepherd. Leaders in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are lay leaders drawn from their various congregations to serve for an undetermined period of years. They serve without compensation, meaning they are not paid in dollars, but I can attest they receive much more than they give because they serve their flocks with love and concern.

He told of going to a small town in northern Utah on a weekend road trip with his wife. While she was looking through antiques in a small shop, he was drawn to a used book store next door. He immediately had my attention. Nobody loves the bowels of Zion Book Store more than I. It's where I found my copy of Foxe's Book of Martyrs in that dingy basement catacomb -- original hard cover, perfect condition and I consider it a treasure of inestimable value. I love old book stores, just like this good man does.

As he wandered the aisles, he was drawn to a box that obviously contained a "quad" edition of the scriptures containing all the standard works we publish to the world as the collected canon of God's word -- the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. In one bound volume, he expected to find what he was looking for, since the box was clearly labeled and showed little sign of use. It was marked for sale for $5.

When he opened the box, however, he was surprised to discover an original patriarchal blessing with the signature of the patriarch who had lovingly prepared it for the recipient, a common practice in the Church. At the top was the name of a young woman, and all her personal information, including birthdate, an address and the names of her parents. He felt like someone who had just stumbled onto the scene of an accident, wanting to run away, but drawn mystically to what he held in his hands.

His dilemma was resolved when he heard a still small voice whisper softly to his heart, "Read it." It was two pages. As a stake president, he explained to his audience, he is at liberty to go to Church headquarters where copies of the patriarchal blessings of his stake members are deposited if he chooses to. He explained he had never done that, feeling he did not want to intrude on those sacred promises, considering them to be private and personal. He resisted the prompting to read it, then finally felt an urge to learn more and insert himself into the life that had been presented to him an a very innocuous happenstance not of his own making. The voice gently whispered, "She needs you."

As he read the two page blessing, he was drawn into the magnificent promises the patriarch had made to this daughter of our Heavenly Father. He knew the parents whose names appeared at the top of the blessing would be imagining the worst and probably needed comfort. It was obvious the scriptures had been a gift because there was an inscription in the front pages with loving counsel from her parents.

So a thousand thoughts then flooded his mind. Is she alive? Is she missing? Did she come to harm? Had she left the Church and renounced her faith? Were these spiritual treasures simply lost, misplaced or left behind and somehow mysteriously placed on the shelf where he found them? What was the answer? He wondered.

After standing and letting the Spirit soak over him in his quiet reflection, he decided to buy the book and the contents of the box - $5 for a set of scriptures and a patriarchal blessing was a small price to pay to return it if he could to this precious daughter of God. He felt like a messenger on a mission now.

He returned home the next day, but not before locating the parents in a town not far away from the bookstore. When he dialed a number he traced to the name and address on the patriarchal blessing, a female voice answered. "I'm calling for Susan (not her real name)," he sheepishly offered.

The woman responded, "She hasn't lived here for many years, may I ask who's calling?"

"I'm President Smith (not his real name)," he replied. "I am holding in my hand the quad set of the scriptures you must have given her, along with her patriarchal blessing, and I wanted to get it back to her if you can tell me how to contact her."

There was a long pause, then, "So, she gave that away too. . ." and her voice trailed off in tears.

He drove to their home later that night and visited with her parents. Susan had left home to go to school, and had cut off all contact with her parents. They didn't know where she was or what might have happened to her. Her spiritual heritage, represented by the book and the patriarchal blessing, had been rejected.

As Susan's mother lovingly stroked the leather binding with her daughter's name inscribed on the cover, then re-read Susan's blessing, her eyes filled with tears again. Here was the evidence suggesting what this dear mother had always hoped could not have happened. This grieving mother had not heard from her daughter for a number of years.

She thanked President Smith for his loving care of these priceless treasures. She told him she was still filled with hope that Susan would someday come home again to claim her spiritual inheritance.

President Smith testified to us that he was humbled to be the instrument in this experience. Like him, as the Spirit whispers to each of us, we may be also be called upon to help another in need. We are His hands here on earth to succor His children.

The Shepherd knows His sheep, and we are the undershepherds.

Four Reasons the Dems Lose the Senate in 2012

Going into the final week of the 2010 midterm campaign, it was obvious the Republicans were going to win the House of Representatives in shocking numbers. It wasn't "if" they would win, only by "how much?"

I harbored hope the same thing would happen in the Senate, but at the end two narrow victories and two "surprises" preserved the 52-48 majority for the Democrats. Chistine O'Donnell in Delaware proved a big disappointment to the tea partiers, but her loss was not one of the surprises.

The two narrow victories came in Colorado and Washington. Recounts settled both those states and they went to the Democrats. The two surprises happened in Nevada and West Virginia, when the Republican candidates faltered down the stretch though they had led earlier, preserving Harry Reid's seat and the old seat vacated by the death of Robert Byrd.

I am optimistic (but not yet convinced) the Republicans can retain the House and regain the Senate, but they will have a shot at it only if they can now demonstrate their will to bow to the expressed will of the people to put our national house of fiscal responsibility in order. The reason it's dicey is the Republicans have not proven to be any better than the Democrats in reining in spending in recent years. It's got to change, and they will have one last shot at it.

That's JOB ONE. They will not retain the confidence of the voters unless they succeed with that.

However, with that one caveat attached to my assessment, 2012 shapes up as a better chance for success at retaking the Senate than this last election. The Constitution provides for a turnover every two years of one-third of the Senate seats. The last several years have brought several new faces into the two houses of Congress. I suspect that trend to continue unabated.

There are four good reasons why:

1. The states up for seats in 2012 offer more "red" possibilities than the blue ones. Here are the states to watch as the 2012 election season swings into high gear. Switching seats in North Dakota, Florida, Nebraska, Virginia and Montana will put the Republicans in control by 52 - 48, and there are good reasons to suspect that might be the case.

2. Retirement announcements continue to pour in. Kent Conrad (D-ND) has announced he will not run again. Jim Webb (D-VA) has been vocally cool and coy about his enthusiasm for the Obama agenda, and hasn't been raising money for his re-election bid. George Allen has come out with his announcement to oppose Webb if he runs, and the smart money says it will be enough to get Webb to drop out. Herbert Kohl (D-WI) may also decide not to run (he's in his eighties now). Former Senator Russ Feingold may decide to challenge Kohl in a primary, and if he does Kohl may just hang it up. It's in the "hopeful" category for Republicans because they picked up the governorship in Wisconsin, both houses in the state legislature, a Senate seat and more House seats in 2010. Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Ben Nelson (D-NE) will both face tough races in 2012 from stronger Republican candidates. Neither may run because of the strong opposition against the Democrats in 2010.

3. I heard Dick Morris, Clinton's former strategist (turned traitor against the Clintonistas) handicapping the Senate races in an interview last week. According to Morris, Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) may sit it out in 2012 after watching New Mexico go Republican in 2010. John Tester (D-MT) won by less than 1 point in 2006, and should be an easy target for someone in red Montana. So now you can put North Dakota, Nebraska, Virginia and Montana in the "highly likely" column for Republican victories in 2012.

4. In the "good possibility" column pencil in whoever opposes either Kohl or Feingold in Wisconsin. Morris goes on to speculate Bob Casey (D-PA) can be beaten, as well as Sherrod Brown (D-OH). Bill Nelson (D-FA) probably won't win again, and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) will likely lose to former state Treasurer Sarah Steelman. Republicans will also have a good shot against Debbie Stabenow (D-MI). Joe Manchin (D-WV) faces mounting scandals, and his failure to make good on his promise to "vote like a Republican" may cost him his seat. New Governor Chris Christie (R-NJ) is making big waves in that state since his victory in November, and when one looks out to 2012, Bob Menendez (D-NJ) who suffers from lack of moral turpitude (I'm being kind) could be easy pickings.

Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT)

Of course, here in Utah a Republican "hold" is virtually a lock. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), currently the ranking member on the Senate Finance Committee, is a 36-year veteran of the Senate from the "reddest state" in the Union. He is building his re-election bid on the hope the Republicans WILL indeed win the majority in the Senate, making him the de facto incoming Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee in 2012. He's leading the way again by proposing (for the 17th time in his storied Senate career) a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. If ever there were a time for it, that time has finally come.

There's absolutely no threat of the Utah senate seat going Democrat, but Hatch faces the almost impossible uphill battle against his age and longevity. No one in the history of Utah has been elected to the Senate who would be as old as Hatch (78) on election day 2012. He's popping up everywhere in the social media as he tries to connect with his constituents. He's never lost an election! Even Abraham Lincoln can't say that!

He's much more formidable than Bob Bennett, but there are many who believe despite his strengths he can be taken down. All it will take is the right replacement candidate, so watch for those who emerge from within the ranks of the Republicans to challenge him. As good as Hatch has been, the people are whispering, "Enough is enough, Orrin." They would prefer that he bow out gracefully now and make way for a younger generation. But it won't happen. Hatch is determined to set some longevity records and damn the torpedoes.


If he is re-elected (and it's still a big IF), he will have served 42 years of his 84 years at the end of his next term as a U.S. Senator. Love him or loathe him he's got proven staying power, but there will be many challengers on the Republican side who will hope to repeat Mike Lee's stunning defeat of Bob Bennett in 2010.

It's still too early to handicap any of these races just yet, but it's fun to speculate.

Obamacare Declared Unconstitutional

Big news of last week -- Obamacare was struck down and declared unconstitutional by a federal district court judge in Florida.  The suit was filed the day Obamacare became law.  Of course it really isn't named Obamacare, it has a much loftier title:  “The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.”  But regardless of title and intent, the court stamped it with a new label:

UNCONSTITUTIONAL

What does that mean?  The U.S. House of Representatives voted to repeal Obamacare, and the Senate narrowly turned back a repeal bill in that body.  What does that mean?

First, twenty-six states including Florida joined in that lawsuit to stop it.  The judge's ruling binds the parties to the suit and that includes all twenty-six states, the National Federation of Independent Business and the Federal Government.  This means that, absent a court-issued stay, Obamacare cannot be further implemented as it pertains to these twenty-six states.  This court victory signals to me that the states are emerging to assert their rights against a federal government grown too big, too demanding, and too dictatorial.  They are beginning to push back.

The outcome will be appealed, but both sides would be well served in expediting the case directly to the Supreme Court.  This ruling reduces all the arguments to a very simple matter -- can the federal government do something unconstitutional just because it can, or is it subject to the protections guaranteed to its citizens after all?  Whatever the outcome up ahead, the case is now a simpler matter because of this ruling.

On the legislative front a repeal of the measure is likely not going to happen as long as Obama is in the White House.  The votes required to override his veto simply don't exist presently.

Judge Roger Vinson

The opinion handed down by Judge Roger Vinson in Florida is instructive and well worth reading.  This is a judge who actually cites the Constitution and reasons his opinion based upon it.  The ruling itself is 78 pages long, a mere fraction of the comprehensive attempt of lawmakers to push through something so massive and incomprehensible even those who voted in favor would later admit they hadn't even read the blasted thing.

I don't pretend to understand the legal system, but I believe I can understand the simple conclusion of this courageous federal judge, who summarized his ruling in these words:

"The existing problems in our national health care system are recognized by everyone in this case. There is widespread sentiment for positive improvements that will reduce costs, improve the quality of care, and expand availability in a way that the nation can afford. This is obviously a very difficult task. Regardless of how laudable its attempts may have been to accomplish these goals in passing the Act, Congress must operate within the bounds established by the Constitution. Again, this case is not about whether the Act is wise or unwise legislation. It is about the Constitutional role of the federal government.

"For the reasons stated, I must reluctantly conclude that Congress exceeded the bounds of its authority in passing the Act with the individual mandate. That is not to say, of course, that Congress is without power to address the problems and inequities in our health care system. The health care market is more than one sixth of the national economy, and without doubt Congress has the power to reform and regulate this market. That has not been disputed in this case. The principal dispute has been about how Congress chose to exercise that power here.

"Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire Act must be declared void."

* * *

In short, the judge concluded the federal government cannot force American citizens to buy ANYTHING under any legal argument built on the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.  Most citizens in America today have absolutely no idea what that last sentence means, nor do they care.

But I care deeply about it.  The battle for individual freedom is on the line, and the battle has been enjoined.

Senator Mike Lee (R-UT)

Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), the youngest member of the United States Senate at age 39, began running the legislative gauntlet yesterday in a Judiciary Committee hearing.  He brilliantly framed the legal argument with a Duke University professor who was appearing and giving testimony before the committee.

This is the very argument that will no doubt play out in the Supreme Court when Obamacare finally lands in the laps of the justices, and it centers in the nexus of the gradual judicial expansion of the original definition in the Constitution of the Commerce Clause.  Lee contends the courts have simply gone too far, Judge Vinson agrees, and now we will see how the SCOTUS lines up.

As THE junior senator on the block, he acquitted himself well.  I learned today that Lee has also been named to the two other committees -- Energy and Foreign Relations.  He got the three committees he asked for.

He's off to a good start doing the job Utahns elected him to do.  Anyone who thought he wouldn't have any "clout" had better be ready to be surprised.  Mike is no shrinking violet.  He's so at home in this maiden voyage in the Judiciary Committee, one wonders if he wasn't born to the task.  (And he probably was).

He's the right man at the right time in the right place.  His knowledge of the Constitution and how to apply its principles is inspiring, but more. . .

He's come to Washington with a big stick, and he will use it to benchmark anything against that Constitutional standard when it comes before him.

I like Mike, and so will you before too long if you think like I do.

Federalism And Why It Matters To You

I've been reading a lot of American history this last year. The Federalist Papers are most revealing, along with other writings of our founders. The term "federalism" is one of those slippery terms bandied about in political rhetoric today needing a clear definition if we are to understand why it is relevant today.


Washington at Valley Forge

For forty-five years George Washington gave himself to his country. No one deserves the title "Father of Our Country," more than he. There was an overriding concern, however, that he was still fighting until the day he left office.

Throughout his presidency he was grieved by all the wrangling between the two predominant parties of his day -- the Federalists and the Republicans. He was usually successful in standing above the fray and warned against the divisions infused by the parties into the American fabric at the time, fearing dissolution of the union he had forged so diligently. Here's a sample of his effort to warn his countrymen "in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party. . . The spirit unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. . .

"The alternate domination of one faction over another sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension. . . is itself a frightful despotism. . . A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume."

We are close to that place, it would seem, where Washington's warning is near fulfillment. He suggested the antidote was morality in government. From his farewell address, we are advised:

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness - these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

One searches in vain today for such wisdom. His farewell address was not given as a speech at all. It was drafted first, then sent to his friends, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, for polishing. It was dated September 17, 1796, and subsequently printed two days later in Philadelphia's American Daily Advertiser. He offered it he said, as the parting counsel from "an old and affectionate friend."

Thomas Jefferson

As the new nation under Washington took shape two polarizing points of view emerged. Thomas Jefferson's followers called themselves Republicans. They stood for a true republic of the people. Alexander Hamilton disciples called themselves Federalists, seeking to strengthen the federal Union. Those two simple ideas are the origins of our how the country became divided into two predominant points of view on the role of the federal government. Hamilton deeply believed only a strong national government could rule effectively, and was advocating the idea the common man was incapable of self-rule. Jefferson was a strong proponent of states' rights, while Hamilton was seeking an ever-stronger central government.



Alexander Hamilton

 Before their lives were over, Jefferson and Hamilton became bitter enemies. Each accused the other of trying to destroy the country. The central idea dividing them? Hamilton had some "radical ideas" about fiscal policies. Jefferson saw the establishment of a national bank as simply a way to enrich the few money men behind it, and everything else Hamilton proposed was viewed with the same skepticism by Jefferson, who saw Hamilton's financial practices as harmful to the poor and destructive to the nation's long-term well-being.

Hamilton countered that his policies were essential to a strong national economy. He did not deny a few would be enriched, but saw that outcome as the necessary step to a thriving economy where everyone could become wealthier.

The differences ran deep, and beyond policy they became implacable personal enemies even though Washington repeatedly tried to reconcile them to each other without success. Jefferson finally resigned as Secretary of State at the end of 1793, and a year later Hamilton quit as Secretary of the Treasury.

The core issues separating these two powerful individuals then persist today. The Constitution was established to create two tiers of governing -- one at the federal level, the other at the state level. This was called "federalism," a shared role for each.

Federalism in the United States is still evolving. It attempts to define the proper relationship between state governments and the federal government. American government has evolved from a system of dual federalism to one of associative federalism. In "Federalist No. 46," James Madison asserted that the states and national government "are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, constituted with different powers." Alexander Hamilton, writing in "Federalist No. 28," suggested that both levels of government would exercise authority to the citizens' benefit: "If their [the peoples'] rights are invaded by either, they can make use of the other as the instrument of redress."

The states established the first level of governance to be formed in this country. Their pre-eminent existence, some would argue today, give them "more rights" than the specific and limited "enumerated powers" spelled out in the Constitution. These include the right to levy taxes, declare war, and regulate interstate and foreign commerce. Also, the "Necessary and Proper Clause" gives the federal government the "implied power" to pass any law "necessary and proper" for the execution of its express powers.

These arguments are the very arguments one hears today in the ongoing attempts to reform health care and other transformative issues. The core issue is shall the states or the federal government be the instrument to decide for the people? Jefferson would have argued for the states and Hamilton would have sided with the federal government.

Powers that the Constitution does not delegate to the federal government or forbid to the states, the "reserved powers," are reserved to the people or the states under the Constitution. Jefferson said, "That government that governs best is closest to the people." Over time, however, the power delegated to the federal government was significantly expanded by the Supreme Court decision in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), subsequent amendments to the Constitution following the Civil War, and by some later amendments. The overall claim of the Civil War, that the states were legally subject to the final dictates of the federal government, had the effect of deferring to a strong federal government in the evolution of federalism and how it is defined today.

The old Hamiltonian Federalist party in the United States was finally dissolved in 1824. They were heavily opposed by the Democratic-Republicans, which included powerful figures such as Thomas Jefferson. The Democratic-Republicans mainly believed:

• The Legislative had too much power (mainly because of the Necessary and Proper Clause) and that they were unchecked.
• The Executive branch had too much power, and that there was no check on him. A dictator would arise.
• A bill of rights for the people should be coupled with the Constitution to prevent a dictator from exploiting citizens. The threat then, as always, is that the Executive could become a dictator.

The Federalists, on the other hand, argued it was impossible to list all the rights, and those that were not listed could be easily overlooked because they were not in the official bill of rights. Rather, rights in specific cases were to be decided by the judicial system of courts.

A larger role and influence for the federal government, however, continued to emerge decades after the Civil War. The reasons included the need to regulate businesses and industries that span state borders, attempts to secure civil rights, and the provision of social services. The federal government acquired no substantial new powers until the acceptance by the Supreme Court of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act in State of Minnesota v. Northern Securities Company.

It is the belief of many today (myself included) that the federal government has grown beyond the bounds permitted by the express and limited powers granted in the Constitution. Opponents to that view think they find some legal latitude among the express powers, such as the Commerce Clause. The Commerce Clause is used by Congress to justify certain federal laws, but its applicability has been narrowing in recent years by Supreme Court rulings.

"Dual federalism" suggests the federal government and the state governments are co-equals, each sovereign. In this theory, parts of the Constitution are interpreted narrowly, such as the Tenth Amendment, the Supremacy Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause, and the Commerce Clause. Under a narrow interpretation, the federal government has jurisdiction only if the Constitution clearly grants it. In this case, there is a large group of powers belonging to the states or the people, and the federal government is limited to only those powers explicitly listed in the Constitution.

To summarize:

We face "ominous challenges" as a nation today. Here's a BYU professor who suggests there are at least five requiring immediate attention by the 112th Congress. There was little in Obama's SOTU address last week to suggest he will take a leadership role in tackling those clear and present dangers lurking on the horizon. He played a large role in creating those challenges with the 111th Congress. It appears, instead, he will play politics as usual, hoping the Republicans by reducing spending make life so miserable for Americans he can ride a wave of displeasure into a second term in 2012, and last long enough without specifically addressing the issues that he might still be popular enough with the people by then to be re-elected. His re-election campaign is launching into high gear now and he'll be on the stump between now and then doing what he does best -- talking and talking and talking and talking.

The arguments debating the meaning of "federalism" today are framed around the concept of "dual federalism," the shared powers and the evolving roles of the federal government and the states. It is my belief it is absolutely essential for Americans to become engaged in the debate using the proper definitions and advocating for states' rights as opposed to further expansion of the role of the federal government. The only question remaining is whether it is too late to finally rein it in. It seems both political parties have expanded federal government, now the question is which one will shrink it, if it can really be "shrunk" at all.

Last week in his press conference following his State of the State address, Governor Gary Herbert here in Utah was mystified by the unilateral imposition of Obamacare upon the states without even so much as a consult with the governors of the various states over the last two years when it was rammed down their throats, and he signaled his adamant opposition to the taking of any more Utah land for federal wilderness and monument designations. The states are on the move to reassert their claims against the monolithic federalism they see as a threat to our existence.

Half the fifty states' attorneys general are now involved in lawsuits to challenge the constitutionality of Obamacare, and the border states of Arizona and Texas are imposing their wills against the federal government's inaction to control the borders.

Henry David Thoreau asserted, though it is often attributed to either Thomas Paine or Thomas Jefferson, "That government is best that governs least."

The polar opposite positions held by Hamilton and Jefferson have played out two hundred plus years later exactly as Hamilton and Jefferson framed the original debate then, and the question is still not settled -- far from it.

A return to Washington's thoughts from his farewell address is sagacious wisdom for America today: "Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

Beware of those who would take God out of this equation.

The Incomparable Role of Righteous Women

(l to r) Melanie, Merilee, Emily, Dianne, Allison

I am a blessed man.  Much of that has to do with the women in my life who surround me and bless me with their faith and righteousness.  The accompanying picture is one of my five living daughters, all grown women now, all righteous, all accomplished, all talented, all faithful.  My cup truly runneth over.  They will be the first to tell you they have also been blessed by the righteous influence of their mother, their grandmothers and their mothers before them.

Andrew and Jessica Goates

This past week our family added another righteous woman to our ranks, a new daughter-in-law, Jessica Topham.  Patsy and I consider each of our daughters-in-law as daughters.  All my sons have married way above themselves, following the example of their father.  Outside the sealing room as we were preparing to leave the temple, I had a wonderful conversation with a couple I had not met previously.  They sat among our children and their spouses during the sealing.  President and Sister Hill were Jessica's mission parents as she served her mission in Japan.  "I had 450 missionaries in our mission during our three years," he said.  "I would not be exaggerating in the slightest when I tell you she was the finest missionary we had."  I promised him we would take good care of her.

When I first met Jessica, I looked into her eyes and the depth of her soul was revealed in an instant.  She is only the latest of extraordinary women to marry one of our sons.  Andrew is the last of our seven sons to be married.  As I spoke at their wedding dinner the night before the ceremony, I reminded them they had each been blessed by holding out and not settling for anything less than the best.  Often, if we expect the best and don't settle, we obtain the best.  So it was for each of them.

With my dear friend Scott Strong, we have written extensively in the past about the role of women and men and how those roles intersect with the priesthood to put us on the path to eventual godhood.  I write today on that topic in a season of even greater confusion about those roles.

The Path of Womanhood

Scripture delineates the prescribed path that illuminates the man's and woman's course leading toward eternal life. (D&C 132:20; 138:39). We are not left alone to wonder about it, because a merciful Heavenly Father has revealed it to those who will choose it. In customary fashion, He also reveals an alternative path, underscoring the freedom to choose will never be violated in His plan. (D&C 132:42). Today that alternative path is also called an "alternative lifestyle."

All the women in my life fill roles as righteous daughters, wives, and mothers. As I observe them in each of these roles, there is little doubt in my mind they will someday be glorified with their spouses and receive the promised blessings in "a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever." (D&C 132:19). These roles as men and women, properly defined and pursued, are as old as Adam and Eve, as fresh and vibrant as last week's sealing between Andrew and Jessica.

Before they were "mine" my daughters and daughters-in-law (all my daughters without the "in law" designation) began their role as women when "the worlds are and were created, and the inhabitants thereof are begotten sons and daughters unto God." (D&C 76:24). As daughters of God first, they learned the ennobling truth "[the Lord] created man, male and female, after his own image and in his own likeness, created he them." (D&C 20:18).

They learned their earliest lessons in womanhood through observation of "our glorious Mother Eve, with many of her faithful daughters who had lived through the ages and worshiped the true and living God." (D&C 138:39). 

Women in Mortality

These daughters of mine then came to earth to take upon themselves a physical body like the one they had seen Eve take in mortality, and like Eve they have become subject to the seeds of death through that body.  For now, however, each has advanced past the age when they become subject to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. They have learned they "must repent and be baptized." (D&C 18:42). Each was baptized, and as they kept the commandments they naturally yearned to have a day at an altar in a temple, where they could be sealed to a righteous priesthood holder and take upon themselves additional covenants with God. These covenants include making a lifetime commitment to personal sexual purity and worthiness. As each has observed and kept those sacred covenants their righteousness shines in their faces for all to see (look at that picture again).

Women as Wives

President Spencer W. Kimball

Women, my daughters included, have "a claim on their husbands for their maintenance." (D&C 83:2). The word "claim" means "rights, privileges, and entitlements." It can be said some wives are "high maintenance" but that is a topic for another day about which I know little. The women in my life give me little experience with such things. President Spencer W. Kimball, includes the husband's "obligation to maintain loving affection and to provide consideration and thoughtfulness as well as food." (CR, October 1978, 63).  Memo to my sons: Loving affection, consideration and thoughtfulness for your spouses is what you promised them at the altar on the day they "gave themselves" to you as the most precious gift you will ever receive. Don't break their hearts through indifference to that covenant.

These righteous women as wives are counseled "to comfort her husband." (D&C 25:5). Despite all his hardships, Joseph Smith found comfort in Emma's love and affection for him, and offered this counsel to women as wives:

"Submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord, for the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the Church; and He is the Savior of the body. Therefore, as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands, in everything." (TPJS, 89).

Emma Hale Smith

Emma Smith was told, "Thy sins are forgiven thee, and thou art an elect lady, whom I have called." (D&C 25:3). The meaning and use of the word "elect" was defined by Joseph Smith on March 17, 1842, in Nauvoo, Illinois, when he told the sisters that "elect meant to be elected to a certain work. . . and that the revelation was then fulfilled by Sister Emma's election to the Presidency of the [Relief] Society." (HC 4:552-53). A righteous woman living her covenants will find the callings she was elected to fill revealed to her in her patriarchal blessing in addition to her roles as daughter, wife and mother. We have daughters who have presided and served as teachers in every auxiliary organization in the Church.

Emma's counsel from the Lord is pertinent to all wives: ". . . the office of thy calling shall be for a comfort unto my servant, Joseph Smith, Jun., thy husband." (D&C 25:5). She was to use "consoling words, in the spirit of meekness" with him. (D&C 25:5). Emma was to cleave to Joseph and to "go with him at the time of his going, and be unto him for a scribe." (D&C 25:6). She was promised that for faithfully fulfilling her calling as a wife, her "husband shall support thee in the church." (D&C 25:9).
 
Women and Their Talents and Gifts

Over dinner several months ago with a son who was in town for business meetings, Patsy and I were reminded how much is required in today's Church of young married couples.  He was serving as an executive secretary in the bishopric, teaching the gospel doctrine class and his wife and young mother of three (then quickly thereafter four) was serving as the ward Young Women's President. Where much is given, indeed much is required. They must support and sustain each other in their callings in the Church, and it is not easy to be a servant to others in addition to those under your roof.

Emma was called as a wife and mother, named an elect lady, and beyond that Emma was instructed to develop her talents. Emma's talents included expounding the scriptures, exhorting the Church, writing, learning, and selecting sacred hymns. (D&C 25:7-8, 11). I have observed all my daughters without exception following these admonitions in their lives. She was told that while fulfilling these responsibilities, she was not to murmur but was to "lay aside the things of this world, and seek for the things of a better." (D&C 25:4, 10). One of our daughters related years ago how that particular verse had guided their family in making a critical employment decision that took them to a new state. Emma was also warned to beware of pride. (D&C 25:14). If she proved faithful, Emma was to receive "a crown of righteousness." (D&C 25:15). The reason I know this counsel extends to every woman in the Church beyond the private instruction Emma received is I have witnessed these same principles at work in the lives of the women I love most.

Joseph Smith loved Emma more than we can even imagine. In one revelation, he pleaded with the Lord on her behalf in these words: "Have mercy, O Lord, upon [my] wife. . ., that [she] may be exalted in thy presence, and preserved by thy fostering hand." (D&C 109:69).

The realization of his pleading comes in another revelation, when she is told "to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else." (D&C 132:54). She is also told to "forgive my servant Joseph his trespasses; and then shall she be forgiven her trespasses. . .; and I, the Lord thy God, will bless her, and multiply her, and make her heart to rejoice." (D&C 132:56). The fact Joseph and Emma are reminded to repent and to forgive one another should give ample hope to those of us who seek to follow their example, knowing a little of the dissonance and resolution that goes with the marriage covenant. Today in ward choir practice we sang "Where Love Is," and were reminded by our director that the song has many dissonant chords that all get resolved in the song, just as we seek to resolve them in our marriages.

Abrahamic Tests for Women

Returning to the earlier counsel, Emma is told she must endure faithfully to the end or risk losing all, for unless she does endure, "where I am you cannot come." (D&C 25:15). "She shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law." (D&C 132:54).

I have written before about "Abrahamic tests," here and here. Perhaps none in our dispensation illustrate those tests more thoroughly than Joseph and Emma. Through it all she is still admonished to beware of pride? How could pride even enter into that equation? Can we actually be proud when we are compelled to be humble? She is told to let her soul delight in her husband.


Elder Bruce R. McConkie

Elder Bruce R. McConkie wrote, "Just as it is possible for the very elect to be deceived, and to fall from grace through disobedience, so an elect lady, by failing to endure to the end, can lose her chosen status." (Mormon Doctrine, 217). The same lessons from the Lord's revelation to Emma apply equally to Joseph and all men by extension: Cleave to each other, comfort each other, serve in the Lord's kingdom, and endure faithfully to the end. I have confirmed the word "cleave" in the scriptures applies in only two usages -- to spouses and to God.

Women Become Mothers

Mothers are extraordinary little girls who mature as women. A righteous young wife earnestly yearns for what comes next -- being a mother. Every mother will desire the children to be sealed to her who are born of her through her marriage relationship. They are sealed to her and her spouse and linked eternally to her through the ordinances and authority of the holy priesthood. (D&C 138:7; 48). Even from the earliest age the parents will teach the children "to understand the doctrine of repentance, faith in Christ the Son of the living God, and of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of the hands, when eight years old." (D&C 68:25). These children will have "claim upon their parents for their maintenance until they are of age." (D&C 83:4).

Evidence our familial relationships as husbands, wives, sons and daughters continuing beyond the grave is obvious in this reference to his vision of futurity and eternal realms, when Joseph wrote, "I saw Father Adam and Abraham; and my father and my mother; my brother Alvin, that has long since slept." (D&C 137:5).

Righteous Influence of Mothers

Lucy Mack Smith

There can be little doubt of the influence of a righteous mother in Joseph's life. This description taken from the words of his mother in the minutes of a Church conference held on October 8, 1845, in Nauvoo, Illinois: "I raised up 11 children, 7 boys. I raised them in the fear of God. When they were two or three years old I told them I wanted them to love God with all their hearts. I told them to do good. I want all you to do the same. God gives us our children and we are accountable. . . I presume there never was a family more obedient than mine. I did not have to speak to them only once. . . I want you to teach your little children about Joseph in Egypt and such things, and when they are four years old they will love to read their Bible. . . Set your children to work; . . . don't let them play out of doors. . . I call you brothers and sisters and children. If you consider me a Mother in Israel, I want you to say so." (Conference in Nauvoo, 8 Oct. 1845, General Minutes Collection, Historical Department, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City, Utah, as cited by Susan Easton Black, LDS Women's Treasury, 13).

According to the minutes, Brigham Young then arose and said, "All who consider Mother Smith as a Mother in Israel, signify it by saying yes." There were loud shouts of yes. I bear witness there are mothers in Israel in my family and yours despite the distraction of other "siren voices" in our world today.

Laws, Rites and Ordinances of Marriage

Woman's role today is consistent with what it has always been throughout ancient scripture dating back to Adam's day. The same is true for men. Together men and women joined in the marriage covenant can learn the doctrines of salvation and how they are to participate in the laws, rites and ordinances of the new and everlasting covenant of marriage.

We are all weak, and often we stumble and sometimes become indifferent to our covenants because of the cares of the world. Either through neglect or knowingly, often those we love most receive the harshest treatment from us. If we love each other truly, our actions will accord with our words. If not, we are full of nothing but empty gestures with no substance.

Despite our frailties in the flesh there is always hope. In Mosiah 7:33, the Lord assures us: "But if ye will turn to the Lord with full purpose of heart, and put your trust in him, and serve him with all diligence of mind, if ye do this, he will, according to his own will and pleasure, deliver you out of bondage."

In D&C 1:32 we read: "Nevertheless, he that repents and does the commandments of the Lord shall be forgiven." In other words, "Nevertheless, he or she that repents and does the commandments of the Lord shall be forgiven."

We get to "practice" on each other in this life: "And let every man esteem his brother as himself, and practice virtue and holiness before me." (D&C 38:24). In the marriage covenant the equivalent is, "And let every man and woman esteem his or her brother or sister as himself or herself, and practice virtue and holiness before me."

Men learn mostly through trial and error (emphasis on error) to respect and dignify women, because as they come to understand the language God uses they eventually are left without excuse. God uses these exalted titles in referring to his daughters: "daughter," "handmaid," "woman," "wife," "mother," and "widow." He uses these titles to teach unthinking men what He expects of us in treating women with respect.

The Parables Highlight Women

The Lord taught many parables highlighting women. We are admonished in these parables about the importance of continually seeking the Lord (D&C 101:84), of being prepared when he comes again (D&C 63:54), and of his desire to gather the house of Israel (D&C 10:65; 29:2; 43:24). Jesus chose a woman as His example of generosity and sacrifice when a certain poor widow threw two mites into the treasury. (Mark 12:43-44).

My Grandmother Leda Meryl Kirkham Goates was an example who was similarly disposed. Her mantra, "Use it up, wear it out, make it do, or do without" still rings in my ears. She dutifully paid her "mite" on her Social Security check, not wanting to "rob God." Also highlighted in the parables is one woman's joy at the recovery of a lost piece of silver to illustrate angelic joy over one soul that repents. (Luke 15:8-10). Such was Grandma's joy when her prodigal son went to the temple with her for the first time in her advanced years only months before she died on an April 6th temple endowment session.

Zion the Bride

Front (l to r):  Heidi, Kristin, Shauna, Emily, Allison
Back (l to r):  Patsy, Kim, Jessica, Dianne, Melanie, Merilee

When I wrote about Zion years ago, it struck me that the pronouns referring to Zion were "she" and "her." One example: "For, behold, I say unto you that Zion shall flourish, and the glory of the Lord shall be upon her." (D&C 64:41). The female traits associated with Zion and the female pronouns "she" and "her" illustrate the Lord's vision of the cherished and even sacred position of righteous womanhood. If Zion is prototypical of women, then surely we can all expect the mercy we need and seek, for no one in my life typifies mercy, love and long suffering better than Patsy and all thirteen of our daughters (missing in the picture at the right at Thanksgiving this year are Adrienne, deceased, Toni and Tina ).

Women are Stronger

Elder John A. Widtsoe

Elder John A. Widtsoe wrote: "This doctrine of equal rights is confirmed in the ordinances of the Church, which are alike for man and woman. Faith, repentance, and baptism are the same for all. The rewards, such as the gift of the Holy Ghost and the temple ordinances, are alike for men and women. The gifts and obligations of the gospel are alike for all. The man who holds the priesthood officiates in it, but the blessings of it descend upon the woman, also." (Joseph Smith, Seeker After Truth, Prophet of God, 185).

President Joseph F. Smith

President Joseph F. Smith wrote: "There are people fond of saying that women are the weaker vessels. I don't believe it. Physically, they may be; but spiritually, morally, religiously and in faith, what man can match a woman who is really convinced? Daniel had faith to sustain him in the lion's den, but women have seen their sons torn limb from limb, and endured every torture satanic cruelty could invent, because they believed. They are always more willing to make sacrifices, and are the peers of men in stability, godliness, morality and faith." (Gospel Doctrine, 352; also, CR, Oct. 1947, 152). He was peering into the future in that prophetic statement as it relates to the women in my life.

The Sophistry of the Single State

If you believe the current trend to "do my own thing" in the single state without the possibility of an eternal correct marital relationship, you believe a sophistry that is inconsistent with the plan of God.

There really is no such thing as "an alternative lifestyle" for those who would style their lives as God has revealed. Women who long for these relationships will not be denied them in the eternities. (For example, see President Harold B. Lee, Ye Are the Light of the World, 292, and President Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 2:36; also see Special Situations).

So sacred is the role of women to bear children in the eyes of the Lord that men and women are specifically warned about it: "He that looketh upon a woman to lust after her shall deny the faith, and shall not have the Spirit; and if he repents not he shall be cast out." (D&C 42:23; 63:16). Women are similarly warned, "If she be not in the new and everlasting covenant, and she be with another man, she has committed adultery." (D&C 132:42).

Babylon the Whore

In the ancient and modern scriptures Babylon is referred to as a "whore." A whore is one who rejects her sacred opportunity to co-create life. She cannot obtain eternal lives except she repents and seeks it through righteous union with one God's sons. A "whore" in the scriptural equivalent uses her most sacred and eternal gifts to get worldly gain, to destroy others, and to create cults for personal, selfish power. She is the antithesis of Zion, the beautiful and pure bride of Christ. The examples abound, but one need look no further than Brian David Mitchell and Warren Jeffs for the example of a whoring misinterpretation of Zion.

Babylon is the moral equivalent of evil whoring for gain after other gods. In the scriptures we see references to false churches, the result of whoring originating with the "mother of abominations." (D&C 88:94).

When these abominations redefine the nature of Deity and the covenants, they often seek a redefinition of the divine role of motherhood. Joseph Smith referred to the teachings of a false prophet, a woman named Ann Lee, who taught, "You must forsake the marriage of the flesh or you cannot be married to the lamb, or have any share in the resurrection of Christ." She abominably concluded, "Those who are counted worthy to have any part in the resurrection of Christ neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like unto the angels." Ann Lee was born in 1736, the daughter of a blacksmith. She married a blacksmith by whom she bore four children, who all died in infancy. At age twenty-two, Ann was converted by Jane Wardley and began to preach. Ann came to America in 1774, and from then until her death in 1784, she was able to found three Shaker communities. Joseph encountered the Shakers (see preface to D&C 49). She also taught the Second Coming had already occurred and Christ had come back as a woman named Ann Lee.

Conversely, there are those who have strayed beyond the authorized priesthood keys and still advocate plural wives. More or less is still abominable without priesthood authorization.

All false religions, false churches and false prophets will one day be revealed and we will exult, "She is fallen, is fallen!" (see D&C 88:105) when Babylon, the great whore of all the earth, finally expires.

Sorry to get sidetracked on whores, but the contrast makes pure womanhood, as seen in the faces of my daughters, all the more delightful. The whore today comes in many guises and disguises. She can be alluring on the surface, but certainly there can be no lasting depth in believing a false premise upon which they are all founded. There is a God in heaven who has given revelation and pointed the way back home. The test of this mortal life is to find Him and Christ crucified in spite of the demons of hell who abound to deceive us and point us in the opposite direction.

Faithful Women

For those who are faithful, nothing can destroy the sacred roles of a righteous daughter, wife and mother in exchange for all the personal or temporal gain the world has to offer.

Cherish the righteous women in your lives.