MMM Protip: Don’t Tell Women They Look Better Without Makeup

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

I get it—I really do. You want to say, “hey, I like you just the way you are” or “just the way God made you is wonderful” or “you can feel at home around me without the need to change how you look.” I get how in your mind that sounds great. It sounds like you really care about her and you don’t want her to feel the need to change herself. Toss in how you don’t want her to feel like she has to keep up with (worldly) ideas of beauty or value and hey, you are trying to say something genuinely kind and loving. And while that is what you are thinking, there’s a really good chance that that is not the message she’s getting.

I have two daughters who take quite different approaches to makeup. One daughter takes time to regularly wear makeup. The other daughter, well if she has makeup on then you know two things: 1—this must be some event or occasion and 2—her sister probably did it. And both are lovely, lovely women! What I have learned is that there is a lot more to wearing makeup than one might think. My daughter spends a fair amount of time every day applying her makeup. She is a naturally lovely woman, and when she wears makeup she is still lovely, and lovely in a different way. There seems to be something extra sparkly about her eyes and extra lovely in her smile.

But the fact that women look lovely in makeup is not the only reason why you Modern Mormon Men should avoid telling women that they look better without makeup. Perhaps the most important reason is because they didn’t ask you and their choice to wear makeup is not really about you. It is their choice and it is for them. The process of putting on makeup can be an important ritual, an activity where she uses her talents, creativity, and skill to add beauty and luster to what God has given. Sure, perhaps some women have men in mind, and perhaps some have other women in mind, but the reasons for wearing makeup are far more complex (and interesting) than to appeal or impress others or because of backwards, ignorant ideas about vanity.

Generally, Not Even Close to Murder

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

If I were given the chance to influence one aspect of Mormon culture and scripture interpretation, one thing that would be at the top of my list would be the notion that sexual sin is “next to murder.” Generally, I believe that sexual sin is not even close to murder. But before I explain this idea, an idea I got from Michael R. Ash, let me say that sexual sins that are close to murder are the only sexual sins that are close to murder. The easiest example of this is Moroni 9:9-10, wherein the Nephites rape, torture, kill, and eat Lamanite women. Now that is sexual sin that is next to murder. Other sexual sins that are next to murder would be sins that irreparably damage souls, sins like incest, molestation, and rape.

When we are speaking with youth about sexual sin, in general it is not the above sins that we have in mind. While sexual sins like masturbation, fornication, and adultery are serious, sometimes very, very serious, I do not believe that they are anywhere near murder.

That Great Day When There Will Be An End to Patriarchy

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

Imagine if you woke up one morning and it had all rolled back. Your wife no longer had a job or even interest in having a job. She was at home patiently waiting for orders from you. Instead of having her own thoughts or plans or ideas, she lived only to serve and support you. All of which is to say that she was very, very dependent upon you. She did little or nothing without your explicit or at least tacit consent, down to the smallest activity. And imagine that your daughters, if they were not married already to men who ruled their lives, then now they are underpaid and disrespected nurses or elementary school teachers. You may have a daughter off at college but, by her own admission, she’s only there to get her “Mrs” degree. Your daughters, in fact all of your children, are as dependent upon you as your wife. They do little on their own without seeking first your approval. For every decision in the family, whether great or small, you must make it alone. You might talk to some other men about it or maybe look in the scriptures for some guidance—books written by men for men—but patriarchy demands that you make every decision and that every decision be flawless. This is the world where father must know what is best in every situation and all the time and for everyone involved. This is patriarchy, and it puts an impossible demand and weight on men while it robs women and other powerless people of participation and of a full voice in making decisions.

My 22 Point Opinion About Temple Sealings for Gay Couples

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

A friend recently asked my opinion about temple sealings for gay couples. I don’t know why anyone cares about my opinion. I’m not proselyting my view; I’m merely stating my opinion in 22 bullet points.

1. People don't choose to be gay, to be only sexually attracted to people of their same sex.
2. No one, I believe, would make that choice, since it is so socially frowned upon and since it does not lend itself to the advantages (of which there are many!) of heterosexual marriage.
3. Since they don't choose it, and since it is really born in them, I believe the gay people I know when they say that they do not feel that their attraction is wrong or a sin.
4. Mormons typically think that such attraction is inherently wrong and against God's plan, while gay people, especially gay Mormons, do not believe that their attraction is wrong or sinful.
5. Mormons see heterosexual attraction as normal, natural, and even God-given.
6. I believe gay Mormons when they say that they believe that their homosexual attraction is normal, natural, and God-given for them.
7. Homosexual marriage seems to interrupt God's plan, since such couples cannot have children in the traditional manner.

Letter to a Muslim Youth Education Director: A Response to Jeremy Runnells

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

Jeremy Runnells’ Letter to a CES Director has been a fairly popular topic for some time. People I respect, like Jacob and others have responded to it. I don’t know why you should care what I think, but apparently you are still reading, so here goes.

How Would You Read a Letter to a Muslim Youth Education Director?

So that’s my first question. If the same book were written about Islam or Buddhism or Catholicism or Presbyterianism, how would you read it? I can think of many different approaches, but personally I would never bother reading such a book. The point of the book seems to be to apply fun house mirror-like exaggerations to every flaw or thing that could be seen as a flaw. After this fun house mirror exaggerates lots of little flaws, the next step seems to be to convince you that all of those little flaws or seeming inconsistencies add up to something big. From what I can tell, next you are supposed to get the message that the church is untrustworthy. This untrustworthiness is supposed to seem so big, so absolute, and so “true” that you “must” abandon it. This untrustworthiness then becomes the lens through which you view everything in the chuch, and this cynical approach reinforces the untrustworthiness. Finally, in order to act with “integrity” and “in good conscience” to the cynical, exaggerated view you have adapted, you must end your participation.

What would you think of a book that did the same thing about any other religion? Again, I would never bother to read such a book. It would not tell me anything useful or good about those faith traditions. Instead, it seems like it would try to use different exaggerations to convince me that something evil is behind them and that they should be avoided if not fought against. To put it another way, such a book would not tell me what is virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy about any of those traditions.

Who Would Read Such a Book?

Why I Dislike the Confederate Flag

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

I don’t know if I can call myself a “Southerner.” I have lived in North Carolina for 15 years, and I lived in Tallahassee, Florida for four more. I also lived in Oklahoma for three, but that’s on the border. I grew up in Virginia, but it was “Northern Virginia,” and it is frankly stretching things to call it “the South.” I can say “y’all” as natural as can be, and I love a good biscuit, but I was born in Utah.

Simply put, I dislike the Confederate Flag (which is really the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia, to be precise) for these reasons: It has historically and is currently too strongly associated with white supremacism and it is a poor symbol for the greatness of the South.

For me, the Confederate flag is too closely tied with white supremacism. It featured prominently in Dylann Storm Roof’s chosen imagery and as part of the race war he sought to inspire. It was also reborn in the South during the late 50’s and 60’s as a racist response to federal integration efforts.

I know many wonderful Southerners who embrace the flag as a symbol of their heritage. Few would describe themselves as racist or white supremacists, and most would not personally associate the flag with those attitudes. But the main reason I dislike the confederate flag is that it is too small, too narrow, too limited, and does not really work as a symbol of the South. To give an example: it does not symbolize for me some great Southerners like the Bedford Boys.

If you have never heard of them or ever been to Bedford Virginia, the Bedford Boys were men who signed up to defend their country and all it stands for during World War II. These soldiers were part of the units that landed in France on D-Day. They made the ultimate sacrifice for their country in a faraway land on that dark morning. These were great Southern men, soldiers defending their country, but for me the Confederate flag does not bring them to mind. These men did not rally under the Confederate flag; they rallied under the flag of the great United States of America.

There are many other great Southern Americans who I do not believe would wave the Confederate flag. They are Southern, but that is not a symbol of a great Southern heritage for them. Those Americans include Harriet Tubman, B.B. King, Jimmy Carter, Jasper Johns, William Faulkner, Jackie Robinson, Rosa Parks, and Aziz Ansari. Instead of a far too narrow symbol, the South needs a better symbol of its rich, wonderful legacy. I think that a better symbol for that legacy is the very flag the Bedford Boys fought under. Exclusively and proudly waving that flag does not lessen one’s love or respect for the South and the South’s contributions to our great nation.


Shawn Tucker grew up with amazing parents and five younger, wonderful siblings. He served as a missionary in Chile during the Plebiscite and the first post-dictatorship election. After his mission, he attended BYU, where he married ... you guessed it ... his wife. They both graduated, with Shawn earning a BA in Humanities. Fearing that his BA in Humanities, which is essentially a degree in Jeopardy, would not be sufficient, Shawn completed graduate work in the same ... stuff ... at Florida State University. He currently teaches at Elon University in North Carolina. He and ... you guessed it ... his wife have four great children. Twitter: @MoTabEnquirer. Website: motabenquirer.blogspot.com.
Image credit: Emily Barney, modified by Scott Heffernan (used with permission).

Building Better Youth Discussions, Mini-Classes, Workshops, Etc.

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

In my calling in the Stake Young Men program, it seems like we are constantly trying to come up with ideas for mini-classes or workshops. Youth conferences typically have some sort of instructional time, class, or workshop, and many other stake activities also have them. This is in addition to firesides and Bishop’s youth discussions. Below is a list of principles I’ve developed that seem to make these successful. These principles are followed by a list of possible class or workshops topics. If you have more, please add them in the comments.

Principles:

• Youth generally prefer workshops and engaging activities to lectures. Of course a talented presenter can be excellent, but, taking a page from TED talks, I believe that no presentation should last more than 18 minutes.


• Youth generally appreciate genuinely open-ended workshops and discussion. Presenters or workshop directors with knowledge, skill, and confidence sufficient to make a workshop genuinely open-ended and truly engaging are often the most successful. Presentations which only have the appearance of being open-ended but which have leading, “fishing,” or manipulative questions should be avoided.


• Youth generally listen to other youth much more attentively than to adults. Panels that feature other youth or younger people, like recently returned missionaries or young single adults, can be very effective. Youth also seem to appreciate a variety of speakers.

Thank You for My … (Warning: Breach of Male Code of Silence)

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

We all love being guys all of the time and would never want that to be different and we love everything about being a guy (and if not, we have our male code of silence to prevent us from admitting otherwise).

One of the many, many reasons we are glad we are guys is because we don't have those body image problems that women have. None of us. Ever. (Okay, we all know that that is not true at all. In fact we all feel unattractive many times. Feeling unattractive makes us feel undesirable and maybe even unlovable. Good thing we never have to talk about it.)

It is always great being a guy because you can play shirts-and-skins to distinguish teams and you never feel self-conscious about it. (I pretty much always felt some shame taking off my shirt. As a teenager I felt that I was scrawny and chicken-chested. Now I feel fat and like I have a forest of disgusting, troll-like chest hair/fur.)

Responding to Non-Mormons about Women and the Priesthood

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

About two years ago or so the missionaries came to our home to talk with two of my university students. It was a great experience all around, with the students asking questions and the missionaries generally doing an excellent job. It was also great for my children to see missionaries in action. Toward the end the missionaries mentioned modern prophets, and the students asked about them. The elders showed the typical pictures from The Ensign. The students, both female, asked why there were not any women, to which the elders responded that women are not ordained to the priesthood in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. When the two twentysomething, female college students asked the two, twentysomething, male elders why, one of the elders said that since women are better nurturers and can bear children, men are given the priesthood. This was met with considerable skepticism on the part of the young women. Oh, and I wanted to grab the elder’s words out of the air and stuff them in his sock.

Another Approach

Since that evening, I have thought a lot about what I might say to non-LDS friends about why women are not ordained to the priesthood. What follows are ideas I have learned/stolen from others, and if I could find their original sources I would give them credit. The approach includes three elements.

Don't Use Gender Roles

The first element of what seems like a wise approach is to not use gender roles or stereotypes as an explanation. Saying that women are one way while men are another, even if those roles are in the Proclamation, is not going to sit well with many non-Mormons. Many people would find this line of thinking sexist. In addition, I think there are two more problems with it. The first problem is that talking about gender roles are not our specialty or expertise. Few of us are sociologist, anthropologist, social historians, or people who have spent the years of study necessary to talk with confidence about issues like gender roles. In this respect I don't think the Proclamation gives us enough foundation or expertise to support that approach. But the second problem for me is that I'm not sure the Holy Ghost will testify, will carry to the hearts of non-Mormons, the idea that women are not ordained because of gender roles. Perhaps that is just my experience, but this does not seem like something that the Holy Ghost will powerfully testify to others.

To a Mission Buddy on Hearing About His Divorce

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

I recently learned that a mission buddy got divorced last year. It came as a shock because I found out through a third party who had been sworn to secrecy. I consider this buddy pretty close; we touched base about once a year and on special occasions like when kids were born. My heart goes out to him and the people affected by this painful change. My only wonder is why he didn't allow us to support him and grieve with him during the process.

Let me start by saying that this buddy was always a private person. He would complain about people getting "too personal" in testimonies or lessons. Honestly I can only understand that like I understand Hudson Bay or subatomic particles; I'm sure that they exist but I have not the slightest direct experience with them. That is to say that I'm a very public and open person. It is in my nature to show pictures of my family on the first day of my university classes or to talk about ways I come up short as a father with strangers in the grocery store. I realize that my buddy's choice to keep his divorce private baffles me in part because we are such different people.

And I can see why someone would be very, very private about such a painful life transition. He may not want to deal with prodding, painful questions by people who might look on his situation like rubberneckers passing a car accident. He may feel like this is the best way for his children to make this transition. There could be lots of extenuating circumstances, including legal, ecclesiastical, financial, family, and career implications that make keeping this private in the best interest of everyone involved. More to the point for me is that he's a private person handling this as he sees fit, and I have no idea how I would handle something similar.

And then of course there is this paragraph—the one where I wonder aloud, publicly, if this private approach might have some drawbacks. And the main drawback is what I mentioned at the start; that I cannot grieve with him. As stated above, I found out through someone who was not supposed to tell anyone. I cannot contact my friend and tell him that my heart goes out to him in this time of what must be great pain. I can put his name in the temple and pray for him, but I cannot share in his burden. I cannot comfort one who might be in need of comfort, and I cannot mourn with one that might be mourning. Perhaps it is just that I'm such a public person or perhaps it is some interesting research about how we are meant to be socially connected, but this feels like a missed opportunity to connect, to bond, and to feel the joy of how our hearts can be knit together. Maybe that feeling of being knitted together is even more important at times like this, at times when hearts might be so weighed down.


Shawn Tucker grew up with amazing parents and five younger, wonderful siblings. He served as a missionary in Chile during the Plebiscite and the first post-dictatorship election. After his mission, he attended BYU, where he married ... you guessed it ... his wife. They both graduated, with Shawn earning a BA in Humanities. Fearing that his BA in Humanities, which is essentially a degree in Jeopardy, would not be sufficient, Shawn completed graduate work in the same ... stuff ... at Florida State University. He currently teaches at Elon University in North Carolina. He and ... you guessed it ... his wife have four great children. Twitter: @MoTabEnquirer. Website: motabenquirer.blogspot.com.
Image credit: THOR (used with permission).

MMM Library: Let's Talk About …

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

The other night at Institute we had a very interesting discussion. My students asked the age-old chastity question about what physical intimacy is appropriate before marriage. They happened to ask the simultaneous question of what is appropriate inside of marriage. I find the second question to be easier to address than the first one, but in answering the second a new thought occurred to me about the first.

I told the students that it is my opinion that the church does not have very many specific or hard-and-fast rules about what intimacy is appropriate in marriage. It seems to me that for obvious reasons that intimacy should not involve other people either directly or indirectly. It also seems obvious that the expression of intimacy should never be demeaning, manipulative, or coercive. Beyond that, it seems to me that every married couple must communicate openly about sexual expression, about what each person wants or needs or finds satisfying. I also told my students that these discussions are probably ongoing throughout a marriage.

Cynicism the Destroyer

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

In one of my first semesters at BYU after my mission, I took an American Literature course, and one of our first readings was Jonathan Edwards' Personal Narrative. Oh, and I hated it. I remember getting very upset at the Calvinist Edwards and at his faulty ideas about God, salvation, predestination, and agency. I'm sure I probably went on quite a rant about it in class and to anyone who'd listen. My passionate dislike for Edwards' writing may have been connected with my idea that he was at least a stumbler in the darkness of the Apostasy if not one who, as the Lord told Joseph, drew near to God with his lips but whose heart was in reality far away.

As I had a habit from mission life of praying about just about everything, one day I found myself ranting to the Lord about Edwards. And when I did I felt God quietly yet sternly rebuke me. As I listened I felt the Lord make it clear that I had been unfair to Edwards, that I had approached his writing with a very negative predisposition, and that I had magnified all of the worst I could find and discounted or dismissed anything good in his Personal Narrative. Being thus rebuked caused me to re-read Edwards. The second reading, as you can imagine, brought to light a wonderful text written by a man using all of his powers to understand his relationship with God. I still treasure Edwards' writings, but what I treasure even more is what this experience taught me about cynicism.

What I mean by cynicism here is an unfair examination of anything, unfair because of an overarching, negative predisposition and a willingness to magnify the worst and disregard anything that might be good. When I cynically approached Edwards' account, it was as if I set out a series of landmines. Each mine is triggered by a belief or a view, and when Edwards' text went against my beliefs or views, the mine would explode. With my views or beliefs duly laid out, and with Edwards unaware of those views, it was inevitable that he would roll over them.

Meekness and Vulnerability

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

I have often heard that meekness is not weakness, but I have to say that it is easy to see how the two go together. In the scriptures, for example, we often see the meek connected with the poor. When Jesus lists the Beatitudes He connects the poor in spirit, those that mourn, and the meek. Even in Elder Ulisses Soares' 2013 LDS General Conference talk Be Meek and Lowly of Heart, a talk where he says that meekness is not weakness, he also says that the meek have a "docile, tolerant, and submissive" temperament. I have to admit that those just sound like three positive terms for weak. To be meek is also to be teachable, and while that is not necessarily weak, those who are teachable must acknowledge a sense of their own ignorance, need, and neediness.

Needy, ignorant, and docile are not usually seen as attractive qualities. But in my opinion, to really get at the nature of meekness, we need to make things worse. To make things worse, or in other words to make meekness seem even less attractive, let's think about poverty. What I have in mind about poverty is actually something that C.S. Lewis says about charity and security. Lewis puts forward that "For many of us the great obstacle to charity lies not in our luxurious living or desire for more money, but in our fear—fear of insecurity." (C.S. Lewis Mere Christianity 86) What really seems frightening about poverty is the lack of control, the lack of power in our lives to predict and to bring about the outcomes that we want. Perhaps this is just me, but I think that what I find really frightening about the poor is to see how vulnerable they are. And I would add one additional frightening thing about the poor: their plight seems shameful. In the capitalistic, individualistic, hard-work-always-guarantees-success world that I live in, to be poor is to be a failure. To look into the face of poverty is to see shame and need and vulnerability. And I think that all three of those things are connected with meekness.

So to get to meekness, let me start with shame. My point-of-departure for this post is a fabulous TED talk by Brené Brown called The Power of Vulnerability. In this talk Brown discusses her findings as a social work researcher. From that work Brown concludes that shame unravels human connection. Brown defines shame as "the fear of disconnection" or the fear of being unworthy of being connected with others. She elaborates that a sense of shame is universal, and that while no one wants to talk about it everyone has it and in fact "the less you talk about it the more you have it." Brown says that a phrase that expresses shame so well is "I am not good enough." This idea of not being enough can be expressed as "I am not thin enough, rich enough, beautiful enough, smart enough, promoted enough." At this point, my reader, you might want to note where you feel that you are "not enough." Of myself I would say that "I'm not quite smart enough, kind enough, obedient enough, and just not quite lovable." I would add that I am afraid of how people around me would respond if they "really knew me."

15 Minutes in the National Gallery of Art: Adoration of the Magi

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

Series Note: The best way to experience Washington D.C.'s National Gallery of Art is in short intervals. The thing is like the Costco of art museums! Too often when people go they stay too long and look at too much, and it all becomes a big, beautiful blur. So this will be an ongoing series of posts that use a room or even just a painting from that museum and connect it with a song or poem to create what I hope is a productive and satisfying 15 minutes.

We're moving through the halls of the National Gallery of Art, and now we are deep in the Renaissance. Look at this painting—this is the sort of painting that we have museums for. This is Botticelli's Adoration of the Magi. The magi are the wise men. At the center is the Blessed Virgin Mary wearing her traditional red and blue and holding the Christ child wearing.

Botticelli is clearly not shooting for historical accuracy. Mary does not look like a poor Jewish woman, and the deep background looks like Tuscany. There is no manger, and the setting actually looks like the ruins of some building. Botticelli painted this work in Rome. The buildings are Roman ruins with a large wooden framework on top. This is an important and complex symbol. Catholics believe that God built Christianity on the foundation of the classical world. That world had passed away, but God's kingdom emerged from it. The humble wood of Christ's cross becomes the framework of a new roof that we see on top. That framework would eventually become the cathedral roof of God's kingdom on earth.

Botticelli wants to make Christ's advent, mission, and relation to the present as real and vivid as possible. Notice the even, delightful deployment of strong colors throughout the work. Notice the central focus and casual symmetry of the composition. Of course we could also see more going on here. Notice the faces of the wise men. Do you see how Mary’s face is fairly generic, as it is just an idealized woman's face? Do you see how many of the wise men look like real people? This is because those are not generic faces; they are the faces of the people who paid for the work. The magi were very popular in Florence at the time. There was a confraternity that celebrated them with a parade every five years. The fact that these are faces or portraits also explains why there are so many wise men and such a large retinue.

When you go to the National Gallery of Art or any other museum with Italian Renaissance art (or Italy!), you will notice lots of paintings of the worshiping wise men. And by lots I mean lots and lots and lots. You will also notice far fewer worshiping shepherds. Oh, and I cannot think of one painting of the Rich Man and Lazarus. That makes sense, because paintings were expensive, rich people paid artists to make them, and rich people wanted paintings that showed God's approval of rich people like themselves. Yes, this work is a show of humble devotion, but it also shows God's approval of the wealthy, powerful people featured here.

So let's listen to two songs with this painting. The first one emphasizes the devotional nature of this work. It should be familiar. Look and listen and see how these go together.



And then there is this song.



This may not be familiar; rarely is 90's Ska music compared with Italian Renaissance art. To what degree might the song describe Botticelli? Was he just a sell out for the rich? Let these two songs rattle around in your head next time you see one of those Italian adoration of the magi pictures.


Shawn Tucker grew up with amazing parents and five younger, wonderful siblings. He served as a missionary in Chile during the Plebiscite and the first post-dictatorship election. After his mission, he attended BYU, where he married ... you guessed it ... his wife. They both graduated, with Shawn earning a BA in Humanities. Fearing that his BA in Humanities, which is essentially a degree in Jeopardy, would not be sufficient, Shawn completed graduate work in the same ... stuff ... at Florida State University. He currently teaches at Elon University in North Carolina. He and ... you guessed it ... his wife have four great children. Twitter: @MoTabEnquirer. Website: motabenquirer.blogspot.com.

Scholars Crack Joseph's Bro Code

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:
assisted by Seattle Jon:

Ogden, UT—Scholars working on the Joseph Smith papers believe that they have finally cracked a code that has perplexed generations of church history researchers, and it was all because of text messaging.

In their article "Cracking the Joseph Smith Bro Code," researchers Dawn Dixon Pratt and Oliver Winslow Young document their efforts to decipher a series of letters at the very end of a number of correspondences between Joseph and other key historical figures. "It is common knowledge that for a time Joseph used code names to protect early church members, but this code seemed different," said researchers Pratt and Young. Try as they might, researchers could not figure out what those letters meant.

Then, earlier this year, a breakthrough. Dr. Pratt noticed rather similar letters in her 16 year-old daughter's text messages. "I was trying to figure out what my daughter was saying," explained Pratt, "when I found an article that became my proverbial Rosetta stone." The article explained some of the arcane texting acronyms contemporary adolescents use such as KPC or "keeping parents clueless."

Pratt arrived at work at her office in the University of Utah at Tooele's Mormon History and Cultural Studies program to discuss her findings with Dr. Young. "Well, after a good laugh, a lengthy discussion of adolescent behavior and attitude adjustment, and a brief discussion about appropriate use and hiding evidence of corporeal punishment, Dr. Young joked that maybe using a sort of early text messaging code was what Joseph was doing," said Pratt. Though nearly dismissed at the time, after a few moments it became clear that that is exactly what Joseph and others were doing.

"We have identified over 142 unique combinations as part of what we call 'Joseph's Bro Code,'" said an exuberant Young. He elaborated that "this will change the face of our understanding of this period forever."

Some of the most used terms include PWIR or "polygamous wife in room," EMIL for "Emma is listening," MMIH meaning "meet me in hiding" and LPRHI for "Let Porter Rockwell Handle It." A common code at the end of letters that talk about the patience and faith needed to work with certain early male church members end with the letters SHTE, which researchers believe means "Send Him To England."

Pratt and Young explained that "deciphering this code has shed new light on the trials of that period." They went on to say that "one code that seems to register some of that time’s frustration and anxiety about the trials of plural marriage is DAWFS which seems to mean 'Dang Angel with Flaming Sword.'"

Note: If you have other acronyms that may or may not have been part of Joseph's Bro Code, please mention them in the comments. Some researchers believe that Emma and other early church women may have also had a unique code. If you believe you know some of their code, include it in the comments as well.


Shawn Tucker grew up with amazing parents and five younger, wonderful siblings. He served as a missionary in Chile during the Plebiscite and the first post-dictatorship election. After his mission, he attended BYU, where he married ... you guessed it ... his wife. They both graduated, with Shawn earning a BA in Humanities. Fearing that his BA in Humanities, which is essentially a degree in Jeopardy, would not be sufficient, Shawn completed graduate work in the same ... stuff ... at Florida State University. He currently teaches at Elon University in North Carolina. He and ... you guessed it ... his wife have four great children. Twitter: @MoTabEnquirer. Website: motabenquirer.blogspot.com.

Seven Tips For Giving Your Best Missionary Homecoming Talk

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

You are excited and happy to be home. Here are some ideas that might help you give the best homecoming talk possible:

Tip #1: What We Really Want Are Your Stories
As we watch you get up to the podium, all we really want are your stories. In fact, the bulk of your talk should be you telling three mission stories. You and everyone who served a mission will know that stories are creations, narratives that have been condensed for a particular audience and purpose. They are true (or they should be true), but the real events are always more complex than any one story can convey. That is okay. Formulate and give us as clearly and honestly as possible three important stories from your mission experience.

Tip #2: Use a Simple Framework
Since you cannot just tell three stories, have a framework or over-arching theme to connect them. It could be the joy of service or how the Lord blesses our best efforts or whatnot, but have some overarching idea that links the stories together. Introduce that theme at the outset, return to it very briefly between stories, and tie all of the stories together at the end with that theme.

Tip #3: Include Scriptures Where Helpful
When you introduce your framework or over-arching theme, between stories, or in your conclusion, include scriptures that support and advance your ideas. I would suggest no more than three scriptures.

Tip #4: Be You
We are glad to see you. We love you. We are glad that you have changed and grown. Simply being you is enough. Also, you are very, very excited about missionary work. That is great. Honestly, we will smile in agreement when you tell us to study Preach My Gospel every day, but there is no way we are going to actually do that. So, if you really want us to do missionary work, just talk about the joy you felt and allow the Spirit to work on us. I say that to say this—you are becoming an adult now, so you need to know that we are all doing our best and some of us have deep, painful struggles that you don't see. When you left, you may have imagined all of us as happily on the gospel escalator taking us to heaven. By now you should know that there is no such escalator, or that the escalator is broken and everyone has to take the stairs. Many find those stairs almost impossibly steep and frightening. You need to know that there is pain in every pew. The value of knowing that is that now when you speak you can rest assured that you don’t need to tell us to do anything. We are adult children of Heavenly Parents, and your job is not to attempt to correct or counsel us. Your job is to be who you are--some who is full of joy and love and enthusiasm. That is enough for us; who you are lifts us. So just be you and share who you are.

Baptists (and Mormons) on the Road to Emmaus

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

Those who have done missionary work in the South (and perhaps other places) may be able to relate to this experience: you have a nice conversation with someone, and when you return for the follow-up appointment that person's pastor or minister is there. It is hard to know if the local leader was invited or invited herself/himself, but usually that pastor seems to view the conversation as a chance to "defend the flock." I had that experience with the missionaries working here in North Carolina. I think the local pastor already had his Bible open as we walked in the door. And I was very proud of how the missionaries responded. Usually an exchange like this is the battle of the prooftexters, or, as I like to call it in the South, "Dueling Bibles." The missionaries here addressed the questions that were raised with humility and sincerity, and refused to quibble over scriptures.

The conversation did not last very long, but before we left we spoke with them about the Book of Mormon and the Restoration. And this is how we did it: we talked about the disciples on the road to Emmaus. We talked about how Christ's crucifixion was very surprising. Many anticipated that Jesus was a Savior who would throw off Roman political rule and restore David's kingdom. When the Man that they believe would save them politically was brutally and shamefully killed, many experienced painful disappointment and confusion. Amidst this confusion, those disciples encountered a Stranger who seemed oblivious to what had transpired. The Stranger soon explained via the scriptures why all that seemed so shockingly unexpected had to happen. The disciples eventually persuaded the Stranger to dine with them, and over the course of the meal discovered Him to be the resurrected Savior.

The Joy and Sadness of a Productive Summer

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

This past summer was particularly productive. I teach at a small, liberal arts University in North Carolina. Summer is the only time that I can do research, since teaching and other responsibilities take up most of my time during the rest of the year. And this summer was particularly productive. But there is something sad about why this summer was productive. Let me explain.

This summer I only have two of my four children at home. My oldest is serving as a missionary in Nevada, and my second child was off at BYU. I was home with my 15-year-old and my 11-year-old sons. We did some fun things together this summer including going to the pool, playing basketball, and seeing family. But only having half of my children at home, and having my remaining children a bit older, I found that I could get more of my academic work done. In fact this summer I completed the second half of a book manuscript. I was very happy to get that project done, but I learned something interesting in the process. Never before in my life could I have been as productive. It is not that I am smarter than before, it is just that I have fewer children at home. And when I got the book manuscript completed not only did I feel grateful to have it done, but I also felt grateful that I had never done so much previously. Every other summer I had spent more time with my children. I do not regret that at all, and as a matter fact I would prefer to be unproductive if it meant spending more time with my kids. If I would have completed a similar project in years past, it would have taken too much time from being with my children. To use this metaphor: I would have got to the top of my ladder only to realize that it had been leaning against the wrong wall.

And that is one of the nice lessons I have learned from being 45 years old and having older children. I do not regret that for most of my career I have been a father first and an employee second. I have done a good job at my job, but I have never let that job become my primary focus. So it is bittersweet now that I can spend more time and be more productive at my job precisely because my real job, my most satisfying job, requires somewhat less of my time.


Shawn Tucker grew up with amazing parents and five younger, wonderful siblings. He served as a missionary in Chile during the Plebiscite and the first post-dictatorship election. After his mission, he attended BYU, where he married ... you guessed it ... his wife. They both graduated, with Shawn earning a BA in Humanities. Fearing that his BA in Humanities, which is essentially a degree in Jeopardy, would not be sufficient, Shawn completed graduate work in the same ... stuff ... at Florida State University. He currently teaches at Elon University in North Carolina. He and ... you guessed it ... his wife have four great children. Twitter: @MoTabEnquirer. Website: motabenquirer.blogspot.com.
Image credit: clarkrc (used with permission).

President Clark, Stewardships, and Variety

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

There is some buzz about something President Clark of BYU-Idaho posted recently. You can read about that buzz here and here. My intention is not to refute anything in particular but simply to add one more point-of-view.

It is helpful for me to work under the assumptions that President Clark is a wise, thoughtful person who genuinely loves those he serves. I assume that he takes his particular stewardship very seriously. I also assume that he sees sides and has experiences with that stewardship that I could never know. Given these assumptions, it seems reasonable for me to also assume that his best judgment and his sincere affection are behind what he wrote.

What helps me think about what President Clark does in his stewardship is how others have responded to what I do in mine. I teach Institute in North Carolina, and on more than one occasion members who do not attend my class have expressed concerns about what we do. I pray every day for my Institute students by name, and I try to use all of my faculties to connect them with blessings God has for them via our time together. I find tremendous joy and satisfaction in this work. But I sometimes do things that do not fit what outsiders might expect of Institute.

While I think all of us should be very, very critical, bravely and humbly asking the most pressing and difficult questions about how we are doing what God has asked us to do, I wonder about how much we should question what others do in their stewardships. How much can I reasonably expect the Lord might tell me about how someone else is meeting the needs of those that she or he serves? What really is my role making such judgments? I will add that, on the surface, the letter President Clark wrote does not seem to line up with what I expect I might write, but perhaps Zion is better off for that. Perhaps variety and difference add to a richness that should neither be judged off-handedly nor dismissed by those who do not have that specific stewardship.


Shawn Tucker grew up with amazing parents and five younger, wonderful siblings. He served as a missionary in Chile during the Plebiscite and the first post-dictatorship election. After his mission, he attended BYU, where he married ... you guessed it ... his wife. They both graduated, with Shawn earning a BA in Humanities. Fearing that his BA in Humanities, which is essentially a degree in Jeopardy, would not be sufficient, Shawn completed graduate work in the same ... stuff ... at Florida State University. He currently teaches at Elon University in North Carolina. He and ... you guessed it ... his wife have four great children. Twitter: @MoTabEnquirer. Website: motabenquirer.blogspot.com.
Image credit: Ken Lund (used with permission) (image has been cropped).

Back to School Tips for High School/College Students

Tweet

by Shawn Tucker:

We hate to see them go and we love to see them go. Just sayin’. Here are some tips that might help them.

Practical Tip: Zotero. Zotero is a free bibliography management software. A what? What it does is easily insert citations for papers. So let’s say that your high school or college student has to write a paper with citations. This program makes it very, very easy. With the push of a button it also generates the Works Cited or Bibliography. And, if the student has done it in the wrong format, say MLA instead of APA, with the click of another button Zotero can change all of the citations and bibliography to another style. It is very easy to use, and it makes writing papers less tedious. Finally, Zotero is essential for longer papers and things like dissertations.