Grace is one of the central concepts in all of Christianity, yet also one of its most contested. What is it? How does it work? Do we as human beings have to do something first for it to perform its healing work? Can we even turn from sin without Grace first being extended to us? What, exactly happened in the Garden of Eden (literally or metaphorically) that caused separation from God (a Fall), and what are its effects on (or the state of) our souls that requires the transformative action of Grace? Certainly, the concept of Grace is no less debated in Mormonism--or at least, as is suggested in this podcast, it is beginning to now enjoy more focused attention. Is Grace a substance/thing that fills in the "gap" between a standard of perfection that God sets forth and everything we can do on our own in showing our desires and faith? Is it the suffering in the Garden and on the Cross that satisfies the demands of an eternal law of Justice? Is it more like an event--our "getting it" regarding God’s love and our worth that leads us to transformation and a new life in Christ, one in which we yield ever and ever more fully to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, becoming godlike in our compassion for all? And what about all the Grace vs. Works passages we find in both in the Bible and Mormon scriptures? Is Paul’s meditations in Romans about his own sinful nature and the need for Grace the key text for viewing Grace and our own human abilities to respond to God? What are alternative readings of those passages or others within wider Christianity? And, for Mormons, how might one read what seems to be the key passage in the Book of Mormon that declares we are saved by grace "after all we can do" (2 Nephi 25:23) in different ways? Is it really a temporal "after" (feeding into the God filling the "gaps" model)? Is this really what Nephi is saying? And does this interpretation even jive with other Book of Mormon passages on Grace? All these views and many more are discussed in this terrific discussion among Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists John Morehead, Katie Langston, and Joe Spencer.

Too often today’s political discourse reduces politics to partisanship, whether one affiliates with this or that political party. It’s a much broader topic, however, encompassing big notions about citizenship in a society, how we as a group of people make decisions, how we navigate our responsibilities to each other, to our government, and to our consciences and deepest religious convictions. When we weave in a particular group of people, such as Mormonism, it becomes even more clear that the political sphere is ever evolving--that even as certain themes maintain some influence in how each period of history unfolded, change concerning what Mormons wanted both for and from government was and is always the norm. Mormonism has a wonderful history of thinking fresh about government, about economic forms such as cooperative economies versus free-market capitalism, in wondering about how heaven is governed and if the way it is governed here on earth is truly the ideal. For any who think today’s super-conservatism or uber-Republicanism is built deep in the fabric of Mormon theology or thought is deeply mistaken--yet even as our history tells tales of great latitude, Mormonism really hasn’t yet articulated a clear sense of what it means to approach the political sphere as a Mormon, to live in community, to live in peace. It’s a much needed project! This two-part episode features three wonderful Mormon historians and social thinkers telling the kind of broad stories about Mormonism’s political past that are very needed if we are to ever find our way out of thinking primarily in partisan boxes. Ben Park, Matthew Bowman, and Patrick Mason join Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon on a tour through four major periods in LDS history--Joseph Smith’s political thinking as manifested during his life, the exodus and early Utah period with its continued experimentation with theo-democracy, the period of political assimilation leading up to Utah statehood and on through the middle of the twentieth century, the rise of and shift toward conservatism and on to the present day--noting major themes and shifts, as well as what from each period and ways of thinking about the political sphere still find voice in today’s Mormonism. When came the rise of Latter-day Saint views about the U.S. Constitution as an inspired document--and were early attitudes toward it the same as we find now? When did it shift primarily from political expediency to align with American forms of government and values to actual embrace of them? How does Mormonism’s past steeped in radical millennialism still influence it today? Does it? How have views of "Zion" shifted through the tradition's 180-plus years? How and why have Mormon views of what constitutes moral goods shifted to concentrate mostly on the individual and domestic sphere versus the wider social one? Are there any signs of possible shifts on the horizon?

Too often today’s political discourse reduces politics to partisanship, whether one affiliates with this or that political party. It’s a much broader topic, however, encompassing big notions about citizenship in a society, how we as a group of people make decisions, how we navigate our responsibilities to each other, to our government, and to our consciences and deepest religious convictions. When we weave in a particular group of people, such as Mormonism, it becomes even more clear that the political sphere is ever evolving--that even as certain themes maintain some influence in how each period of history unfolded, change concerning what Mormons wanted both for and from government was and is always the norm. Mormonism has a wonderful history of thinking fresh about government, about economic forms such as cooperative economies versus free-market capitalism, in wondering about how heaven is governed and if the way it is governed here on earth is truly the ideal. For any who think today’s super-conservatism or uber-Republicanism is built deep in the fabric of Mormon theology or thought is deeply mistaken--yet even as our history tells tales of great latitude, Mormonism really hasn’t yet articulated a clear sense of what it means to approach the political sphere as a Mormon, to live in community, to live in peace. It’s a much needed project! This two-part episode features three wonderful Mormon historians and social thinkers telling the kind of broad stories about Mormonism’s political past that are very needed if we are to ever find our way out of thinking primarily in partisan boxes. Ben Park, Matthew Bowman, and Patrick Mason join Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon on a tour through four major periods in LDS history--Joseph Smith’s political thinking as manifested during his life, the exodus and early Utah period with its continued experimentation with theo-democracy, the period of political assimilation leading up to Utah statehood and on through the middle of the twentieth century, the rise of and shift toward conservatism and on to the present day--noting major themes and shifts, as well as what from each period and ways of thinking about the political sphere still find voice in today’s Mormonism. When came the rise of Latter-day Saint views about the U.S. Constitution as an inspired document--and were early attitudes toward it the same as we find now? When did it shift primarily from political expediency to align with American forms of government and values to actual embrace of them? How does Mormonism’s past steeped in radical millennialism still influence it today? Does it? How have views of "Zion" shifted through the tradition's 180-plus years? How and why have Mormon views of what constitutes moral goods shifted to concentrate mostly on the individual and domestic sphere versus the wider social one? Are there any signs of possible shifts on the horizon?

In this second episode of the "Matters of Perspective" series, Charles Randall Paul reads his May 2009 Sunstone article, "The Sacred Secret Open to All: Ye Are Gods," a wonderful exploration about the concerns many people have with the secrecy related to Mormon temples and how Latter-day Saints might do a better job communicating about what goes on there. Drawing on historical sources, Paul demonstrates a reversal in public perspectives about secret/sacred rites that has taken place in the past two centuries--a shift from seeing those who participate in rites such as the Eleusinian mysteries or Freemasonry as highly trustworthy (until this shift one could hardly hold high political office were one not initiated into the rites) to highly suspect. Why has this taken place? And in the case of Mormon temple rituals, can this distrust be reversed with different messaging that better shares what goes on in the LDS temple, especially through contextualizing them as fitting the genre of "ascent literature," myths and rites that tell the secret sacred story of humankind? Are there ways to better communicate why Latter-day Saints consider temple work as wonderful and affirming for "all" people? Can Mormons re-structure aspects of its temples as sacred centers to make them more welcoming to everyone? Several aspects of this article were discussed in Mormon Matters episodes 75-76, "Communicating about the Temple." We encourage you to listen/re-listen to that exceptional episode.