In this episode, sociologist Jim Smithson talks of the LDS church and all of its programs and organizational systems as a vehicle for delivering the gospel message, and uses the metaphor of a minivan to describe the type of vehicle the church is. Minivans are great cars, but they fit best in middle-class and suburban areas where people can afford them and the fuel they consume, where there are mechanics and the infrastructure that helps keep them up, etc. But how efficient are minivans in locales where there are no paved roads, few trained drivers and technicians, in international or domestic areas where bicycles would be a better fit, where public transportation is the only realistic way for citizens to get around? How well does Mormonism "work" in non-suburban, non-middle class, less technologically sophisticated areas? Are the Church’s size and organizational structures obstacles for really delivering a saving gospel message of hope and transformation, and for creating communities where Zion might grow and flourish? This episode features Smithson, Sylvia Cabus, Ken Driggs, and Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon in a far-ranging discussion of how best to "do" church among those who do not fit the educational, income, or other profiles of the middle class. Cabus draws on her wide experience as an international aid worker and with the LDS Church abroad, as well as her own very urban and diverse ward in Washington, D.C., and Driggs from his fifteen years of experience in an inner city Atlanta, Georgia, ward to share experiences and reflect on Smithson’s theses about the current church and its challenges. How can the Church adapt more readily to serve those who are not in the demographic groups and areas where Mormonism currently works best? What are the biggest obstacles preventing these kinds of adaptations? What might be the best way ahead?

One of the most prominent and difficult issues in philosophy of religion addresses the dilemma that arises when one asserts the existence of an all-powerful God who is also perfectly loving, while also asserting the presence of genuine evil in the world. As David Hume puts the case: "Either God would remove evil out of this world, and cannot; or He can, and will not; or, He has not the power nor will; or, lastly He has both the power and will. If He has the will, and not the power, this shows weakness, which is contrary to the nature of God. If He has the power, and not the will it is malignity, and this is no less contrary to His nature. If He is neither able nor willing, He is both impotent and malignant, and consequently cannot be God. If he is both willing and able (which alone is consonant to the nature of God), whence comes evil, or why does he not prevent it?" There have been many attempts to address this dilemma, ranging from denial of the logical problem that seems apparent when trying to hold to all three assertions, to giving reasons for God allowing evil for some larger goods: because love requires free will, which opens the door to the possibility of us choosing evil, or because the presence of evil creates ideal conditions for "soul making," our proving ourselves through how we respond to it. Outside of classical theism and the three assertions, one finds other approaches to evil, including its denial--the claim that it only appears to be evil because we have a limited perspective (e.g., St. Augustine, Buddhism)--a denial of God’s goodness (e.g., protest theology, theistic dualism), or the denial of God’s omnipotence (e.g., process theology, LDS metaphysical positions suggested in some of Joseph Smith’s writings). Evil is far more than a philosophical problem, however. Most people care more about the suffering associated with evils, and their concern is to find meaning in what they or others are experiencing. A nice, clean "defense" (theodicy) of the God of classical theism is of little interest to them, as such answers are of no help to a torture victim or a teenager sold into sexual slavery. The matter then becomes finding the best response to evil and its attendant suffering. How do I best serve others who are in pain? How do I act powerfully in the face of my own afflictions? What role, if any, has God played in bringing this trial to me, or is God a fellow sufferer with me, ready to offer comfort and guide me to important lessons and eventual peace? And many more. In this three-part episode, Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Jennifer Finlayson-Fife, Jim McLachlan, and Loyd Ericson address these and many other issues related to the problem of evil and suffering. Part 1 focuses on the classical philosophical problem and defenses. Part 2 move more directly into LDS approaches to the subject, including a distinction between LDS "discourse" about evil (which follows closely what one finds in most other theistic traditions) and LDS "theology" about evil and suffering derived from Joseph Smith’s rejection of classical theism, as well as fascinating scriptural passages. Part 2 and Part 3 also directly address suffering, including powerful tire-meets-the-road stories of people in intense pain and which ideas and approaches to thinking about evil often exacerbate their suffering versus the ones that are more helpful.

One of the most prominent and difficult issues in philosophy of religion addresses the dilemma that arises when one asserts the existence of an all-powerful God who is also perfectly loving, while also asserting the presence of genuine evil in the world. As David Hume puts the case: "Either God would remove evil out of this world, and cannot; or He can, and will not; or, He has not the power nor will; or, lastly He has both the power and will. If He has the will, and not the power, this shows weakness, which is contrary to the nature of God. If He has the power, and not the will it is malignity, and this is no less contrary to His nature. If He is neither able nor willing, He is both impotent and malignant, and consequently cannot be God. If he is both willing and able (which alone is consonant to the nature of God), whence comes evil, or why does he not prevent it?" There have been many attempts to address this dilemma, ranging from denial of the logical problem that seems apparent when trying to hold to all three assertions, to giving reasons for God allowing evil for some larger goods: because love requires free will, which opens the door to the possibility of us choosing evil, or because the presence of evil creates ideal conditions for "soul making," our proving ourselves through how we respond to it. Outside of classical theism and the three assertions, one finds other approaches to evil, including its denial--the claim that it only appears to be evil because we have a limited perspective (e.g., St. Augustine, Buddhism)--a denial of God’s goodness (e.g., protest theology, theistic dualism), or the denial of God’s omnipotence (e.g., process theology, LDS metaphysical positions suggested in some of Joseph Smith’s writings). Evil is far more than a philosophical problem, however. Most people care more about the suffering associated with evils, and their concern is to find meaning in what they or others are experiencing. A nice, clean "defense" (theodicy) of the God of classical theism is of little interest to them, as such answers are of no help to a torture victim or a teenager sold into sexual slavery. The matter then becomes finding the best response to evil and its attendant suffering. How do I best serve others who are in pain? How do I act powerfully in the face of my own afflictions? What role, if any, has God played in bringing this trial to me, or is God a fellow sufferer with me, ready to offer comfort and guide me to important lessons and eventual peace? And many more. In this three-part episode, Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Jennifer Finlayson-Fife, Jim McLachlan, and Loyd Ericson address these and many other issues related to the problem of evil and suffering. Part 1 focuses on the classical philosophical problem and defenses. Part 2 move more directly into LDS approaches to the subject, including a distinction between LDS "discourse" about evil (which follows closely what one finds in most other theistic traditions) and LDS "theology" about evil and suffering derived from Joseph Smith’s rejection of classical theism, as well as fascinating scriptural passages. Part 2 and Part 3 also directly address suffering, including powerful tire-meets-the-road stories of people in intense pain and which ideas and approaches to thinking about evil often exacerbate their suffering versus the ones that are more helpful.

One of the most prominent and difficult issues in philosophy of religion addresses the dilemma that arises when one asserts the existence of an all-powerful God who is also perfectly loving, while also asserting the presence of genuine evil in the world. As David Hume puts the case: "Either God would remove evil out of this world, and cannot; or He can, and will not; or, He has not the power nor will; or, lastly He has both the power and will. If He has the will, and not the power, this shows weakness, which is contrary to the nature of God. If He has the power, and not the will it is malignity, and this is no less contrary to His nature. If He is neither able nor willing, He is both impotent and malignant, and consequently cannot be God. If he is both willing and able (which alone is consonant to the nature of God), whence comes evil, or why does he not prevent it?" There have been many attempts to address this dilemma, ranging from denial of the logical problem that seems apparent when trying to hold to all three assertions, to giving reasons for God allowing evil for some larger goods: because love requires free will, which opens the door to the possibility of us choosing evil, or because the presence of evil creates ideal conditions for "soul making," our proving ourselves through how we respond to it. Outside of classical theism and the three assertions, one finds other approaches to evil, including its denial--the claim that it only appears to be evil because we have a limited perspective (e.g., St. Augustine, Buddhism)--a denial of God’s goodness (e.g., protest theology, theistic dualism), or the denial of God’s omnipotence (e.g., process theology, LDS metaphysical positions suggested in some of Joseph Smith’s writings). Evil is far more than a philosophical problem, however. Most people care more about the suffering associated with evils, and their concern is to find meaning in what they or others are experiencing. A nice, clean "defense" (theodicy) of the God of classical theism is of little interest to them, as such answers are of no help to a torture victim or a teenager sold into sexual slavery. The matter then becomes finding the best response to evil and its attendant suffering. How do I best serve others who are in pain? How do I act powerfully in the face of my own afflictions? What role, if any, has God played in bringing this trial to me, or is God a fellow sufferer with me, ready to offer comfort and guide me to important lessons and eventual peace? And many more. In this three-part episode, Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Jennifer Finlayson-Fife, Jim McLachlan, and Loyd Ericson address these and many other issues related to the problem of evil and suffering. Part 1 focuses on the classical philosophical problem and defenses. Part 2 move more directly into LDS approaches to the subject, including a distinction between LDS "discourse" about evil (which follows closely what one finds in most other theistic traditions) and LDS "theology" about evil and suffering derived from Joseph Smith’s rejection of classical theism, as well as fascinating scriptural passages. Part 2 and Part 3 also directly address suffering, including powerful tire-meets-the-road stories of people in intense pain and which ideas and approaches to thinking about evil often exacerbate their suffering versus the ones that are more helpful.

What does it mean to still claim that scripture is "true" or "inspired" when we fully recognize that much of it is fictional (parable, allegory, poetic, mythic, or clearly "shaped" to achieve certain effects) or when some scriptural claims clash with other scriptural claims or with historical and scientific facts? Once revelation or scripture has begun to shed for us some of their "authoritative" status and become more obviously a product of human hearts and minds or a divine/human admixture, why does or should it remain compelling? What are other ways to read and gain from prophetic utterance or scripture that don’t view them as the exact words of God? In this episode, Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Charles Harrell, Wade Greenwood, and Eric Samuelsen explore various kinds of "truth" and the different rules that govern them. They begin with recently raised issues raised about the standards of truth required by journalism versus more artistic endeavors such as storytelling, drama, and other art forms before turning to the connections the insights gained from these areas have with scripture and prophetic inspiration. They explore insights from theologians from other traditions who have wrestled with similar questions, including various types of inspiration--verbal, conceptual, and motivational--and pre-critical, critical, and post-critical lenses through which one might assess its importance and power. Other questions: Should scripture and the type of inspiration claimed by prophets be seen as wholly "other" from the kind of inspiration we feel from time to time in our own lives? What are the drawbacks and gains from viewing it as radically different or quite similar? Given each of their own study and reflection on scripture that highlights the human fingerprints that permeate it, why do the participants still love and claim to gain much from their continued encounters with it?

What does it mean to still claim that scripture is "true" or "inspired" when we fully recognize that much of it is fictional (parable, allegory, poetic, mythic, or clearly "shaped" to achieve certain effects) or when some scriptural claims clash with other scriptural claims or with historical and scientific facts? Once revelation or scripture has begun to shed for us some of their "authoritative" status and become more obviously a product of human hearts and minds or a divine/human admixture, why does or should it remain compelling? What are other ways to read and gain from prophetic utterance or scripture that don’t view them as the exact words of God? In this episode, Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Charles Harrell, Wade Greenwood, and Eric Samuelsen explore various kinds of "truth" and the different rules that govern them. They begin with recently raised issues raised about the standards of truth required by journalism versus more artistic endeavors such as storytelling, drama, and other art forms before turning to the connections the insights gained from these areas have with scripture and prophetic inspiration. They explore insights from theologians from other traditions who have wrestled with similar questions, including various types of inspiration--verbal, conceptual, and motivational--and pre-critical, critical, and post-critical lenses through which one might assess its importance and power. Other questions: Should scripture and the type of inspiration claimed by prophets be seen as wholly "other" from the kind of inspiration we feel from time to time in our own lives? What are the drawbacks and gains from viewing it as radically different or quite similar? Given each of their own study and reflection on scripture that highlights the human fingerprints that permeate it, why do the participants still love and claim to gain much from their continued encounters with it?

This three-part episode features a wonderful discussion about some of the peculiarities about the LDS Mormon experience in Brazil, as well as the many ways that LDS experience seems universal. In doing so, it introduces Antonio Trevisan and Marcello Jun de Oliveira, two Brazilians who are leading the ABEM--Associação Brasileira de Estudos Mórmons (Brazilian Mormon Studies Association)--a fledgling group modeled somewhat after Sunstone as a similar effort to explore Brazilian Mormonism through historical inquiry, scholarship, and other mediums, including an annual conference. It also features a terrific young scholar moderator, Rolf Straubhaar, who served his mission to Brazil and has returned several times as a graduate student doing ethnographic work in comparative education. In many ways, the first two parts of this episode will feel much like Mormon Stories episodes as we explore the lives and faith journeys of our two panelists. The final part features an exploration of the Brazilian Mormon experience, paying close attention to those intersections between the wider, largely North American, church and the particularities of Brazilian culture. It touches on everything from congregational dynamics to doctrinal issues, and attitudes about sex and bodies to certain aspects of the Word of Wisdom. One other major focus is the reasons Brazilian Mormons drop out of the church, in which one factor is the lack of resources for these saints to discuss the issues that trouble them. For that reason, it’s with great admiration that we celebrate and advertise the ABEM and its blog, VozesMormons.

This three-part episode features a wonderful discussion about some of the peculiarities about the LDS Mormon experience in Brazil, as well as the many ways that LDS experience seems universal. In doing so, it introduces Antonio Trevisan and Marcello Jun de Oliveira, two Brazilians who are leading the ABEM--Associação Brasileira de Estudos Mórmons (Brazilian Mormon Studies Association)--a fledgling group modeled somewhat after Sunstone as a similar effort to explore Brazilian Mormonism through historical inquiry, scholarship, and other mediums, including an annual conference. It also features a terrific young scholar moderator, Rolf Straubhaar, who served his mission to Brazil and has returned several times as a graduate student doing ethnographic work in comparative education. In many ways, the first two parts of this episode will feel much like Mormon Stories episodes as we explore the lives and faith journeys of our two panelists. The final part features an exploration of the Brazilian Mormon experience, paying close attention to those intersections between the wider, largely North American, church and the particularities of Brazilian culture. It touches on everything from congregational dynamics to doctrinal issues, and attitudes about sex and bodies to certain aspects of the Word of Wisdom. One other major focus is the reasons Brazilian Mormons drop out of the church, in which one factor is the lack of resources for these saints to discuss the issues that trouble them. For that reason, it’s with great admiration that we celebrate and advertise the ABEM and its blog, VozesMormons.

This three-part episode features a wonderful discussion about some of the peculiarities about the LDS Mormon experience in Brazil, as well as the many ways that LDS experience seems universal. In doing so, it introduces Antonio Trevisan and Marcello Jun de Oliveira, two Brazilians who are leading the ABEM--Associação Brasileira de Estudos Mórmons (Brazilian Mormon Studies Association)--a fledgling group modeled somewhat after Sunstone as a similar effort to explore Brazilian Mormonism through historical inquiry, scholarship, and other mediums, including an annual conference. It also features a terrific young scholar moderator, Rolf Straubhaar, who served his mission to Brazil and has returned several times as a graduate student doing ethnographic work in comparative education. In many ways, the first two parts of this episode will feel much like Mormon Stories episodes as we explore the lives and faith journeys of our two panelists. The final part features an exploration of the Brazilian Mormon experience, paying close attention to those intersections between the wider, largely North American, church and the particularities of Brazilian culture. It touches on everything from congregational dynamics to doctrinal issues, and attitudes about sex and bodies to certain aspects of the Word of Wisdom. One other major focus is the reasons Brazilian Mormons drop out of the church, in which one factor is the lack of resources for these saints to discuss the issues that trouble them. For that reason, it’s with great admiration that we celebrate and advertise the ABEM and its blog, VozesMormons.

How "green" is Mormonism? What is holding the tradition and culture back from becoming more environmentally sensitive--or even overtly activist? What theological and practical resources are there in Mormon thought and practice for fostering an ethic of greater care for the earth and its systems, including all the other forms of life with which we share the planet? How can Latter-day Saints who are environmentally active be effective in moving Mormon culture toward greener awareness and action? Prompted by the release of a brand new Sunstone magazine with a terrific collection of articles and essays under the heading of "Earth Stewardship," this episode features Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists George Handley, Rachel Whipple, and Craig Galli in a far-ranging conversation about their shared sense of Mormonism as a religion rich with scriptural and prophetic support, theological sensibilities, and practical wisdom and vehicles for teaching and acting with greater sensitivity toward the environment--and, in so doing, finding our way to a much more connected and fulfilling life. Topics range from sensibilities about Mormonism’s teachings about the intimate connection between spirit and matter, to resources for taking seriously the "intrinsic value" of all forms of life and the systems that sustain them, to the call to be "stewards" of the earth, to consumer/disposable culture, to fighting the sense of hopelessness (often leading in many to apathy) in the face of the difficulty of these issues, to more consciously choosing where to live and various sustainable practices we might adopt in an effort to align our lifestyles more closely with our spiritual values. It also features some great ideas for Primary and other ward leaders about how to more deeply unite their communities in life-enriching ways.

On the verge of another Pioneer Day (July 24th and the 165th anniversary of the first Mormon pioneer wagon train reaching the Salt Lake Valley), Mormon Matters takes this opportunity to the current state of discourse and cultural practices (in the U.S. and abroad) surrounding those who sacrificed so much to cross plains, mountains, and seas in the quest to find a place where they could establish Zion. In this episode, panelists Joanna Brooks, Gina Colvin, and Joseph and Shalisse Johnstun join Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon in discussing the ways they draw strength and part of their identity from U.S. pioneer or other ancestors, examine the mixed blessing contained in the mythologizing of the pioneers--faithful, never wavering, can do it all, bear all burdens with gladness--that so often dominates discourse about them, riff a bit on the practice in many stakes of every few years organizing handcart "trek" experiences for their youth, and discuss other possible (or better!) ways Latter-day Saints might still teach coming generations to value and honor the pioneers and their many gifts still alive in the church today without relying so heavily on idealized portrayals or forced, extreme measures.

This podcast episode is timed to coincide with recent activism among many faithful straight, gay, and allied Latter-day Saints who marched and will march in recent and upcoming PRIDE parades and who are becoming increasingly visible in raising awareness of the hurts and suffering among the GLBT population and the importance for Mormons--leaders as well as all of us in our own wards and stakes--to engage in even more earnest efforts to educate about GLBT issues and to support families and communities in ways that will allow every person to know of God’s (and our) love for them and to feel supported in coming closer to Christ. It is also timed just a few weeks after the release of an important new resource for LDS families with GLBT children, a booklet titled Supportive Families, Healthy Children by Drs. Caitlyn Ryan and Robert A. Rees. In this episode, Mitch Mayne, an openly gay Latter-day Saint man who is serving as executive secretary in his San Francisco area ward, and Dr. Caitlyn Ryan, co-director of the Family Acceptance Project (affiliated with San Francisco State University) and co-author of the above-mentioned booklet, share key insights from their work with the Latter-day Saint community and the Family Acceptance Project's research into the ways that family support or rejection affects the health and flourishing of GLBT persons. They discuss Mormonism's good foundations for family support and talk about ways LDS families can always show their love for their GLBT family members even as they may still be hesitant to embrace the idea that homosexuality is part of that person’s true identity. As Dr. Ryan discusses several times in the podcast, even just eliminating "rejecting" behaviors (as opposed to also exhibiting "accepting" ones) can go a long way toward helping avoid the devastating consequences that befall so many homosexual persons (suicide and suicide attempts, homelessness, drug and alcohol abuse, increased risk of HIV infection, etc.). This is an important discussion that not only educates (there is SO much more to sexual orientation than who it is you are attracted to) but also inspires. It is deliberately designed to be a resource to be shared with others as even an early introduction to these issues as they play out in LDS contexts, as well as to direct people to good resources for Mormon families and friends and allies of GLBT persons, as well as alerting all to the broad work and stunning findings made available through the Family Acceptance Project.

The April 2012 General Conference featured a terrific talk by President Uchtdorf that reinforces the importance of being forgiving and non-judgmental. He "bottom lines" his message with the following statement: "This topic of judging others could actually be taught in a two-word sermon. When it comes to hating, gossiping, ignoring, ridiculing, holding grudges, or wanting to cause harm, please apply the following: Stop it!" Earlier in the talk, he cited D&C 64:9, "Forgive one another; for he that forgiveth not . . . [stands] condemned before the Lord; for there remaineth in him the greater sin." For the vast majority of Latter-day Saints, such messages are wonderfully received. When it comes to judging and hating and resenting and holding grudges, yes, we should "stop it." Most listeners would also hear in an earnest spirit of striving to do better the scriptural statement that those who fail to forgive others are sinful--perhaps condemned even more than the one who did the offending. But what about abuse victims? What about those who have been physically, sexually, emotionally abused--sometimes relentlessly and violently? How would they hear such messages? Is a warning that they must forgive their abusers, rapists, torturers or else they are even worse sinners than them a good one to hear? Can certain messages that are wonderful in most cases (and no one is imagining that abuse victims were on President Uchtdorf’s mind when he gave his remarks) be heard in spiritually and emotionally damaging ways by those whose self image distorted by internalized shame over the abuse they received as a child or whose lives are in danger or souls are being warped by abuse even in the present? Are there circumstances in which even the beautiful message of "Families Are Forever" be heard as a threat--heard in such a way that a person might express a deliberate choice to live in hell rather than be forced to associate with their abuser(s) in heaven? The answer is yes. In this episode, LDS therapist Natasha Helfer Parker and blogger and abuse survivor Tresa Brown Edmunds share deep insights about how important it is for all of us, whether it is through official church capacities or friendships or other relationships, to understand and keep in mind the realities of abuse and all the ways it can affect its victims. They discuss the mindset of victims that often includes deeply internalized shame and warped thinking about their own role in the abuse, the effects of trauma and helplessness on physiology and normal bodily responses that manifest in many and varied ways beyond the victim’s control yet somehow still get carelessly talked about (often in wrong-minded gospel frameworks) as if these "problems" are actually the victim’s fault, that if they were only stronger or a better person they would just suck it up and move on. This discussion is a difficult one but powerful and very important. We encourage you to share it widely.

"Am I saved?" "Is this idea or that practice ‘pertinent to my salvation’?" Many Mormons and other Christians focus quite a lot of energy on concerns about possible rewards or punishments in the afterlife. And many, as seems natural for humans living in an unpredictable and confusing world, long for and (even very consciously) seek assurances here and now that their life is acceptable to God, their "salvation" is secure. Concepts such as having one’s "calling and election (a New Testament phrase and idea) made sure" reveal this longing and concern. Christians seek to know they are "saved" in many different ways, as do Latter-day Saints, but Mormonism also has a formalized ritual in which these concerns are directly addressed and assurances that one’s life is fully accepted by God are given. "Salvation"--it’s a huge idea. But it often comes as a bit of an eye-opener to those who are raised fully within some form of the Christian story to learn that the idea of "sin" as the major problem we need to overcome in this world and that we as humans would need a "savior" (especially a god of some form to intervene on our behalf) to overcome it are not simply the obvious primary problem to those in other traditions. In fact, many religions do not focus much at all on "salvation" in terms of eternal rewards or punishments, instead viewing religion much more practically, such as helping one seek meaning or mediate social conflicts that affect us in "this" world. In this three-part episode of the Mormon Matters podcast (our biggest one to date), host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Jared Anderson, Chelsea Shields Strayer, and Danielle Mooney dive deep into "salvation." What are the various ways other world traditions view the human predicament and how to overcome it? How does Christianity differ from these, and then Mormon views from those of other Christians? What, exactly, is Mormon salvation theology? How is the LDS "plan of salvation" typically presented, and what are some ways of looking at it that might lead to more profound insights and understandings? Finally, how does the idea of "calling and election" fit into this story? Is it still part of Mormon thought or focus today? What about the ritual of the "second anointing" that was practiced intensely at times in LDS history but has had declines and resurgences since early in the twentieth century? What are its major features? How does it make sense within the overall salvation narrative? What clues does it offer about deeper views about women and priesthood than one typically sees explored in LDS discourse? What information is available about this ritual being practiced today? Finally, what is the currency in today’s Mormonism about other seemingly exotic teachings related to a soul’s journey toward salvation and exaltation? In all of the above discussions, the panel tries to pay close attention to insights from myth and ritual studies, scripture, and concepts about blessings and acts serving as tokens of promises to come rather than automatic sealings of those promises. Within such contexts, are LDS notions and practices really all that "weird"?

"Am I saved?" "Is this idea or that practice ‘pertinent to my salvation’?" Many Mormons and other Christians focus quite a lot of energy on concerns about possible rewards or punishments in the afterlife. And many, as seems natural for humans living in an unpredictable and confusing world, long for and (even very consciously) seek assurances here and now that their life is acceptable to God, their "salvation" is secure. Concepts such as having one’s "calling and election (a New Testament phrase and idea) made sure" reveal this longing and concern. Christians seek to know they are "saved" in many different ways, as do Latter-day Saints, but Mormonism also has a formalized ritual in which these concerns are directly addressed and assurances that one’s life is fully accepted by God are given. "Salvation"--it’s a huge idea. But it often comes as a bit of an eye-opener to those who are raised fully within some form of the Christian story to learn that the idea of "sin" as the major problem we need to overcome in this world and that we as humans would need a "savior" (especially a god of some form to intervene on our behalf) to overcome it are not simply the obvious primary problem to those in other traditions. In fact, many religions do not focus much at all on "salvation" in terms of eternal rewards or punishments, instead viewing religion much more practically, such as helping one seek meaning or mediate social conflicts that affect us in "this" world. In this three-part episode of the Mormon Matters podcast (our biggest one to date), host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Jared Anderson, Chelsea Shields Strayer, and Danielle Mooney dive deep into "salvation." What are the various ways other world traditions view the human predicament and how to overcome it? How does Christianity differ from these, and then Mormon views from those of other Christians? What, exactly, is Mormon salvation theology? How is the LDS "plan of salvation" typically presented, and what are some ways of looking at it that might lead to more profound insights and understandings? Finally, how does the idea of "calling and election" fit into this story? Is it still part of Mormon thought or focus today? What about the ritual of the "second anointing" that was practiced intensely at times in LDS history but has had declines and resurgences since early in the twentieth century? What are its major features? How does it make sense within the overall salvation narrative? What clues does it offer about deeper views about women and priesthood than one typically sees explored in LDS discourse? What information is available about this ritual being practiced today? Finally, what is the currency in today’s Mormonism about other seemingly exotic teachings related to a soul’s journey toward salvation and exaltation? In all of the above discussions, the panel tries to pay close attention to insights from myth and ritual studies, scripture, and concepts about blessings and acts serving as tokens of promises to come rather than automatic sealings of those promises. Within such contexts, are LDS notions and practices really all that "weird"?

"Am I saved?" "Is this idea or that practice ‘pertinent to my salvation’?" Many Mormons and other Christians focus quite a lot of energy on concerns about possible rewards or punishments in the afterlife. And many, as seems natural for humans living in an unpredictable and confusing world, long for and (even very consciously) seek assurances here and now that their life is acceptable to God, their "salvation" is secure. Concepts such as having one’s "calling and election (a New Testament phrase and idea) made sure" reveal this longing and concern. Christians seek to know they are "saved" in many different ways, as do Latter-day Saints, but Mormonism also has a formalized ritual in which these concerns are directly addressed and assurances that one’s life is fully accepted by God are given. "Salvation"--it’s a huge idea. But it often comes as a bit of an eye-opener to those who are raised fully within some form of the Christian story to learn that the idea of "sin" as the major problem we need to overcome in this world and that we as humans would need a "savior" (especially a god of some form to intervene on our behalf) to overcome it are not simply the obvious primary problem to those in other traditions. In fact, many religions do not focus much at all on "salvation" in terms of eternal rewards or punishments, instead viewing religion much more practically, such as helping one seek meaning or mediate social conflicts that affect us in "this" world. In this three-part episode of the Mormon Matters podcast (our biggest one to date), host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Jared Anderson, Chelsea Shields Strayer, and Danielle Mooney dive deep into "salvation." What are the various ways other world traditions view the human predicament and how to overcome it? How does Christianity differ from these, and then Mormon views from those of other Christians? What, exactly, is Mormon salvation theology? How is the LDS "plan of salvation" typically presented, and what are some ways of looking at it that might lead to more profound insights and understandings? Finally, how does the idea of "calling and election" fit into this story? Is it still part of Mormon thought or focus today? What about the ritual of the "second anointing" that was practiced intensely at times in LDS history but has had declines and resurgences since early in the twentieth century? What are its major features? How does it make sense within the overall salvation narrative? What clues does it offer about deeper views about women and priesthood than one typically sees explored in LDS discourse? What information is available about this ritual being practiced today? Finally, what is the currency in today’s Mormonism about other seemingly exotic teachings related to a soul’s journey toward salvation and exaltation? In all of the above discussions, the panel tries to pay close attention to insights from myth and ritual studies, scripture, and concepts about blessings and acts serving as tokens of promises to come rather than automatic sealings of those promises. Within such contexts, are LDS notions and practices really all that "weird"?

Are there statements about God, humans, the universe, and any other thing that a Latter-day Saint "must" believe to be considered a "Mormon"? And, if so, how literally does one have to take these so-called "doctrines"? Are they close-to-perfect encapsulations of eternal truths that are consistently taught in scripture and that have hardly changed or evolved throughout time, with modern LDS pronouncements simply further clarifications? Or are doctrines far "fuzzier," more fluid statements suggesting where Mormons are encouraged to focus now but always with the anticipation that, as the Ninth Article of Faith states, there are "many great and important things" still to be revealed? Furthermore, are "ideas" or "truths we can state" really what we should focus on? Does "knowing" some truth actually translate directly to becoming more godlike in nature? Would God really prefer that someone is able to list beliefs or name attributes of godliness over someone who has come to embody compassion and other spiritual qualities? Are we giving "doctrine" too much power? Are we letting "statements that we are supposed to believe" distract us from what’s vital? Are we allowing the discomfort of conspicuousness when we imagine that we are being pressured to say we assent to various teachings (that fall apart, horribly, when held up to scientific or intellectual scrutiny) drive us from fellowship with other Latter-day Saints? In this two-part podcast, Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Gina Colvin, Charles Harrell, and Chris Cobb take on all of these issues, and much more. Are there different, healthier ways to view the question of Mormon teachings and doctrinal discourse? Is doctrinal presentation, especially in Church curriculum, a straightforward process of teaching truth, or is there much more at play--assumptions (cultural, Western, cognitive, gendered, etc.) motivating what is selected as more or less important? The panel explore what it means when leaders might say that this or that doctrine is "binding" upon members and whether or not it is actual "doctrines" that are canonized or simply sources (scripture) that are granted authoritative power--and, as is evident about any scripture, whatever doctrines might be offered therein call always to a wonderfully wide spectrum of interpretation? The panel also explores whether we might be in a moment within Mormon development when doctrines are being scaled back, when less emphasis is being placed upon teachings and more on community, doing good in the world, "becoming" better Christians/human beings.

Are there statements about God, humans, the universe, and any other thing that a Latter-day Saint "must" believe to be considered a "Mormon"? And, if so, how literally does one have to take these so-called "doctrines"? Are they close-to-perfect encapsulations of eternal truths that are consistently taught in scripture and that have hardly changed or evolved throughout time, with modern LDS pronouncements simply further clarifications? Or are doctrines far "fuzzier," more fluid statements suggesting where Mormons are encouraged to focus now but always with the anticipation that, as the Ninth Article of Faith states, there are "many great and important things" still to be revealed? Furthermore, are "ideas" or "truths we can state" really what we should focus on? Does "knowing" some truth actually translate directly to becoming more godlike in nature? Would God really prefer that someone is able to list beliefs or name attributes of godliness over someone who has come to embody compassion and other spiritual qualities? Are we giving "doctrine" too much power? Are we letting "statements that we are supposed to believe" distract us from what’s vital? Are we allowing the discomfort of conspicuousness when we imagine that we are being pressured to say we assent to various teachings (that fall apart, horribly, when held up to scientific or intellectual scrutiny) drive us from fellowship with other Latter-day Saints? In this two-part podcast, Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Gina Colvin, Charles Harrell, and Chris Cobb take on all of these issues, and much more. Are there different, healthier ways to view the question of Mormon teachings and doctrinal discourse? Is doctrinal presentation, especially in Church curriculum, a straightforward process of teaching truth, or is there much more at play--assumptions (cultural, Western, cognitive, gendered, etc.) motivating what is selected as more or less important? The panel explore what it means when leaders might say that this or that doctrine is "binding" upon members and whether or not it is actual "doctrines" that are canonized or simply sources (scripture) that are granted authoritative power--and, as is evident about any scripture, whatever doctrines might be offered therein call always to a wonderfully wide spectrum of interpretation? The panel also explores whether we might be in a moment within Mormon development when doctrines are being scaled back, when less emphasis is being placed upon teachings and more on community, doing good in the world, "becoming" better Christians/human beings.

The three guests in this Mormon Matters episode grew up in faithful, committed Mormon homes. In important ways, however, these panelists’ homes were different than what many listeners of the Open Stories family of podcasts experienced growing up in the way that these homes welcomed any and all questions about the faith and encouraged reading and exploration and working through difficult issues. Each home was highly orthoprax--there was no question of commitment to LDS standards, attending church, accepting and serving faithfully in callings--but what a family member had to believe was wide open. For them, Mormonism featured a wide array of ways to orient to the tradition and/or to God, and the set of claims one had to accept to truly be a Mormon was small. What was it like to grow up in these homes? What messages about gospel "roominess" or what it means to be "Mormon" did these panelists absorb? How much of the way the parents in these homes taught and lived the gospel have found their way into these panelists’ lives as they raise their own families now or think ahead to when they will have children? I am extremely grateful for the generosity of heart and spirit of panelists Kristine Haglund, Jordan Kimball, and Katie Davis Henderson in sharing so much of their lives in this episode, and I am thrilled to present our conversation to listeners. These are issues that truly hit home for so many of us who are raising children while we are, at the same time, wrestling with our own faith and relationship with God and life’s biggest questions. We hope to teach them "fearlessness" in their spiritual lives but wonder exactly how open we should be with our children about our own struggle toward this type of faith. We want our children to have their own faith journeys, but at the same time we are not sure we want them to experience the sort of "crisis" that accompanied what many of us have or are going through. These are "tire meets the road" issues, indeed. May this episode be a great conversation starter!

Pragmatism is the name of a philosophical approach for judging between truth claims. It essentially says that if you are presented with two competing ideas and there is no overwhelming way to determine through empirical methods which is superior to the other, you should consider the difference it would make to you if you decided to accept one or the other as the true one. For instance, one of philosophy’s long-standing discussions is about whether or not human beings have free will or if they are fully determined. Since there are good arguments and evidences on both sides, the pragmatic method suggests we should turn to the practical effects it would have in our lives if we were to live as if one position or the other were true. William James, one of pragmatism’s key champions, broadens this "difference" to include which idea would "work" better in moving us to positive action, increased zest--what he calls living the "strenuous mood." Ideas have a "cash value" of sorts, with the value being how much they contribute to greater vitality and richer experience. If an idea "works" in this way, it can be considered "true"--but then pragmatism says that truth still needs to continue to prove itself in struggle with other ideas; these things we hold as "true" should always remain open to further refinement as they interact with other truths. It’s a philosophical method of experimentation and engaged action in the face of possible paralysis and stagnated action caused by the fear of perhaps being wrong. The pragmatic processes of continued engagement will help sort out the truth of any claim or system of thought. In this episode, Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Jared Anderson, Charles Randall Paul, and Chris Naegle introduce key aspects of pragmatism, especially focusing on the flavors given to it by William James. They then engage several of its shared sensibilities with Mormon theology and its optimistic temperament, as well as directions it points regarding why religion is such a powerful force--for good or ill--and reasons for not closing ourselves off to the areas of inquiry and subconscious realms religion focuses on. The discussion also includes a look at a fun section in William James’s book, Pragmatism, that proposes a thought experiment that matches in striking ways the LDS notion of a "council in heaven" and competing choices about whether to take part in earth life. Finally, the panelists tackle how pragmatism intersects with ethical decision making and the best ways to influence others who are engaging in what you consider to be harmful practices, and they also discuss some of the motivations and forces at play in the 9/11 tragedy and in the practice of circumcision--both male and female.

Pragmatism is the name of a philosophical approach for judging between truth claims. It essentially says that if you are presented with two competing ideas and there is no overwhelming way to determine through empirical methods which is superior to the other, you should consider the difference it would make to you if you decided to accept one or the other as the true one. For instance, one of philosophy’s long-standing discussions is about whether or not human beings have free will or if they are fully determined. Since there are good arguments and evidences on both sides, the pragmatic method suggests we should turn to the practical effects it would have in our lives if we were to live as if one position or the other were true. William James, one of pragmatism’s key champions, broadens this "difference" to include which idea would "work" better in moving us to positive action, increased zest--what he calls living the "strenuous mood." Ideas have a "cash value" of sorts, with the value being how much they contribute to greater vitality and richer experience. If an idea "works" in this way, it can be considered "true"--but then pragmatism says that truth still needs to continue to prove itself in struggle with other ideas; these things we hold as "true" should always remain open to further refinement as they interact with other truths. It’s a philosophical method of experimentation and engaged action in the face of possible paralysis and stagnated action caused by the fear of perhaps being wrong. The pragmatic processes of continued engagement will help sort out the truth of any claim or system of thought. In this episode, Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon and panelists Jared Anderson, Charles Randall Paul, and Chris Naegle introduce key aspects of pragmatism, especially focusing on the flavors given to it by William James. They then engage several of its shared sensibilities with Mormon theology and its optimistic temperament, as well as directions it points regarding why religion is such a powerful force--for good or ill--and reasons for not closing ourselves off to the areas of inquiry and subconscious realms religion focuses on. The discussion also includes a look at a fun section in William James’s book, Pragmatism, that proposes a thought experiment that matches in striking ways the LDS notion of a "council in heaven" and competing choices about whether to take part in earth life. Finally, the panelists tackle how pragmatism intersects with ethical decision making and the best ways to influence others who are engaging in what you consider to be harmful practices, and they also discuss some of the motivations and forces at play in the 9/11 tragedy and in the practice of circumcision--both male and female.

This two-part episode focuses on the unique experience of Mormon missions--their wonderful, powerful, light aspects, as well as those element where things can go wrong and be potentially unhealthy. Panelists Derrick Clements, T.K., and Rory Swensen join Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon in sharing about their mission experiences (two of them quite recent, the other two more than twenty years ago), how they interpreted what they were going through then versus now with post-mission lenses that are influenced to some degree by their faith journeys since the time of their service. Knowing what they know now, or viewing the LDS Church and gospel as they currently do, how would they serve differently? Would they still choose to go? Should their children want to serve, would they support that decision? And, if so, how would they frame for their child some of the potential negative aspects of mission life--the pressures to reach goals, to teach things in a certain way, to testify to things they may not fully be converted to themselves, to live rules to the letter (sometimes pushing themselves in ways that are detrimental to physical and spiritual health), etc.--in ways that might mitigate potential damage? What would they encourage their children to focus on instead?

This two-part episode focuses on the unique experience of Mormon missions--their wonderful, powerful, light aspects, as well as those element where things can go wrong and be potentially unhealthy. Panelists Derrick Clements, T.K., and Rory Swensen join Mormon Matters host Dan Wotherspoon in sharing about their mission experiences (two of them quite recent, the other two more than twenty years ago), how they interpreted what they were going through then versus now with post-mission lenses that are influenced to some degree by their faith journeys since the time of their service. Knowing what they know now, or viewing the LDS Church and gospel as they currently do, how would they serve differently? Would they still choose to go? Should their children want to serve, would they support that decision? And, if so, how would they frame for their child some of the potential negative aspects of mission life--the pressures to reach goals, to teach things in a certain way, to testify to things they may not fully be converted to themselves, to live rules to the letter (sometimes pushing themselves in ways that are detrimental to physical and spiritual health), etc.--in ways that might mitigate potential damage? What would they encourage their children to focus on instead?

Mormon Matters episodes 85 and 86 featured a panel consisting of four men discussed "Middle Way Mormonism," a term that has been gaining traction as a way to describe a path that some Latter-day Saints are taking in which they attempt to negotiate the tensions that arise when they find themselves believing ideas or valuing certain things differently than what they perceive is a typical LDS position yet still working to remain within and fully engaged with Mormon community life. We now turn to a similar discussion of the "Middle Way" journey, but with women’s voices. What are the common experiences women and men share in a Middle Way journey? What are some of the differences? How can women find their authentic voice and have it be effectively heard in the church’s patriarchal culture? Is their approach to raising children in the LDS community different for their daughters than their sons?
In this two-part episode, Mormon Matters favorite Chelsea Robarge Fife moderates a wonderful, practical, and insightful panel discussion featuring Claudia Bushman, Jana Riess, and Jennifer Finlayson-Fife. How do they negotiate the tensions that come when one is walking a path somewhat out of the norm? Why do they do it? What is it about Mormonism that they see or focus on that compels them to stay fully involved with Mormon issues and ward life when so many other women and men choose to disengage? This discussion is full of stories, laughs, sighs--and deep wisdom. This is an episode both women and men will enjoy and gain much from!

Mormon Matters episodes 85 and 86 featured a panel consisting of four men discussed "Middle Way Mormonism," a term that has been gaining traction as a way to describe a path that some Latter-day Saints are taking in which they attempt to negotiate the tensions that arise when they find themselves believing ideas or valuing certain things differently than what they perceive is a typical LDS position yet still working to remain within and fully engaged with Mormon community life. We now turn to a similar discussion of the "Middle Way" journey, but with women’s voices. What are the common experiences women and men share in a Middle Way journey? What are some of the differences? How can women find their authentic voice and have it be effectively heard in the church’s patriarchal culture? Is their approach to raising children in the LDS community different for their daughters than their sons?
In this two-part episode, Mormon Matters favorite Chelsea Robarge Fife moderates a wonderful, practical, and insightful panel discussion featuring Claudia Bushman, Jana Riess, and Jennifer Finlayson-Fife. How do they negotiate the tensions that come when one is walking a path somewhat out of the norm? Why do they do it? What is it about Mormonism that they see or focus on that compels them to stay fully involved with Mormon issues and ward life when so many other women and men choose to disengage? This discussion is full of stories, laughs, sighs--and deep wisdom. This is an episode both women and men will enjoy and gain much from!