• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

FairMormon

Save the date! 2019 FairMormon Conference August 7-9
(You can still read 2018 talks or watch streaming.)

  • Find Answers
  • Blog
  • Media & Apps
  • Conference
  • Bookstore
  • Archive
  • About
  • Get Involved
  • Search

Cassandra Hedelius

The Brethren are not Bigots

November 9, 2015 by Cassandra Hedelius

quentin-l-cook-largeSeveral weeks ago, I was excited to learn Elder Quentin L. Cook would be visiting our Annapolis, Maryland Stake Conference. (When I learned he had brought his wife, Mary, I was even more thrilled.) My husband’s calling required him to attend the Saturday afternoon priesthood leadership meeting, and I rode down with him to avoid having to drive down by myself for the Saturday evening adult session. I settled in on the couch in the foyer to listen to the priesthood meeting, and will always be grateful to have heard what I heard.

Elder Cook shared some prepared thoughts, and then opened the meeting for questions. My husband was called on, and asked about a matter concerning the Church’s teachings about families and LGBT individuals. Elder Cook first answered the particular detail my husband sought, but then continued in a much more personal vein.

He reminisced about presiding over a San Francisco stake in the early 1980s, when the city was an early gathering place for many LGBT individuals and social tensions were high, in part due to the AIDS scare. Elder Cook found himself responsible for many heartbroken individuals in extraordinarily difficult circumstances–––diagnosed with a terrifying disease, estranged from their families and the Church, sometimes disowned by their families and shunned by members of the Church, alone and unmoored as death approached.

Elder Cook’s recounting of this situation was no humdrum recital–––his voice shook with plain emotion. His descriptions of the men he tried to help were incredibly tender. It was obvious that even all these decades later, the love he felt for those men, and his sympathy for their pain, had stricken him to the core.

Elder Cook ended his answer with a forceful command to love everyone, and especially LGBT members. To try harder to reach out with compassion and understanding.

When new Church policies cause controversy, it’s tempting to suppose our experience, joined with the experience of the multitude of voices weighing in on social media, gives us sufficient wisdom to judge. It’s good to learn from others, and to have the easy opportunity to learn from so many others via the internet. But those voices can give us no insight into the motives and hearts of the leaders responsible for the policy–––only assumptions that often reveal more about the assumer than about Church leaders.

I share my experience listening to Elder Cook not because it will resolve the debate about the new Church Handbook policy on baptisms and parents in same-sex relationships, but because part of that debate is perpetuating a troubling falsehood. The accusations that the Brethren are bigots and clueless about people out in the real world are false. The accusations that the Brethren are acting out of hatred or ignorance are false.

Sustaining our leaders means, at the very least, extending to them sufficient benefit of the doubt to reject such accusations. Fully reject accusations against Church leaders; don’t let conventional wisdom and assumptions constantly repeated by others start to cloud your judgment. I fear that even when we don’t agree “the Brethren are bigots,” we almost subconsciously incorporate some cynicism into our opinions of them just because we see the accusations repeated so often. We conclude so much smoke proves at least a tiny fire. We have to consciously reject that false conclusion.

Church leaders are not automatons at a podium. They’ve led full lives and had broad experience. There’s no Utah bubble to hide in for Church leaders, because to be a high-level Church leader, even in Utah, is to deal with a constant stream and bewildering variety of hard and heartbreaking situations.

And to be a former Stake President in San Francisco is to have a deeply compassionate and loving perspective on the situation of LGBT members. That’s not incompatible with the new policy.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Church Development in Florida

August 13, 2015 by Cassandra Hedelius

images

The news that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints plans to develop some of its ranchland in Florida for commercial and residential use has prompted the incorrect story that the Church is “building a city.” The implication is that the Church would own or control the eventual city. This is untrue.

Deseret Ranches has owned the 290,000 acre ranch for 60 years. Last year it acquired a further 380,000 acres. The Ranch plans to convert 130,000 acres of land to commercial and residential use over several decades, and is working with Osceola County officials to envision what eventual development would entail.

Understanding the real estate development process is key to understanding the Ranch’s intentions. The owner of a large parcel of land who wants to sell his land to businesses and homeowners cannot simply put out a “for sale” sign. Building on such a large parcel involves a great deal of practical planning, which requires county government input, and has environmental implications, which could require several layers of local, state, and federal government approval.

So the landowner must devise a development plan, which lays out, in varying degrees of detail, which portions of the land will be sold for residential building, which for commercial use, which will be set aside as off-limits to building in order to protect sensitive environmental areas, where new roads will be placed, where existing roads will be altered, whether public transportation will be needed, how big of lots people will be able to buy for their homes, how the new buildings will be provided with utilities like electricity and water, whether eventual occupants would be part of existing cities or form new cities, and other factors.

The Ranch is presently working with local officials to envision these details, and the main point of continuing discussion seems to be the amount of land to set aside for environmental protection.

After a development plan is eventually approved by all the necessary government regulators, the Ranch will be free to sell off portions of the land to those who want to build houses or businesses on it. The Ranch would not retain any ownership stake after the land is sold. The Ranch would not own a city or any of the resulting houses, businesses, or other new developments. Even the land set aside for environmental conservation would likely transfer to the ownership of the county or the new city.

Why is the Ranch preparing to sell off some of its land? Why now? The Ranch has never before developed its Florida land. But if it doesn’t make a plan for intentional development, it will lose control over its own land bit by bit. Neighboring cities have been suing successfully for water rights, and a neighboring county is attempting to condemn a portion of the land for use as a landfill. Rather than losing a significant portion of the land’s value to such actions, the Ranch has chosen to be proactive and make a coherent plan for the land’s future.

Myth: The Church is building a city in Florida.
Fact: The Ranch is working with local officials to draft a development plan that will allow the Ranch to sell parcels of land for commercial and residential development in the future, which will probably create a new city.

Myth: The Church will have ownership of the future city.
Fact: The Ranch will sell the land to buyers and developers, and will not retain ownership interest in any parcel sold.

Myth: The Ranch’s plan has something to do with creating a gathering place for refuge from future calamities.
Fact: Future development of the land will produce a normal, diverse city without any special LDS character. The only way to live in the city will be to buy or rent a home there from a developer who bought the land from the Ranch.

For more information on Deseret Ranches, see their website here.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Some Thoughts on Suicide

September 15, 2014 by Cassandra Hedelius

cassandra-hedeliusEvery now and then an article like this comes out (headline: Utah has highest rate of adults contemplating suicide, coalition says), and critics of the church hasten to pull long faces about how defects in Mormon doctrine and culture are harmful. Regarding this story, I’ve seen several ex-Mormon/anti-Mormon discussion boards nod sagely at the proposition that LDS doctrine teaches that we need to become perfect > no one is perfect > the discrepancy leads to despair > more suicides. And sure, that’s superficially plausible. Just-so stories are nice.

But I can come up with other explanations that just happen to match my own pre-existing beliefs and commitments. How about this: outside of LDS culture, many people, especially the young, are adopting biological determinism as their entire philosophical framework (i.e. everything you are and do is determined by your genes; there’s no soul or afterlife). If that’s what you sincerely believe, and meanwhile your brain is misfiring chemically so that you suffer clinical depression, why think that it can or should be fixed? The universe has no reasons why you can or should be happy. And so suicidal ideations go unreported and untreated.

Conversely, inside LDS culture, there’s a lot of attention to the concept that we are that we might have joy, God loves us, the atonement can fix and heal, and resurrection will solve our mortal bodies’ problems. Therefore if your brain is misfiring chemically so that you experience clinical depression, you are more likely to decide something is amiss and seek treatment. And so suicidal ideations are reported at a much higher rate than elsewhere, leading to headlines like today’s.

And how about this: Given that people who die of suicide tend to isolate themselves prior to harming themselves, perhaps in Utah more potential suicides are reported because it’s harder to isolate oneself in a Mormon culture. Home Teachers, Visiting Teachers, on-the-ball Bishops–there are a lot more opportunities for someone to find out about suicide potential, and to pass it on to ecclesiastical and then therapeutic channels. Mix that up with the mysteriously higher western US suicide rate (even altitude has been shown a possible risk factor), and voila–somewhat higher completed suicide rate, and much higher reported rate of contemplated suicide.

There are plenty of nits to pick in all that, but it’s at least as plausible as the “Mormonism is to blame” narrative.

Point is, such discussions tend to be based on really nothing more than what one wants to be true based upon one’s unrelated beliefs. Would that we were all psychiatrists and neuroscientists; as we’re not, let’s stop trying to pin tragedies on our enemies and instead think of a friend who seems unhappy and withdrawn. Reach out, and remember that a suffering person’s best view of Christ’s love might be exactly where you’re standing.

Filed Under: Apologetics, General

Faith, community, excommunication, and Sister Kelly

June 26, 2014 by Cassandra Hedelius

To begin with, we offer our love to Sister Kelly. It is a hard, and sad, and sobering thing to lose a member of the church. The power of fellowship and universal opportunity to serve is central to the experience of being Mormon, and the loss of one is a loss to all.

Excommunication is not an extreme practice or unique to the LDS church; most Christian denominations and some non-Christian traditions have long-standing provisions for formalizing a discordant relationship between an individual and the church. Throughout Christian history, the aim of excommunication has been not to punish or cause pointless suffering, but to spur reconciliation.

Catholicism has lately suffered its own turmoil over the propriety of excommunication; Pope Francis recently reaffirmed that individuals who encourage abortion and euthanasia should not receive communion, despite ongoing criticism from some Catholics as well as some non-Catholics.

Religious language like “apostasy” is very loaded in our culture; it can bring to mind caricatures of pitchforks, torches, and witch-burnings. Most Mormons don’t see it that way in this case; apostasy would be better expressed as breaking faith with the community of members. Personal opinions and hopes regarding church doctrine and practice vary widely in the church, and expressing and exploring disagreement is acceptable. But it crosses the line to act and teach in ways that will threaten others’ faith in the church and its leadership.

This is a crucial point. Sister Kelly has said that she fervently believes in the church’s basic truth claims, and I am happy to take her at her word. But even if she feels secure in her own belief, her actions and teachings have led others to reject those beliefs. One cannot teach that church leaders are unable or unwilling to seek the Lord’s will on a crucial matter, without expecting that some who hear will conclude the leaders are not inspired and not even basically decent people in important ways. Her actions have broken faith with the community of members by encouraging disunity and threatening the spiritual welfare of those whose beliefs are less firm.

Seeking and questioning is central to religious faith; public accusation and fomenting disaffection is not. Sister Kelly has allied herself with others who have made blatantly untrue, flawed, and biased accusations against the church under the guise of benign “questioning.” She is part of a movement that may offer commiseration to struggling members but also feeds a false narrative that the church and its leaders’ actions can best be understood through the lens of cynical politics, and that God does not guide the church, if indeed He exists.

For all this, Sister Kelly’s leaders expressed as kindly as possible their conviction that excommunication is necessary. Their letter made it clear that she is not being cast out or shunned or forbidden from the church. The letter forthrightly invites her to continue to attend church, and practically begs her to return to full fellowship.

A faith community bound by loyalty to an inspired organization and leadership can reasonably conclude that loud public antagonism, destructive to that loyalty, requires discipline to preserve the overall health of the community. We hope that sorrowing church members and outside observers can understand that truth. Above all, we hope that regardless of present pain, friends at first will one day be friends again at last.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

City Creek Mall

March 30, 2012 by Cassandra Hedelius

Salt Lake City, Utah was founded by leaders and members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 1847, as they arrived after a difficult overland trek to escape religious persecution. Over time, the church has grown from a small, regional group to a world-wide, thriving major religion. Likewise, the city has grown into a major center of commerce and industry, with residents of many religions. Despite the broadened scope of each, a special relationship between the Church and its headquarter city remains.

Salt Lake City has faced many of the challenges common to cities: upper-income flight to the suburbs, aging infrastructure, an influx of low-income residents with heavier claims on public services, decreased economic vitality, and increased crime. Like many cities, Salt Lake City has sought to attract businesses in order to provide jobs for residents and prevent the degradation of the city environment.

The Church has shared the city’s concern for economic vitality, both out of concern for the residents’ livelihoods and because of the Church’s downtown Temple Square which attracts thousands of visitors annually. Were Salt Lake City to suffer urban decay, these visitors would be affected.

In recent years the area around Temple Square in Salt Lake City looked likely to suffer exactly that fate. Many businesses had moved to other areas of the city and the area was becoming run down, decreasing the quality of life for residents.

The Church has responded in two ways. First, through its Inner City Project, the Church has assigned service missionaries to provide job training, transportation, and other help to inner-city Salt Lake City residents. The hope is that the city environment will benefit from residents who are less plagued by joblessness, health troubles, and feeling hopeless to rise economically. Second, the Church has invested in the City Creek Mall as an economic development project, in hopes that the construction and other jobs will provide opportunity for residents and that the new infrastructure will stave off urban decay.

Some criticize the church for its investment, judging that the funds could have been better spent elsewhere. (The total estimated cost of the project is $1.5 billion; it is not known how this was shared between the church and its development partner, The Taubman Company.) These criticisms ignore the merits of the Church’s strategy–the City Creek Center addresses the roots of urban decay, and the Inner City Project addresses its symptoms. There are many places in the world with greater need–and the Church’s humanitarian programs commit significant resources to them–but the Church shouldn’t be condemned for helping its own neighbors in the city to which it has special historical ties.

Whatever funds the Church spend on City Creek did not come from member tithes; the funds came from returns on church properties and investments. The Church owns these assets from the happy historical accident of acquiring them many decades ago and prudent management since then.

Filed Under: Apologetics

‘American Grace’ and LDS women

May 30, 2011 by Cassandra Hedelius

In the April 2011 General Conference, Elder Quentin L. Cook gave the probably most-discussed talk: “LDS Women Are Incredible!” My attention went mostly to a very short line—“The recent highly acclaimed book American Grace…noted that Latter-day Saint women are unique in being overwhelmingly satisfied with their role in Church leadership.”

At the risk of assuming too much, I think that in including that one line Elder Cook was aiming at two related criticisms: First, that the Church’s gender-based organization harms women, and second, that it blunders by not fully acknowledging women’s distress over that issue. [Read more…] about ‘American Grace’ and LDS women

Filed Under: Anti-Mormon critics, LDS Culture, Women

Primary Sidebar

Subscribe to Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


RSS-Icon RSS Feed (all posts)

Subscribe to Podcast

Podcast icon
Subscribe to podcast in iTunes
Subscribe to podcast elsewhere
Listen with FairMormon app
Android app on Google Play

Pages

  • Blog Guidelines

FairMormon Latest

  • “The Laborers Are Few” (The Church in the DR Congo: A Personal Perspective, Part 11)
  • FairMormon Conference Podcast #23 – Richard Lloyd Anderson, “Explaining Away the Book of Mormon Witnesses”
  • Bishop Vaughn J. Featherstone’s Experience with the Scriptures and the Savior
  • Church Developments and Their Timescales
  • FairMormon Conference Podcast #22 – Daniel Peterson, “Apologetics: What, Why, and How”

Blog Categories

Recent Comments

  • Jack Berg on Bishop Vaughn J. Featherstone’s Experience with the Scriptures and the Savior
  • Dennis Horne on Bishop Vaughn J. Featherstone’s Experience with the Scriptures and the Savior
  • Jack Berg on Bishop Vaughn J. Featherstone’s Experience with the Scriptures and the Savior
  • Hogarth on Bishop Vaughn J. Featherstone’s Experience with the Scriptures and the Savior
  • Chrys Reynolds on FairMormon Questions: First Presidency Statement on Temples

Archives

Footer

FairMormon Logo

FairMormon is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of LDS doctrine, belief and practice.

Quick Links

  • About FairMormon
  • Bookstore
  • Contact Us
  • Get Involved
  • Sign Up for Updates

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • iTunes
  • YouTube

Donate to FairMormon

We are a volunteer organization. We invite you to give back.

Donate Now

Donate to us by shopping at Amazon at no extra cost to you. Learn how →

Site Footer

Copyright © 1997-2019 by The Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

No portion of this site may be reproduced without the express written consent of The Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, Inc.

Any opinions expressed, implied, or included in or with the goods and services offered by FairMormon are solely those of FairMormon and not those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR) Logo

FairMormon™ is controlled and operated by the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR)