More shameless self-promotion to distract from other more heated Bloggernacle happenings! My wife and I don’t have children yet, but we do have a daughter-dog. Her name is Chicken Delicious and we love her to death. She’s a mutt, her litter was rescued from a shelter at the last minute. Of course, we want her to be a part of our family forever, as this baby picture of her suggests:

Chicken and I co-edited her papers just in time to present them to my wife for our anniversary. The bound volume includes color photographs of Chicken’s life and times. Page one starts off with an excerpt from Chicken’s first journal entry:

“I am Chicken Delicious and this is a minute account of all things that have come under my observations.”

Because it is difficult for dogs to write, Chicken’s papers are mostly photographs taken by other people of Chicken and her family. The journal does not include all known photographs of Chicken, however. Nevertheless, the editor (me) was quite conscientious in his selection, this is not a white-washed volume by any stretch. Photo’s include some embarrassing moments, including the time when Chicken ripped open her favorite toy which we called “Tube-y,” a long green canvas dog with a squeaker in it. Other embarrassing moments include Chicken’s first bath and an unflattering picture of her sneezing. These moments do not detract from the overall positive account of Chicken’s life so far.

The Chicken Delicious Papers, Journal, Vol. 1: 2007-2010 is a meticulously edited, and meticulously cute volume, a limited edition print run of (1) copy.

BHodges's mother (left) and BHodges's wife (right) enjoy reading on the couch with Chicken Delicious

A new Pew survey out today has been making the news.  It shows that Atheists/Agnostics, Jews, and Mormons have the highest religious literacy.  On the questions regarding Christianity and the Bible, Mormons scored at the top!  Among other Christians, Mormons also demonstrated the most knowledge about world religions and tied for the highest score in the category “Religion and Public Life.”  Jews and Athetists/Agnostics outscored Mormons in both categories.

I don’t know whether this makes me happy, or want to cry.

[Read more...]

I woke up this morning to find out via Facebook that Elder Marlin K. Jensen had apologized for Church participation in Proposition 8 (the headline was later changed to him apologizing for Prop 8 and later to “personally” apologizing).

I was a tad skeptical. After a bit of digging, I am downright cynical.

This was an apology to a small group… done in private.

Carol Lynn Pearson’s comment  on the Mormon Matters thread is informative:

The headline “Elder Marlin Jensen Apologizes for Proposition 8″ is a bit misleading. I was present at the meeting. There was a great deal of pain expressed by a number of people about their experiences around Prop 8 and the larger context of church policy regarding gay people. It was a remarkable meeting, and Elder Jensen took copious notes and was visibly emotionally touched as he listened to the stories. At no time did he say anything like, “I know Proposition 8 was a mistake and I apologize for that mistake.” He was responding personally and in general to the extraordinary pain he was witnessing. No one had a tape recorder, but I wrote down the words, “…Do we owe an apology? I will say I am sorry. To the full extent of my capacity I say I am sorry.” It was a sincere and moving statement. It would not be constructive to make his statement sound like something it was not. The meeting itself was an historical event, for which I and many others are deeply grateful.

The thing which gets to me is that this story is not being shared as a way of highlighting the compassion of Elder Jensen (which is this account does). It is instead an attempt to show a crack amongst the general authorities. It is a gotcha moment. However, I think that the event should be viewed as a servant ministering. Will Apostles and Seventies have intimate meetings like this in the future if they will be used for publicity by those that disagree with Prop. 8.

Dehlin thinks that “we should seize this as an opportunity and tell every living, believing member in the church the news. If the church is forced to clarify, all the better. Double-speak must never be allowed again. The Internet can help us make sure that happens. Maybe this really is a new step for the church. Let’s act like it is, and see if we can help to make it so.”

Sure, I understand the desire to use a “sincere and moving statement” for political purposes. I likely do it all the time. However, if ones intent is to change the positions of the Church, this is going to be viewed as an attack. The best that can be realistically hoped for is gradual change. Twisting those small moments and using them against the Church is…well…a jerk thing to do.

There seems to be a hope that the Church will change its approach to gay marriage and homosexuality. I do not think this is likely to happen. My guess is that many are still waiting for the Church to reverse their opinion on the Equal Rights Amendment. I support the legalization of gay marriage. I voted against constitutional amendments banning it in both Utah and Idaho. Maybe I have long given up on wanting the Church to officially agree with me. However, I am also not bothered when they do not.

I applaud Elder Jensen for addressing the issue in the format that he did. He is a favorite in these parts for his role as Church historian and his role as the official LDS Democrats. I hope we can follow his example. This is much better than exploiting it. Of course, if we need a General Authority to tell us to be compassionate and Christ-like, we are pretty useless.

Last night was the 2010 Leonard J. Arrington Mormon History Lecture. Appropriately enough, the subject of the lecture was Leonard J. Arrington. Among the 30,000 journal pages, Arrington took the time to record the frustrations of bachelorhood cooking.

“My Stouffer’s cooking instructions say ‘place chicken pouch on non-metallic plate and puncture top three or four times with a fork to vent.’ Well, is it three or is it four? If I puncture it three times, what might happen? What if I puncture it four? Would it get too much air on four? Would it explode if it was only three? Why don’t they say what they mean? Then it says ‘heat three to four minutes.’ Ok, should it be three, or should it be four? Will it be undercooked at three or overcooked at four? Or does it depend on the altitude? And why I’m at 4,000 feet should it be cooked three or four minutes? I simply cannot stand this indefiniteness. It’s driving me crazy making these decisions when I’m so ignorant and inexperienced.”

Check out my pseudo-transcript here.