Happy New Year (The Adventures of Elder Elder and Elder Benjamin)

Happy New Year!

January 27, 1990 (Saturday)

Once a year, there was one day in which it was nearly impossible to proselytize, and that was today: Lunar New Year’s Day, the same day the Chinese celebrated, always during a new moon.

New Year’s was a day of celebration and being with family. In the old reckoning of age, this was when everyone’s age incremented. That is, when a person was born, it was their first year. And at the next New Year’s Day, they would become two years old, and so on. Such as, “this is the second year in which I’m alive.” It’s just a different way of looking at things, and the gist is: it is like a big birthday party.

We had to wake up early, because we were invited to New Year’s breakfast, and we had to be there by 9AM. As per our usually strict schedules, we were supposed to be studying scripture and Korean, and preparations. But we had special permission so we could fellowship with the members on this special day.

“Come on, Elder Benjamin! I need to get in there, too,” said Elder Riley, waiting for his turn in the shower.

“Okay, I’m hurrying!”

Elder Shumway asked me, “Is this your first New Year’s?”

I said, “Kind of. I was here a year ago, but no one invited us over. So, we missed most of it.”

“You’re in for a treat. There’s going to be so much food, it’s crazy! What about Elder Benjamin?”

“Oh, first time for him, I think. He’s younger than me.” In this context, I was actually saying, “He’s been on his mission less time than I have been.” We missionaries had the weirdest slang.

We arrived at Brother Kim’s house at 9AM and they already had food laid out on a table in the middle of a big room. They also had three children and their families in attendance. We all sat on the floor around the table, and began the feast … eggs, some kind of vegetable pancakes, and also fried mandu, the Korean version of Chinese pot stickers — only deep fried to a wonderful crisp.

We ate and socialized for a couple of hours, including singing hymns and … well … eating more food. 

We had another appointment at 2PM at Brother’s Han’s house … a New Year’s Lunch celebration. This was a noticeably larger celebration with two large tables filled with food, and again we all sat on the floor. Sisters Anderson and King were also there.

We thought Baek Ho-sung would invite us to his place, with all the money he had. It would have undoubtedly been a larger shindig. Though, lately he had been very busy with work and wooing his potential fiancé, Soo-jung, … but probably mainly his work. Just yesterday, he had promised to bring some expensive root beer to our district meeting at the church, but he didn’t show up. Needless to say, we weren’t making any progress with him.

Brother Han, the second counselor in the bishopric, was more than happy to have us over. He placed us near the center at one of the tables. On the most part, it was laid out much like the Korean BBQ we had with Ho-sung, complete with many small bowls of kimchis and condiments, our own bowl of rice, but it wasn’t just BBQ ribs — already cooked, but several main dishes, which ended up being passed around, including pulkogi, sweet and spicy meat; chapchae, a mixture of clear noodles and vegetables, meat & vegetable skewers, and more mandu. There was no way we were going to go hungry today.

Caught up in all the excitement, I actually tried some octopus. It wasn’t all that bad. Glad I tried it, but I was certainly happy other foods existed.

We also got to drink a kind of rice punch … very interesting and sweet — with cinnamon?

Brother Han’s extended family seemed very interested in our lives in America, and we told all — the room full of excitement and laughter. I had no idea that Sister Anderson was the only church member in her family, and had to raise the money, herself, to go on a mission.

Somehow, somewhere in there, Elder Benjamin got in an uber-spiritual tidbit. He said, “You know, this feast reminds me of a story I read about in General Conference.” Everyone paused to listen.

“This sister’s family was taking care of sheep, and there were many lambs. But then one day, a storm came and killed all the mother sheep. The surviving lambs were small and didn’t know how to eat. So, the family would have to catch the lambs and feed them milk. However, this was very difficult. The lambs liked to run away and they were very good at it. Even when they were starving, they wouldn’t come to the humans. And many got eaten by coyotes.

“So, the sister was devastated. The lambs were so close to the food, but refused to eat. Many of them died. She asked her father, ‘Who can feed our sheep?’

“Such is the Word of God. It is a feast just like this, and there are many sheep out there who could eat this food and be edified. But they don’t know that it exists, or they just refuse to acknowledge it. And that’s our job — to find them. One by one, we must save these lambs, and show them the way.”

Everyone nodded in agreement, and then the joyful conversation continued.

After dinner, we played a game called yut (윷), or in English, the Four Sticks game. It involves a board with spots laid out in a square and an X. People split into two teams, and we each got tokens, called horses — white or black. And for each move, we would toss four sticks — decorative pieces of nearly cylindrical wood with one long side flat and the opposite side round. Depending on how the sticks landed — curved or flat-side facing up, we got to move our horses in a certain way.

Okay — to be honest, I was totally lost, but it was fun throwing the sticks and watching everyone cheer. My team won, so we must have done something right.

If the day had ended there, it would have already been a lot of fun — so much food and camaraderie. Even with it being a holiday for families to reunite, they still invited us into their homes and included us, showing off their ancient traditions.

However, the day hadn’t ended. We still had one more appointment. 

Remember Kim Bo-yeon, our college student friend? He invited us to his apartment at 6PM to celebrate New Year’s. Since he was saving money for his big America trip coming up, he couldn’t afford to go back home to celebrate, and he was also studying for a big test the next day. It would be just us four Elders and him.

And as Koreans always did, Bo-yeon was going to cover all the costs of the celebration. This was one thing we never took away from them. Even when poor, it would hurt their pride for us to offer any kind of compensation.

You may also notice that Bo-yeon’s surname of Kim was the same as the family we had met in the morning. So, yeah. Kim is the most popular surname in Korea, kind of like Smith in the Americas.

We showed up, and Bo-yeon welcomed us in. Rich houses and poor, the celebration was the same — us sitting on the floor around a table. Only, this time, the table was some kind of portable fold-up thing, and there was much less food. 

The main course was a soup called Tteokguk (떡국) containing circular rice cakes and green vegetables. It had a creamy chewy consistency - very unique and tasty. The boiled rice cakes were shaped as coins to promote prosperity. It also represented growing one year older; in fact some people believed you couldn’t advance in age without eating this soup.

After dinner, we played more games and socialized. But we had to be done by 8PM so he could get back to studying. We talked a lot about school and his upcoming trip to America. We didn’t teach any discussions, and didn’t press yet again for a baptismal commitment. Rather, we were just friends having fun.

Toward the end, Elder Shumway turned to Elder Benjamin and asked in English, “So, what did you think of your first New Year’s Day?”

“Wonderful! I’m stuffed! Crazy fun day!”

Bo-yeon said in Korean, “I hope you’ve saved room. I’ve got dessert.”

“Are you kidding?” said Elder Riley. “Well, I guess I could eat some more. What is it?”

Bo-yeon brought out individual bowls of fruit salad, and we ate it all.

After we left Bo-yeon’s apartment, I said to the others, “I can’t believe how exhausted I am. So full and tired.”

And sure enough, we all ended up going to sleep early that night.

Next Adventure: Lost in Taegu

They Will Know We Are Christians By Our Love

More than 40 years ago when I was a young lad, I attended Camp Mikell in Northern Georgia -- three summers in a row. This was an Episcopalian summer camp, of which, my father thought I could do well learning more about other churches.

And I have to admit -- those summers at camp are among my most favorite and cherished memories. I did learn a lot more about Episcopalians, their church services, and what they believed in general. And we had lots of singing, with someone always playing the guitar. Yes -- "Kumbaya" was one of the songs we sang.

We called the camp leader Father Bear. I can't remember his real name, but he was the kindest person one could imagine. He was the epitome of brotherly love, which emanated throughout the whole camp, even though we were all raunchy kids.

Everyone knew I was a Mormon, and they were all okay with it. They accepted me for who I was, and included me in all their activities. And when camp was over, I would miss being with them -- wishing I could go back to all that fellowship and love.

There was a song we sang over and over, which has stuck with me my whole life: "They Will Know We Are Christians By Our Love." Here's a sample of this song ...

The main thing this song teaches: Am I demonstrating my church's teachings with my love? Will others see my example and want to join? As such, I strive to always show love no matter what.

Here are a couple of related scriptures.

Matthew 25:40 -- one of my favorites. It's part of the "sheep and goats" parable, which runs from verse 31 to the end of the chapter. Verse 40 says:

And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

In other words, what we do unto others, we do the same to Christ. I highlight "least of these my brethren" for discussion. To whom is this referring? Is it our friends? Is it other Christians?

No: rather -- think of the lowest life person you can think of -- a sinner -- an enemy -- a rotten person. These are what we may consider to be the least of all people. Not worth our attention. But -- here Jesus is, saying that these are the people we need to be nice to. If we've done it unto these lowest life people, we have done it unto Christ.

Does this sound like a tall order? Did we understand this correctly? Well -- take a look at verse 45:

Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

Ooof -- this is even clearer. If we act un-nicely toward one of these lowlifes, we are likewise acting un-nicely to Christ.

In other words, Jesus is telling us: "No exceptions. You need to be nice to everyone. Period."

But what about those peeps who hurt us all the time? You know -- our actual enemies?

Uh oh -- check out Matthew 5:44.

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Dang ... can't get any clearer than that. What are we supposed to do with our enemies, and those who hurt us? We're supposed to love, bless, do good, and pray for them. Note that it doesn't say we need to agree with them, but we can still be nice.

Well -- at least I try to do this, but I must admit that it is very difficult. And I see others struggling with this as well.

A large chunk of Christians, particularly those who call themselves Christian Nationalists, are identifying enemies, condemning them, and outright treating them poorly. I am often saddened by the many posts that I'm seeing from people expressing anger and/or outright hate toward certain groups of people: immigrants, LGBTQ, people of color, members of an opposite political party, people who are concerned with the environment, and so on. It's like we've forgotten how to discuss, and instead we devolve into our base instincts of fear and hate, when Christ would rather we work together and figure out mutual solutions.

And the saddest part: I have many non-Christian friends who are good people, but they tell me: "I could never be a Christian, because all I see is hate." I try to tell them that we're not all like that, but they won't have any part of it. They know we are Christians by our hate, by our hate.

So I ask: is it worth it to chase away good people from the Gospel? Is it really okay for us to be selective in whom we be nice to? In the end, we will be judged in the ways that we've interacted with other people, whether they are friends or foe, holy or sinners. Are we going to be ready when we approach the pearly gates?

I am going to continue striving to show my love for everyone, and I challenge you to do the same.

The Book of Mormon and Voting

Utah is one of the reddest states out there. For the presidential race, ever since 1968, Utah has chosen the Republican candidate. That's hard to imagine -- during my entire lifetime, Utah hasn't gone Democrat even once. This makes sense, as Utah is dominated by Latter-day Saints, who tend to be conservative.

There are some Democrats, but overwhelmingly Republicans win out. Check out these voting stats for Utah:

2000 - W Bush - 66.8%

2004 - W Bush - 71.5%

2008 - McCain - 62.6%

2012 - Romney - 72.8%

Aren't those crazy high numbers? But check this out ...

2016 - Trump - 45.5%

2020 - Trump - 58.1%

Source: https://www.270towin.com/states/Utah

Trump still won the state, but these numbers are noticeably lower. In 2016, 27% of the vote went to another conservative, Evan McMullen, and other candidates. And it's not just Utah. Trump just does not poll as well with Latter-day Saints. So, what gives? Perhaps I can provide those answers pulling from Latter-day Saint scripture, such as the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine & Covenants (modern day revelation), and other official statements of the Church.

Mosiah 29 (in the Book of Mormon) talks about the effects of an unrighteous king. This is around the time that the people decide to switch from kings to judges. I recommend reading the entire chapter to get the whole story -- it would help you to understand the importance members of my church place on having leaders we can choose rather than kings who may turn out to be rotten. Here are some highlights that relate more directly to today's discussion, with my own added emphases.

(11) ... let us appoint judges, to judge this people according to our law; and we will newly arrange the affairs if this people, for we will appoint wise men to be judges, ...

(17) For behold, how much iniquity doth one wicked king cause to be committed, yea, and what great destruction!

 (21-22) And behold, now I say unto you, ye cannot dethrone an iniquitous king save it be through much contention, and the shedding of much blood. For behold, he has his friends in iniquity, and he keepeth his guards about him; and he teareth up the laws of those who have reigned in righteousness before him;

(25-26) Therefore, choose you by the voice of this people, judges, that ye may be judged according to the laws which have been given you by our fathers, which are correct, and which were given them by the hand of the Lord. Now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the voice of the people.

(27) And if the time comes that the voice of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited this land.

(32) And now I desire that this inequality should be no more in this land, especially among this my people; but I desire that this land be a land of liberty, and every man may enjoy his rights and privileges alike, ...

In summary, wicked leaders are bad, and they cause destruction and iniquity. It's common for most people to choose the right leaders. But if they choose poorly, bad things will happen. This is supposed to be a land of liberty (here the scripture is indeed literally referring to the North/South American continent, but the concepts can apply elsewhere as well).

Here is further instruction in Doctrine and Covenants 98. This is revelation Joseph Smith received in August 1833. While the Mosiah scripture above was in relation to events occurring before the birth of Christ, this D&C excerpt is instruction meant for modern members of the Church, including for us today. For the full story, you can read the whole section, but again, here are highlights ...

(4-8) And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them. And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me. Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land; And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil. I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free.

(9) Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn.

(10) Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil.

In summary, we again get confirmation (from the Lord) that we should be living in liberty. We should befriend the Constitution. Wicked rulers cause us to mourn, so we must seek out honest men and wise men.

Here another verse describing yet another concept popular among the Latter-day Saints...

Helaman 7:4 And seeing the people in a state of such awful wickedness, and those Gadianton robbers filling the judgment-seats—having usurped the power and authority of the land; laying aside the commandments of God, and not in the least aright before him; doing no justice unto the children of men;

You may hear this among my fellow church members -- the Gadianton robbers, a gang of men who successfully take over the government through corruption and "secret combinations." This is a special brand of wicked ruler.

And finally, before I bring everything together, the Church often offers official declarations to prepare us for voting. They are usually statements of neutrality, and invitations to participate in the process with open discussion, and not to condemn fellow voters for their decisions.

The latest version came out in June 2023, and here is a particular paragraph of note ...

We urge you to spend the time needed to become informed about the issues and candidates you will be considering. Some principles compatible with the gospel may be found in various political parties, and members should seek candidates who best embody those principles. Members should also study candidates carefully and vote for those who have demonstrated integrity, compassion, and service to others, regardless of party affiliation. Merely voting a straight ticket or voting based on “tradition” without careful study of candidates and their positions on important issues is a threat to democracy and inconsistent with revealed standards (see Doctrine and Covenants 98:10). Information on candidates is available through the internet, debates, and other sources.

In summary, we get the additional instruction not to do straight-party voting, but to rather study out the candidates and choose those who best embody correct principles. Also, the Republican Party is not the official party of our Church (which is different than what many had told me in Utah when I lived there). Rather, the Church does not endorse either party.

Perhaps you can see where this is all going. Why did Trump not do as well with Utah voters, and with other members of my church?

First off, I should point out that more than half of Latter-day Saints did vote for Trump, and still support him today, and I totally get it. They recognize Trump's foibles, but overlook them. They tell me: don't vote for the man, but rather his policies. They see his ability to make good deals, support religious freedoms, install conservative judges, and promote certain conservative priorities.

But for a large chunk of us (and we are not a few), we see all the above scripture and counsel and we've determined that: no, it really is the man, and not so much the policies. If the man, himself, is wicked, that's what brings the suffering upon the people and causes us to mourn. (In my case, it's the policies, too -- which I feel are inconsistent with Matthew 25:40, but that's another topic.)

We do not see Trump as a wise man who embodies gospel principles and demonstrates integrity, compassion, and service to others. Rather, we see how he mocks others and lies every time he opens his mouth. We also see how he kindles an uncooperative environment -- he even had the largest turnover of staff than any other president in the past 100 years. We see his scams -- how easily he gets money from his followers -- how he cares about nothing more than himself. We've seen how he vilifies his own people -- members of his own party and even his former staff.

We also see him as a Gadianton Robber, who attempted to usurp power at the end of 2020, who has befriended many of his party and has encouraged them to help tear down laws, weaken the Constitution, strip away freedoms, and cast out those who stood up to him in his own party. It's gotten to where there are few left in his party that still have any shred of integrity.

We also saw how bad things got in 2020, and how they didn't get any better until 2021, after he had left office. Instead of mitigating the pandemic, he helped to spread it. And instead of handling riots, he stoked the fires. We see how the people mourned from these poor decisions.

And yes -- I realize that these are all largely my own biased opinions and interpretations of Church doctrine and official statements. But in my opinion, Trump's words and actions and the friends he keeps seem to speak for themselves. It's difficult for me to interpret the above scripture and counsel any other way. And I remain frustrated, as I feel I no longer have a conservative party that represents my beliefs. I wonder why the party can't choose someone better who is wiser and demonstrates integrity, compassion, and service, and doesn't try to usurp power. Is it too late to reconsider someone like Nikki Haley?

So, take it for what it's worth. I figure those who are not of the Church can better understand why a large chunk of us can not now, and likely never will support Trump.

Trip to the Zoo (The Adventures of Elder Elder and Elder Benjamin)

Trip to the Zoo

January 22, 1990 (Monday)

P-Day!!! On this nice cold day, Elder Benjamin and I decided to go to the zoo. No Elder Shumway, and no Elder Riley. Just Elder Benjamin and me. We left around 10AM in our jeans and heavyish coats.

“Who could have known Taegu had a zoo?” said Elder Benjamin as we walked to our bus stop. “What don’t they have?”

“They don’t have one of our temples,” I said.

“Not yet. But just wait. One day there will be a temple here, bigger than the one in Seoul.”

“We’ll see.”

“Hey,” said Elder Benjamin. “Aren’t you excited? I just love zoos. They’ve got lions and tigers.”

“Yeah, and bears, too.” I think he was more excited about this than I was. I would much rather stay in our apartment and work on my letters, as I was always behind.

And I had already had my fill of zoos, too. My parents loved them. We went to Atlanta, Greenville, South Carolina, and even San Diego. And this zoo would be smaller than all of them. With no charge to enter, I didn’t have high hopes.

“Imagine being on Noah’s Ark,” said Elder Benjamin. “It was like a big zoo, but for survival, not for show. Do you ever wonder: when the animals received the call, how did they knew when and where to go?”

“Wait — what call?”

He suddenly stopped and turned around to explain, but then at that very moment, a car backed out of a small alleyway zooming in front of us at high speed, not pausing at all on the sidewalk we were about to walk on.

Elder Benjamin and I looked at each. “What the heck?” he said.

“Interesting. How did you know to stop walking?” I asked. “That guy would have hit us.”

“It must have been the Spirit. It made me stop. Whoa.”

“I didn’t see him coming.”

“Neither did I,” he said. “The Adversary must be working hard. But the Spirit is protecting us.”

“Or it was just a guy not paying attention. I’m glad you stopped.”

Elder Benjamin resumed walking. “Oh, so you were asking about the call?”

“Oh yeah. I thought Noah was supposed to round up all the animals.”

“Yeah. Two, and or seven of each kind. Do you know how many that would be in total? Thousands. There’s no way he could have done that by himself. That’s why God told the animals to go to Noah. In Genesis 7, it says that the animals went into the ark just as the rains were about to hit.”

“Well, yeah,” I said. “Noah opened the door and let them in.”

Again he stopped in his tracks, right as we were about to cross another alleyway, and this time a motorbike came whooshing past. But this time, it happened behind Elder Benjamin’s back, and he continued talking. “Just think about it. Those elephants walk pretty slow, and all the way from Africa. God must have called them years before the other animals. And what about the polar bears?”

He went on but I wasn’t listening. I was just in awe that he had done it again, and he didn’t even know it. Several onlookers looked at me, and at the bike that still whooshed down the street, and they stared at the oblivious Elder Benjamin. How did he not hear the bike?

I tried to interrupt him to let him know what had happened, but he was enjoying the miracle of the animals. I gave up trying to get his attention.

Eventually, he started walking again, we got on a bus, and then we arrived at Dalseong (달성) Park. Set upon a hill next to downtown, we went through an old Korean gate and entered the park. Tall buildings rose above the trees around us.

At the zoo, an circular path led to all the exhibits, and every now and then cross paths interrupted the middle area. The landscape looked impressive, but as I had expected, the animal exhibits seemed to be rather small.

We were practically the only ones there, probably because of the near-freezing temperatures. Elder Benjamin smiled and said, “Looks like we have the place to ourselves!”

I laughed, thinking about how many people were smarter than us.

We went off to the right, checking out the first exhibit. Birds in small enclosures surrounded by chainlink fence. To my surprise, there was a decent selection, representing all the colors of the rainbow. Elder Benjamin was excited, knowing what each species was, while to me they were just pretty birds.

They did have a peacock — at least I knew what that was.

Next came the monkeys. Or maybe they were chimpanzees. I didn’t know the difference. We talked with them, and they responded, seeming to enjoy our attention. They were in a slightly larger enclosure with chainlink fencing.

At this point, I could appreciate there being hardly anyone around, as we could go crazy with the monkeys. We were there longer than we probably should have been.

Next up — a water exhibit with a few birds, but not much else. Was something missing?

“So, Elder Benjamin,” I said. “Did you not see the bike that almost hit us back there?”

“It was a car,” he said.

“No. Not that. I mean after that. The second time.”

“What are you talking about?”

“You know,” I said. “When you stopped to talk about the animals being called to go to Noah’s Ark?”

“Oh yeah. That was some miracle, wasn’t it?”

“Oh, so you did see the bike.”

“What bike? I’m talking about the animals.”

“I see.” Maybe I could try again later.

Next up was a bear exhibit — a somewhat larger area, and no chainlink this time. Except, we didn’t see any bears.

“Well Elder Elder,” said Elder Benjamin. “Do you see any bears in there? I want to see a bear.”

“Nope. They’re probably inside where it’s warm.”

“Inside where?”

“I don’t know,” I said. “Wherever they go when they’re tired? Maybe in that building behind those big rocks?”

“Oh, maybe.”

We continued walking around, but just like with the bears, there were no other big animals. No tigers, no lions, no elephants. Just a few small animals here and there. I suggested that we could go back to the monkeys or chimpanzees and play with them some more.

“I don’t know,” Elder Benjamin said. “I came to see lions and tigers and bears. Maybe we can find someone to help us out.”

That was the other thing. We didn’t see any zoo hands anywhere — just a couple of other random people, and yeah — I think we did see two other visitors who looked just as disappointed.

Elder Benjamin said, “Let’s go back to the tiger exhibit. I saw a building over there.”

“Okay,” I said. We went back, and Elder Benjamin was right. There was a mid-sized building attached to the side of the empty tiger exhibit. And no zoo-hands to be found. We walked around the building as much as we could, but there were no windows, and we couldn’t hear anything from inside. All we saw was a singular door — just a regular metal door you’d see on a shed or warehouse.

“Maybe we can find a trainer inside,” said Elder Benjamin. 

“I don’t think we’re supposed to go in there.”

“Nonsense,” he said. “If they wanted to keep us out, why would they put a door there? I’m just going to check to see if it’s locked.”

“Hmmm … the building that’s in the back with no signs saying ‘come in’?”

“I came here to see a tiger, so let’s go find someone.”

He walked toward the door, and then something hit me. I’m not sure what it was — a flash of everything at the same time. The chainlink fences everywhere? The absence of zoo hands? The fact that the building was attached to the tiger exhibit? The building’s relatively small size and the absence of some other alternative area where the tigers could be resting? The idea that we shouldn’t expect this zoo to keep dangerous doors locked?

“Elder Benjamin!” I ran past and got between him and the door. He was only a few seconds away from opening it. I said, “I had a sudden prompting that we need to leave this door shut. I think there’s something on the other side of this door, and it will not be happy to see us.”

“A tiger — right in there?” He backed away in silence, and then said, “Wow. That was close. Elder Elder, do you get the sense that something keeps trying to hurt us?”

“I’d say that’s a distinct possibility.” We started walking away.

Elder Benjamin continued, “Someone doesn’t like us doing the Lord’s work. Trying to take us out of the picture on our P-Day when our guard is down. But it won’t work.”

“No, it won’t,” I said.

“Okay. Let’s go home.”

“Sure,” I said. “I still got some hot chocolate left. We could go warm up. Maybe come back here later in the spring.”

“Sounds good, if we’re still tongbanjas.”

As we walked, I put an arm around him and gave him a quick sideways hug. “Elder Benjamin, I’m so glad you’re my tongbanja. We’re going to get a lot of work done, and we’ll protect each other.”

“That’s right,” he said.

Next Adventure: Happy New Year!

Analyzing the Separation of Church and State

I figure that during this exciting election year, these posts may get more on the political side, but we'll see. This year the Church-wide reading is the Book of Mormon, so I may pull from that as well.

For today, though, I going to take on the Separation of Church and State, which is enshrined in the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ...

Our founding fathers desired to protect the people from two undesirable scenarios. One was a government that only allowed one church (an established state religion), and the other was a government governed by a religion (a theocracy). They wanted to instead protect the freedoms of every person in this new fledgling country.

The Book of Mormon (in Alma), also describes a government with both a religious leader and a civil leader, who would each be allowed to act independently. Another instance of Separation.

And my Church's 11th Article of Faith states:

We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

It doesn't explicitly address Separation, but it seems to be implied.

Of the three examples above, two speak to the protection of religious freedoms. And the Alma example presents the idea of government acting independently of the religious. Similarly in the New Testament, Jesus suggests we render to Caesar the things that are of Caesar, and render to God the items of God.

So, Separation appears to be very important. But what exactly does this mean?

In set theory (math), there are two different kinds of separation: Mutual Exclusivity and Independence.

The first, Mutual Exclusivity, is easiest to understand. Imagine a group of cats, and a group of dogs. Those groups are entirely separate. If you're a cat, then you're not a dog, and vice versa. So each group is exclusive. Makes sense?

Independence is a little tougher to understand, because the groups can mix. Imagine one group who belongs to Race A, and another group who has Genetic Disease B. (Yeah -- I'm thinking like an actuary here.) It's possible to be in both groups. So exclusiveness is gone.

Let's say Race A makes of 15% of the entire population, and Genetic Disease B is 3%. If being members of both groups is Independent, that means that being a member of one group has nothing at all to do with being a member of the other group.

What this means in terms of math is: if we look at Race A, we would expect 3% of them to have Genetic Disease B. And if we look at Genetic Disease B, we would expect 15% of them to be in Race A. You can also multiply the two percentages to get 0.45% of the entire population belonging to both groups.

Makes sense? But what if we do some testing and find out that in Race A, 10% of them have Genetic Disease B. This would be significantly larger than the 3% we would expect, so we would conclude that Race A is more susceptible to Genetic Disease B. So, independence is gone. We would say there is correlation.

To be truly independent, two groups must have absolutely ZERO correlation.

So, what about "Separation of Church and State"? I believe that the founding fathers were going after Independence, while many today are pushing more of a Mutual Exclusivity.

For example: should prayers be allowed in school? "No, because of separation of Church and State. School is a State thing, so there should be no Religion. Likewise, State should stay out of Religion."

But Mutual Exclusivity is NOT Independence. Remember the dogs and cats? If one is a dog, that fact by itself guarantees that it is not a cat. Where Independence is ZERO correlation, Mutual Exclusivity is 100% correlation. In other words, Mutual Exclusivity is the EXACT OPPOSITE of Independence.

Or put in simple English: you can't have true independence if you try to force things to not coexist.

Think about it: is government totally hands-off with all religions? Heck no. Churches may be tax-free entities, but they still have to follow all the laws. Their buildings need to built to code. Each religion needs to fill out their own paperwork to be officially recognized. Each religion can still be punished for fraudulent activity. And get this ... my church is famous for owning for-profit businesses in their investment portfolio -- and guess what! They have to pay taxes on all the earnings from those businesses.

In other words, no entity can exist in a government without it being subjected to all the laws of the land.

And what about restricting prayer in schools? Is that Independence? Heck no -- because that's the State telling Church what they can't do. That is, if I want to pray in school, and I'm being told No, then my freedoms are being infringed upon because of where I am. This becomes even more pronounced when one is not allowed to wear religious clothing in certain places.

In my area, it becomes especially annoying when LDS teenagers try to find a place to hold daily seminary (like a bible study class), and the schools reject any requests to do so. Instead, these teenagers must travel to some other designated far away place in order to meet. And the simple act of supplying a room for that purpose at school does not by itself connote an establishment of a religion. These kids are just looking for a central place to meet. Other clubs get to meet in rooms. What's the difference, other than the topic being discussed?

Why is it no one seems to ask: why did our founding fathers, who wrote the First Amendment, allow prayers in their meetings? Huh? Huh? ... mmmm ....?

But while we're on this topic, we must address the opposite concern. What about only allowing Christian prayers in school? Would that be Independence? Heck no -- because that would be Church telling State what to do. Despite what some would like to believe, we're not a Christian nation. Believing such a notion is in outright contrast with the First Amendment -- nothing short of establishing a religion.

But wait -- we can't allow Christian prayers, because it tempts the establishment of a religion? If we don't allow the prayers, we're infringing. If we do allow them we might be establishing. Is there really no solution here?

Actually -- HECK YES. There's a solution, and it's called True Independence -- which is exactly what our Founding Fathers intended. So, how would this solution look like?

The reason I brought up math before, is I can now show with math how this thing would work. Actually -- if we were to simply let things happen naturally, this would happen on its own, but we can math this up anyway just to demonstrate.

Say there are 30 children in a classroom, where most are Christian -- a typical American classroom. Let's say 5 of them are Jewish. If a prayer were uttered in class each day, we would expect 16.7% (5 divided by 30) of the prayers to be Jewish. Now, let's say 1 of the kids is Wiccan or Satanist. Yeah -- I know -- we don't like these guys, right? But in order to have True Independence, the math must be satisfied. 3.3% of the prayers must be Satanist/Wiccan. And perhaps atheist/agnostic children may instead recite some good thoughts or even say: let's skip the prayer today.

But what about offending other people? You see, that's the nice thing about Independence -- because once it's fully realized, we're learning about other cultures. Could I listen to a Wiccan prayer and NOT get offended? Let's see -- I've heard the prayer, and I'm still standing here. I'm still alive. I must have survived. And I actually learned something about that kid's beliefs? How is this not a good thing? It's all too easy a thing to say: all prayers are forbidden, which then infringes on all our rights.

So yeah, we'd have to actually stop being precious snowflakes that fall apart at the smallest difference, but we are more than capable in getting this all to work. That's what grown-ups do. When people of different faiths reach out to each other, they end up helping each other, sometimes even financially (as I've witnessed).

So yeah -- I totally support the Separation of Church and State, as far as it is interpreted as Independence, and not Mutual Exclusivity. Let's fix this!