- Stephen Fleming on A Review: After Happiness: Living with Faith in a Time of Crisis: “Thanks for the review, Chad. Sounds like an important book.” Jul 21, 18:48
- on A Review: After Happiness: Living with Faith in a Time of Crisis: “Chad, I would put it like this: There’s a broad spectrum of income levels and family sizes for which having one parent as the primary nurturer is not a luxury, but an economic necessity – childcare is so expensive that it’s basically impossible to pay for if there are multiple children of the relevant age and income is limited. But, as you say, it also entails paying for little beyond basic necessities for years at a time, which is not much fun. I just think that this experience isn’t that unusual across generations. I think people are generally pretty good about not viewing less-than-ideal situations as moral failings in others, but it’s often harder to extend the same grace to ourselves. Natalie, thanks for engaging with Chad’s review! I wish more of the authors he reviewed would do that.” Jul 21, 18:06
- on A Review: After Happiness: Living with Faith in a Time of Crisis: “Chad, thanks for this lovely review and deep understanding of the challenges faced by LDS Millennials. This book does not attack The Proclamation on the Family. Instead, it talks about how much I regret that more families today cannot make the choice to live the ideal it articulates. I think you’ll be surprised to find that it is also a deeply multi-generational book that turns to my father and the prophets before us as models of how to live in our own times. Hope you enjoy it <3” Jul 21, 17:04
- on A Preposterously Complimentary Review of the Book of Abraham: “Personally, as I continue to watch, learn (and live) as the years roll along – I’ve come to perceive that the Book of Abraham is simply just silly “Fan Fiction”; and that there’s no historical or revelatory value to it. And, I believe that many LDS folks are coming to the same conclusion. I absolutely agree (that a great many) LDS Folks are tremendous people and I want to continue my association with them.” Jul 21, 16:15
- on A Review: After Happiness: Living with Faith in a Time of Crisis: “To be clear, my own view is that the Family Proclamation is important and has good principles. I think that Brown’s point wasn’t that we need to throw out the Family Proclamation or to throw out the target it presents, as Jonathan says, so much as that the lived reality is complicated. I’m glad to hear that in some people’s experience, “It’s quite possible to raise a family primarily on one income even today,” but for most people in my generation, the model of a stay-at-home mother focused on nurturing a multitude of children and a breadwinning father bringing in the sole income for the family is out of reach, at least if you want to have a place to live and food to eat at the same time. I’ve lived a privileged life, with enough intergenerational wealth to buy and pay off a home and a STEM-field job that pays well, so it’s something my family has been able to do, but even then, it’s difficult. Raising children is great, but it takes a huge toll on mental health if it’s the only thing you’re doing, and it’s difficult to pay for anything beyond basic necessities on one income, even if you have a good income. I think because of that reality, what Brown is saying is that we need to make more room culturally for people who don’t fit that ideal, so that when they aren’t in that exact ideal situation, they don’t feel like it’s viewed as a moral failing.” Jul 21, 15:07
- on A Review: After Happiness: Living with Faith in a Time of Crisis: “I would not so quickly dismiss the faith and spiritual lives of multiple generations of church members so quickly as uncomplicated enjoyment of prosperity. I promise you, your parents and grandparents also experienced trials, you can just ask them. You may even have seen some of them. It’s quite possible to raise a family primarily on one income even today, although you may not enjoy some of the sacrifices that entails, and I completely understand if you make different choices; just be aware that it’s a choice, not something that has been forced on you or taken from you. The Proclamation on the Family is probably more relevant today than when it was first published. People fail to understand it because they are looking for a series of simple thou shalt/thou shalt not commandments, when it instead presents a positive target that anyone, whatever their situation, can work towards.” Jul 21, 13:28
- on A Review: After Happiness: Living with Faith in a Time of Crisis: “Jack, but isn’t the traditional family a recent social construct? By traditional family, don’t we mean the common pattern of middle class America in the 1950s, where the man worked and provided all the money and the woman stayed home, the family was a unit of consumption instead of a unit of production, and teenagers enjoyed a fun adolescence? I haven’t read the book, but I do believe that times change, people change, and societies and economies change. And however much we might want to pretend otherwise, the church of which we’re a part has also changed. I am okay with the proclamation, and I understand why it was written, but since so many people continually point to it, may I ask for specific, tangible, and concrete actions you would like to see in others to perform to be true to the proclamation? Should we mandate marriage by a certain age? Should we proscribe divorce? Should we expect a certain number of children before calling a man to a high church office? Joseph F. Smith, while the prophet and at general conference, railed against women wearing make-up — that is specific and actionable. Heber J. Grant, while the prophet and at general conference, railed against Social Security and against electing Democrats to national office — that is specific and actionable. Of course, no one pays attention to those prophetic calls anymore. But for the proclamation, what specific and actionable actions or results are you asking for? I believe the church needs to serve people, and it needs to serve them where they are. I still see Latter-day Saints getting married, albeit at generally later ages and lower rates than the 1950s. I still see Latter-day Saints having children, albeit at generally later ages and lower rates than the 1950s. Yes, I do see Latter-day Saint women in the workplace, much more than in the 1950s, but I understand that our economy no longer allows women to stay home like it did in the 1950s — so I do not think negatively of Latter-day Saint women for working. Indeed, have you noticed that almost all (maybe even all) of the women called to the general Relief Society, Young Women, and Primary presidencies in recent years are all working women? Doesn’t that mean that none of them heeded Ezra Taft Benson’s prophetic calls for them to stay at home and raise children? Maybe the book and the OP have a valid point, that theological frameworks must evolve and that there may be strength in having the “psychological flexibility” to go “off script” — I think it is a valid thought. But yes, I do believe that the church exists to serve people, rather than people existing to serve the church.” Jul 21, 12:40
- on Spiritually Inspirational Art by Not-So-Inspirational Artists: “I’m not sure all this philosophizing helps me appreciate McNaughton’s LDS artwork any more, or look past what feels like the symbolic wink and nod, the subtle dog whistle, of continuing to promote and endorse his otherwise uncontroversial works.” Jul 21, 10:12
- on A Review: After Happiness: Living with Faith in a Time of Crisis: “I think we have to remember that the proclamation was not only a warning about the future–it also came on the heels of the most socially disruptive era in U.S. history. The American family was literally shredded during the 70s and 80s–and the apostles were concerned with the ills caused by rampant fatherlessness. That said, while there’s no question that West has changed in significant ways, it is keeping the family intact that will do the most good vis-a-vis grounding and establishing the rising generation both temporally and spiritually regardless of those changes. I haven’t read the book–so maybe I’m overreacting–but I don’t know why some folks utilize the argument that traditional family is really no more than the latest cultural construct–because of our polygamous past–as if that some how delegitimizes the core doctrines that are found right at the beginning of the scriptures.” Jul 21, 09:23
- on Spiritually Inspirational Art by Not-So-Inspirational Artists: “A quick clarification: I’m not saying we need to decide what part of someone’s work is inspired and what is not. We just need to decide what’s good and what’s not, and we do that all the time. If you don’t like Thomas Jefferson’s writings, Van Gogh’s art, or Van Wagenen’s endowment film, fine. If you do, I’m suggesting you can go ahead and enjoy/learn from/be inspired by them, knowing God will judge their creators for everything else they did in their lives–and has forbidden you from doing so. (In Van Gogh’s case, I trust his mental illness will make that judgment merciful.) I’ll grant this is less complex when the flawed artist is safely dead.” Jul 20, 09:32
