Friday December 12th, Waikiki, Cheesburger in Paradise, Kings Village Farmer's Market

I was awake some during the night because I woke up when Harry got up, thought he was up for the day and turned on lights and tried to get up, only it was 2:30 and he was just up to the bathroom, lol, so then I had a hard time getting back to sleep. So I woke up again when he did get up, but went back to sleep until after 7am. Then I got dressed and walked downtown to a 7/11 store to get my bus pass. 

I was sweat soaked when I got back, so I showered and spent some cool hours in the room working on computer, especially blog diary entries.

Lunch at Cheeseburger in Paradise
Around 1 pm I was really hungry so I went down to the Cheeseburger place on the beach. It was mentioned in the AAA guidebook and looked good. I wasn't prepared for $15 burgers, but once I was seated I just called it a splurge. 

View of the beach walk from my table at the Cheeseburger in Paradise

While I waited for my food and while I ate I watched the beach, the people and the coverage of the triple crown surfing competition on the sports bar TVs

Three screens are tuned to the surfing competiton

I got a Kalua Pork sandwich with slaw and onion rings. The menu described the onion ring coating as something unusual, but it was just like many I've had before. The sandwich was very good, aside from several bites that had cilantro in them, probably from the slaw. The menu there is very touristy, does not cater to locals, no plate lunches or loco moco, etc. Every table around me photographed their food when it came, lol.

I stopped at an ABC market for snacks and more water on my way back to the room. I spent the rest of the afternoon staying off my sore heel and watching TV and reading, plus a little computer time.

King's Village Farmer's Market
At four pm. I headed down to the other end of our block to the every-other-day evening farmer's market in the King's market. I never saw this market when I was here last time. It is built to be a little taste of colonial days with narrow cobbled "streets" that wind up several levels and include lots of little shops. There is a Burger King on the outside of it, appropriately to the name.

The Farmer's Market goes from 5-9 pm and is mostly produce, but also includes baked goods, sweets, and catering trays of hot foods to take and eat. I haven't seen anything else like it here, it is really fun.

In the courtyard, the Circle of fame is the hand prints of local celebrities

I bought cucumbers, cherry tomatoes, custard filled Portuguese Malasada doughnuts, and a Hawaiian sweet, that looks like it is a baked custard of coconut milk and eggs. 

When I was done shopping I took my purchases back to the room and got my camera. I headed down to the beach to enjoy the water, the people and the sunset. Harry was coming in late, so I had the time to see the sunset.  

December 11th day 2-Newbie Snorkeling-Waikiki Beach

Having checked out likely snorkeling spots the day before, I planned to do some snorkeling this day.  I spent the morning in the room working on the computer and had my Spam snack and some grapes for lunch, along with another of the pastries. 

When I got out to the beach in the afternoon I found that the tide was low. I went to the best beach from the day before and noticed it was almost all covered in rocks. I didn't bring my water shoes and I planned not to wear my fins for most of the time, so I retreated back to the mostly sandy beach by the jetty with the overlook at the end. I had my Fuji waterproof camera. 

My goal was to get familiar with my new snorkel set and more comfortable in the water. I hoped the water would be as warm as it had been in St Maartin island in the Caribbean last spring, but it was as I expected, a little chilly, more like the water at Coco Cay. After I immersed I found that my eyes were really burning and stinging from the salty water. I wondered if this ocean is more salty than the Atlantic around the Caribbean. 

View from where I was snorkeling

The water was murky from the low tide and from the influx of water from the baffled sea wall where I was swimming. Most of it was shallow enough to stand up and sandy, which was ideal for what I was doing. I find I am still quite nervous and panic easily even in this setting, which seems silly, but then I didn't know until I SNUBA dived last spring what an almost phobic feeling I would have about being in deeper water and breathing through a tube. I knew I would calm down as I continued in the water, and the depth was similar to Coco Cay, where I could stand up most anywhere, so I just kept working with it. 

I had problems getting the mask to seal around my nose, maybe more so than when I was using the one last spring that I borrowed from Wayne's son. I can't put the tube in my mouth without losing the seal as my mouth stretches around it. Tilting my head up also tended to break the seal.  I know there is a technique to it, so I kept trying different things. What worked best was pressing the mask against my face to expel air and create a vacuum. The snorkel tube worked great and didn't accumulate any water at all, so I never needed to use the valve to clear it. 

Very bad photo of  Needle fish

I really wanted to see and photograph the needle fish from underwater. They were so visible the day before and pretty, with their colorful stripes. What I found out though, was that they are always so close to the surface that I had to tip my head back to see them and I'd lose the seal and have to stand up to empty water and re-seal the mask. Also, they are very fast and would swim away when I tried to get close to take their photo. I got the shot above by holding the camera under water and pointing it towards them as they shot by. If I tried to half submerge upright to see them underwater that way, my legs and rear would immediately float up and put me on my face in the water-back to square one. Oh well, I guess they are just better viewed from above.

'My' school of fish!

I didn't take a lot of photos because of the visibility and scarcity of fish. I mostly just cruised around and practiced maneuvering through the water and keeping a seal on the mask. At one point I was pretty far from the wall in the sandy center of the water and suddenly found myself face to face with this dense school of fish. I grabbed out my camera and took a couple of shots before they moved away from me.

Eventually I felt a little chilled and went back to shore to warm up a little and get my new fins so I could work on getting more comfortable with them. I had used the fins last spring a little bit but eventually took them off because I felt like they floated my feet at the top so much that I couldn't get them underwater to kick properly. Then they were a little hard to bring down and forward as fast as I wanted when I wanted to stand up again. I was only moving very slowly and could do most of the moving around I needed to do with my arms and hands. But I felt that if I had more time to work with them I might be able to get comfortable and use them effectively.

I put on the fins when I was standing in about 6 to 8 inches of water. They were more awkward to put on than I expected. They floated, so I had to bend and lift one leg and put one on, then standing on that one do the other, only standing on the first one destabilized me so I almost fell over.

Then I tried to walk in deeper. Oh, what a comedy and a disaster!  The fins are curved, so each step I took the front dug down into the sand. Then I had to lift the fin, plus the sand it was inserted into to take the next step. I tried over and over, and almost fell over, and ended up crossing my feet and almost falling over. I couldn't make any real progress forward. I imagined how this was going to work when I was deeper in and falling sideways into deeper water, and gave up. I guess the ones I borrowed last spring were flat, because I certainly didn't have anything like that kind of problem with those. I wish I could find a short, flat flipper that would be easier to walk in and stand up in and still give a little extra kicking power. I wonder if these were made for getting off a boat straight into the water.

Meanwhile, I was aware I'd been presenting a laughable spectacle to anyone watching on the beach. Visualize fat older lady floundering around in flippers... So I just walked out of the water carrying my fins and laughing at myself a little. Can't do anything about looking ridiculous, so I might as well enjoy the humor also!

I swam with the mask and snorkel some more until I had salt water burning in my nose and throat from the difficulty I was having with the seal on the mask. Even with all that I enjoyed myself.

I spent a leisurely time then walking back down the beach and sitting and watching the water and the people before going back to the room and showering and having a rest before Harry came back from work.

He came in rushed and anxious to get me to Walmart where I planned to finish my shopping. He is not good in city traffic and was over tired and way stressed, so I was glad I could bring up a map on my phone that showed our progress and let me zoom in to be sure about each turn and street name. He was anxious about parking downtown, and I said there was probably a parking garage. He disagreed and when it came time to turn down the street the store was on he went straight instead and parked on the street. We walked around to the store entrance, and sure enough, there was a big parking garage. He grumbled that anyway, it would be full because everyone would be using it. He headed for an escalator marked with a small sign, 'To Sam's Club'. and said, 'Come on, here's an escalator', I answered, 'Ok, we could do that, or we could just go in the store,' as I pointed to the entrance to Walmart opposite to where he was headed.

To my relief he parked himself in a fast food called L & L, with a soda and I did my shopping. After I was done he suggested we eat there and we both had Saimin ramin noodles, me with teriyaki BBQ chicken, and him with Spam...? He doesn't like spam but wasn't sure if that was what it was. He did like it ok that way though. I wanted to eat light because of the heartburn the night before from the heavy meal.

Then it was home and a little TV and to bed by 9:30.

December 10th First full day in Waikiki

Orientation day

Harry got up and off to work without disturbing me, which was not my plan, I planned to be on his schedule, but I guess it will take some time to get my inner clock dialed to 5 am! I woke at 7:30 and planned my day. I thought it would be best to get oriented to the room and the beach first. How nice to have enough days here that I don't have to worry about 'wasting' a day.

I got familiar with the room first, then dressed and had a bowl of cereal for breakfast. I did some tidying of the kitchen and washed up the barbeque grill that Harry had used recently to cook chicken in a sugary sauce. Then I went to the front desk and met Chardonay face to face finally-I've talked to her on the phone several times and read some great reviews about her on TripAdvisor.com.  She gave me the dates we will have to change rooms. I needed to know whether or not to completely unpack. If we were changing rooms in a few days I wouldn't want to get out anything but the essentials. Turns out we will be here until the 27th, so I felt like I could settle in and unpack most everything.

From there I headed to the beach. My plan was to walk down and get familiar again with the different beaches and see if there are any spots that might have fish for snorkeling fun. I wasn't sure how far I would walk, my heel is still not better and walking on it a lot could really set back the healing.

The beach nearest our hotel a the end of Waikiki Beach and beginning of Kuhio Beach

It was still morning, so there was shade enough that I could stop every little bit and sit on a shady bench and just look at the view. I was also looking to see if anyone was snorkeling. I expected that it might be kind of dorky to snorkel this area and wondered if there were maybe only a few other touristy newbies like me trying it.

View towards Honolulu

Surf breaking over the breakwater wall

My heel did fine and I walked on much farther than I originally planned. There were a lot of big white canopies at Kapiolani park and I read on the notices about parking space closures that the big marathon is this weekend. 30,000 people run it, so it is a BIG deal. We almost had to move to another hotel that night, since it was the one night they were all booked. Cancellations saved us from that though.

As long as I was that far I went on down to the place I wanted to stay, the Diamond Head Beach Resort condo building. It is nice and quiet down there but would have been a longish walk for me to get to stores and places to eat lunch and the sandy beaches.

View of beach from first jetty

I had walked down on the park side and walked back along the beach walk. When I got by the Aquarium I could see several kinds of fish on the plentiful rocks, especially on a sandy area between rocky areas. There were what I was calling Pipe fish, but turned out to be Needle fish, and the Hawaiian state fish, which looks like a modern painting. There were big silver ones and little yellow striped ones-I really need to get a fish guide!

View from first jetty I snorkeled here the 2nd day

I took some photos and a video of a spreading Banyan tree. I think that may be where I got a couple of mosquito bites on my arms. The tree was full of birds and I took the video partly to record their twittering.

I had walked out on one jetty that has a roofed viewing area at the end of it and saw some fish along the jetty wall, then as I walked back there was another narrow jetty with no viewing area at the end. There were some people on it, so I went out to see if it was any better. At first I was mostly taken with the little crabs that skittered around my feet and clung to the side of the jetty. They were so much the same color as the wet rocks that I might have missed them if I hadn't seen the little ones.

I saw quite a variety of fish also, and a man there with his teen children pointed out a large mass of some sort off a ways from where we were standing. He said it was moving around and we wondered if it could be a Lion fish. I didn't realize they would be around so close to the beach, I thought they were more coral reef fish, but it did really look like it could be, even as indistinct as it was through the water. Later I asked a young woman who had been out there if she'd seen any, and she said she'd seen several. On the fish finder card I looked at there was a similar looking fish that was called a Hawaiian Turkey fish, but I've also seen a photo of a Hawaiian Lion fish also, so I'm not sure what the whole story is about that.

Feeding fish and birds on the jetty

Walking back along the jetty, I encountered a man who was feeding the fish the remnants of a sandwich. They were massed below him, and boiling around the bits he threw in. There were also quantities of larger birds standing around that area and some teeny brown ones that would come and land on his hand, and let him feed them. Sometimes they piled on 6 at a time, jumping up on each other's backs trying to get at the food in his hand.

Homeless in Paradise
While orienting myself to the beach I couldn't help but be aware of the ever present homeless population mixed in among the tourists and locals. I noted that picnic shelter number three along the beach seemed to be a homeless gathering spot, with many on the benches and sleeping, and some seated nearby. One Banyan tree with a sheltered center area had had a sleeping quilt spread over its roots that was there the next day too. It looked like a good place to sleep.  When I got down to the end of Kapiolani Park I started to use a bathroom there, but noticed half a dozen men in the area, including one having a sponge bath at a sink on the outside of the building. I decided this wasn't a good place for me to use... Then when I was leaving the condo area I noticed at the base of a fence there was a pile of small bags and cases. I think that was where someone dumped the bags he/she had stolen from the beach and emptied of valuable contents. That let me know I need to be especially careful of what I take to the beach. There are a few of these people begging, but most are not, they are just wandering, sitting, or curled up sleeping somewhere.

Heading back and unpacking
I stopped at a big ABC store on my way back and got an oriental chicken salad, some cut up pineapple, and two 1.5 quarts of bottled water. The water from the tap is warm, flat and tastes not too great. Back at the room I showered, ate lunch, including a chocolate filled puff pastry from the box of pastries Harry left and rested a little before tackling my unpacking. There was plenty of places to put everything. I had brought a hanging sweater organizer and an over the door shoe organizer. With the big closet there was plenty of room to hang the sweater organizer and stash specialized items in it like beach wear. The shoe organizer went over the bathroom door which opens up against the sink. there is little real storage for small items there, no shelves, drawers or medicine cabinet, so all the small items go into the pockets and are right at hand as needed.

Organizing the closet

I set up a charging spot in the closet where there is a plug half way up the wall. I put my big suitcase under it as a shelf to put things on and plugged in a power strip,  Then I went down and got the Wi-fi password and checked mail, etc while watching TV. I was also writing a list of things I needed to get from Walmart or Target. I talked with Harry on the phone about getting to the store and looked up directions to the nearest store, which was a Walmart.

It turned out we went to Safeway instead because he was too tired to find a store he'd never been to. I tried to keep the purchases there to a minimum. They were so expensive, even the little I got was over $35. Even a 70 page spiral notebook was over $4. I later got a similar one at Walmart for $1.00.

We went to Zippys for dinner. I had deep fried Mahi-mahi with rice and macaroni salad and got a little spam snack for later. I'd read about it in the guide book. It is a piece of fried spam on a cake of sticky rice wrapped in sushi seaweed wrap. We also had a slice of Chantilly cake from the bakery there where Harry gets his pastries.

The late dinner and heavy food did a number on me and I had acid reflux later and ended up staying up late sitting up, then sleeping sitting upright until midnight. Note to self: no more heavy dinners!

We slept again without the AC and windows open, but with the white noise machine on.

Aloha from Waikiki

I always like to keep a trip journal, and decided for this extended stay in Oahu that I would keep it here.
Getting There
The only hitch for the flight was the headwinds that delayed us so that we got in 45 minutes late. The Delta jet had two aisles. I was on a window and only had one other person to disturb if I needed to get up. He was a 19 year old from Bremerton, heading over to live with a friend for awhile. He was very pleasant. We both enjoyed watching movies on our personal seat back screens. That is my favorite configuration for flying. Everyone gets to pick their own content from a large list of current movies and TV shows. I can usually find something to watch. This time I watched two movies, Magic in the Moonlight, which was very good, and a movie with Pierce Brosnan and Emma Thompson, a zany European adventure/romance.

I was prepared this time for the gust of warm, moist night air while walking through the outdoor part of the walk to through the terminal to baggage claim. Last time it was such a surprise to find myself on a covered walkway while still in the secure part of the airport. Harry was waiting at the baggage carousel with a lovely lei for me, very fragrant with little white ginger flowers. He had been waiting all that extra time and was very tired and anticipating how tired he would be for work in the morning. We got to the room around 10:30 and to sleep at 11:00. He gets up at five so it was a short night for him.

Just behind the Hyatt Regency, 2 blocks from the beach. 24 rooms

Our Room at the Waikiki Prince Hotel
With no unrealistic expectations for our budget hotel, I was pleasantly surprised at how nice the room is. It has a double and a twin, so it is more spacious than a room with only one bed. The closet is large and as wide as the bathroom, which is helpful for storing the luggage and other extras that will accumulate. All is clean and well kept up, no cracks, mold or peeling paint. The beds are comfortable, the fridge a little bigger than I expected, though it is still pretty small. The bathroom is spacious, and we have a good sized dining table that is a catch spot for all kinds of things. I'm well satisfied at the price point.

Mele Kalikimaka-our tree presents, nativity

If I lean out the lanai I can see the tops of the palms at the end of the street where the beach is, but otherwise the view is all apartment and hotel buildings. The city noise when the windows are open and the AC off  is intrusive for someone like me who lives in a rural spot where a truck idling on the street outside is cause to go to the window to see what is going on. Here there are trucks idling and backing up all day long. At night there are sirens and regular clanks and bangs as if someone is loading metal pieces into the back of a dump truck.. However, with the windows and lanai door closed and the air conditioner going, I can hear very little of the outside world.  We don't hear much through the walls either.

We have a kitchenette also. We will be in this room until December 27th. We will move then for a few days and again on the 30th to a room two floors above this room, which has only one bed, so it is a little smaller. But we can stay in that one the rest of the time.

Our bedroom, looking toward the lanai....

Our 'kitchen' lol...

Dining table in the wide hallway across from the bathroom door

The Everchanging World of Medical/Dietary 'Facts'

Are there things we know for sure about what foods are healthy, and which foods are not, as in the proverbial 'heart attack on a bun' foods? We think so. For years, everyone from the nightly newscaster to Dr. OZ, to your family Dr. or medical specialist can recite the no no's, foods to avoid, foods to eliminate. The information is all backed up by scientific facts, right?

And then out come the latest scientific 'facts' to refute the truths we've been living by for ever-so-long, and it all gets turned on its head. Take eggs for example. Those little evil cholesterol bombs. Better dump those yolks down the drain, and order the egg white McMuffin if you don't want to find yourself keeling over of a heart attack one of these days....How many years has that been the accepted truth?  Except now they're telling us that there is actually something in egg yolks that is protective against heart attack that will raise that healthy HDL, so now, it's one or two a day if you want to protect your heart.Which I think is pretty funny that this was confirmed alongside McDonald's and Burger King just releasing their egg white breakfast sandwiches at the same time.

The problem is, whatever the scientific study, be it ever so well designed, peer reviewed, significant in size and longevity, however well duplicated, and solid, we always go beyond the findings to speculation and hypothesis and then hand out advice based on speculation (and lingering debunked old wisdom) as much as proven conclusions. Such as the egg. We learn that arteries are clogging with cholesterol. So naturally eggs yolks, which are rich in cholesterol, must be contributing to the clogging of arteries. Reduce dietary cholesterol, and improve artery health...yes? Well, no, as noted.

Now, a couple of years after the toppling of the evil egg conspiracy, more icons of the unhealthy diet are being exonerated. Not surprisingly though, each instance of debunking is accompanied by a whole new set of speculations that are attached to new health advice. For example, from the July issue of O magazine, page 64 "The Skinny on Fat"

'nutritionists have..universally recommended avoiding food high in saturated fat....while some studies have supported this..the findings were far from conclusive, and may not have taken into account other dietary factors or the fact that saturated fat can actually raise good (HDL) cholesterol.'

'But now emerging research is shedding new light....' No kidding. The article goes on to describe 'a scientific review of studies involving more than 6000,000 people that found 'no significant link between dietary saturated fat and heart disease-suggesting that we don't, in fact, need to shun foods like red meat, butter, and whole milk for our heart's sake.' 

The article goes on to discuss these several items, but each one can't resist adding the hypothesis at the end, the speculation that seems to be validated as truth by the study results. Then there is the resulting advice that may even ignore the research just described. Just to illustrate, I'll go over each one...

Meat
Fact: The study results-Analysis of 20 studies shows that unprocessed red meat, beef, lamb, pork, in a daily serving of 3.5 oz (or more!) was Not associated with a higher risk of heart disease, but eating 1.8 oz of processed meat (sausage, bacon, lunch meat) were associated with a 42 percent increased risk.

Speculation: Following that we read, 'the main culprit might not be the saturated fat, but rather the high amounts of sodium (which can raise blood pressure)... and preservatives (which may promote arterial hardening)' ...boldface added for illustration purposes.....

Conclusion: 'Sticking to one to two servings of red meat per week shouldn't have a major impact on your heath if you eat well the rest of the time....' Hmmmm.. The conclusion is SO interesting. So the analysis showed that eating unprocessed red meat EVERY Day didn't impact heart disease incidence, but the conclusion wording implies eating red meat is still unhealthy, and the cautious, 'one to two servings a week' also implies daily eating of red meat is dangerous and needs to be limited.

Of course the recommended fish and nuts are great too, but this is a great example of the difficulty experts have letting go of long established 'wisdom' even when faced with new research results.

Whole Milk
Fact: Whole full fat milk is higher in calories, 66 per cup, than nonfat, skim milk, but a study of 19,000 middle aged women found that one serving a day protected against weight gain and low fat milk did not.

Speculation: 'The extra fat in whole milk is satiating and it's possible that we may get fuller on less'
With no information, how do we know the women got fuller on less?
Conclusion: 'Portions still matter, so drink no more than three cups of whole milk per day.'  If the speculation is true, won't amounts be self limiting because the milk is more satiating? I guess this is to advise those of us crazy enough to think if less is good, more is better, to keep us from chugging huge amounts of whole milk a day as a magic pill for weight loss.

Butter-Yay! Butter! and Lard...
Fact: 'Butter and lard are back in favor as natural, minimally processed sources of fat. Lard is actually lower in saturated fat than butter and contains double the amount of hearth healthy monounsaturated fatty acids. 

No speculation, there is no study quoted.

Conclusion: Small serving sizes as part of a balanced diet.

Cheese
Fact: a 2012 study of dairy consumption in 8 European countries showed that those who ate 2 ounces or More! cheese a day had a 12 percent lower risk of developing Diabetes compared with those who were sparing in their cheese consumption.

Speculation: When cheese is fermented it produces good bacteria that may help reduce cholesterol.

Huh? How does reduced cholesterol explain lowered risk of Diabetes?

Conclusion: Cheese keeps unhealthy company with burgers (wait, see meat above...?) so pair it with healthier foods..also, try to eat lower sodium cheese and high flavor cheese so you will eat less..in other words, try to limit that healthy cheese...they seem so afraid their information will send us all on big binges of these foods...

True or False? Men get the Priesthood, because Women get to be Mothers.

Discussions about why women in the LDS church are not ordained to the priesthood have been going on for a long time, certainly longer than I've been alive. The interesting thing is that these discussions in church classes and meetings don't seem to be generated by any feeling among the sisters of actually wanting to be ordained, but rather have the feeling of trying to reassure women that they are valued just as much as men and hold the same esteem in God's eyes and heart.

Men seem uneasy about the topic of men's and women's responsibilities as well, and often seem to go overboard with flowery praise of the sisters, which results in them putting themselves or men in general down and elevating the women as to as what their basic natures and capabilities are in an effort to verbally close that gap. It's not just the brothers either. The sisters, off in our own meetings, will indulge in some half humorous, half serious talk about the frailties of men and the capabilities of women.

In church settings when the topic of men/priesthood, women/? comes up, among other thoughts and explanations, a main rational involves women being mothers. The basic idea put forward is that the ability to bear and be the primary nurturers of children is so important to God that He wants our time and energy to be available for that. It is usually pointed out that partnering with God in creation by bearing a child is something no man can ever do, and that the rearing of healthy faithful children is His most important work, reserved for women with some help from men. 

This can go to the point of making it sound like Priesthood is the consolation prize for men because they can never experience pregnancy and don't have the main task of raising children. To me, as sacred and important as motherhood is, and I totally believe that and have lived my life by that belief, it still feels like this line of reasoning is both incomplete and has the effect of minimizing or marginalizing both men and women in the process.

I also worry that we use this as a quick, shallow explanation because it is hard to delve into important and true principles that go deeper than most of these discussions can go, mostly because the majority of us only partially understand them, and because they are hard to articulate in a sentence or two or even a 40 minute lesson time. 

When those who are pushing for more 'equality' by sharing priesthood ordination with women point out that this is not a valid comparison (IE. men get the priesthood, women get to be mothers) they are making a valid point. It is what I have always thought in these discussions. As much as I value my role as mother, and dedicated the years when my children were still at home to mothering, this line of reasoning doesn't add up. The next logical thought is, 'What about when we are not in our mothering stage? What if we never get to raise children? There are a lot of women in the church who are not currently mothering children, so if that were the Reason, that leaves a lot of women with nothing, while men are active priesthood holders from 12 on, whatever their other circumstances, married, single, father, or childless. 

However, rather than say the solution is to give the priesthood to women, I think we need to look deeper, and to re-evaluate the explanation. It is human nature to want to know why, so if we have something that hasn't been fully explained to our satisfaction, we will use our experience and ability to reason to come up with explanations. If our reasoning seems sound to ourselves, or others reasoning seems sound to us, we may go on to take that as truth. In the church we have some good examples of that. The most striking lately being; 'Why was priesthood ordination withheld from men of African negro descent?' I won't go into this topic, but it turns out reasons were given that attempted to explain the policy that in hindsight were speculation and not true. Recently the LDS.org site published a good history of the issue of ordaining black men to the priesthood that refutes for good the faulty explanations that had been given in the past. This is a good example of how when our understanding increases, myths and untruths are laid to rest. 

The issues of understanding or only partially understanding Priesthood/Women may be resolved the same way. When we discuss this issue we are making some points that are part of the truth and maybe some that are a type of myth reasoned out from things we do understand. As time goes on we may come to understand it more completely than we do now. One thing I have noticed is that this reason is not being used in the recent talks and articles about Priesthood and women that are coming from our general leadership. I'm referring to Elder Oak's talk in the Priesthood session,  the-keys-and-authority-of-the-priesthood and Sister Burton's article in the June Ensign priesthood-power-available-to-all

I think the mind of God is deep, complex, and beyond our understanding. He doesn't reveal all to us, but gives us enough to make decisions on, based on faith and trust. The decisions we make are part of our mortal test. When we don't have complete or satisfying explanations, then our response comes under the heading of faith and obedience. 

This can be what we might call an 'Abrahamic Trial' to some of us. God asked something inexplicable of Abraham, something that would break his heart and went against what he knew about the way God looked at the sacrifice of humans. But he knew he had received a command from the only true God, and he understood enough to know that obedience was the only right choice he could make, whether he understood why or not. So he did it, and though an angel stopped him from the final act, he left us his example to use in our own Abrahamic trials. When God tries us this way, he makes sure we have principles to guide us to do the right thing, even when we don't understand why.  

My main point is that if we are looking for an explanation for this issue, can we agree that saying 'Men get the priesthood, and women get motherhood' may be a faulty comparison, or it may be an incomplete explanation, part of a larger truth that we only partially understand? That doesn't say that the next logical step is to give women the priesthood. To me it says, let's look deeper, let's look at what is currently being said at the general leadership (Priesthood and women leaders) level, and let's take all we can understand in an intellectual way, and a spiritual way, and add faith to that in realizing we probably don't know all of God's reasons. Then if we still feel the explanations we get are not adequate, and our reasoning doesn't cover all our concerns, and we aren't getting full explanations from answers to prayer, then we continue to question, think, study and pray, and we continue to live the gospel, serve, and trust that we will someday understand. In my mind, I leave issues like this 'open' and continue to add and discard ideas as my understanding increases.

What About the 'Uchtdorf Principle'?

Yesterday I followed and contributed to an interesting, thoughtful and thankfully civil thread of discussion on Facebook that prompts my thoughts in this post. 

The post from one of my nephew's wife (is there such a thing as a niece-in-law?) concerned the excommunication of Kate Kelly, how sad it is that it came to this for her, and whether or not excommunication is something Christ would do. (I weighed in that he would, indeed, revelations from Christ in the Doctrine and Covenants are the guidelines for the excommunication and re-baptism policies that exist in the church today.)

Within the discussion another nephew referenced a talk by President Dieter F. Uchtdorf, a member of the governing body of the church at it's highest level in the first presidency. In this talk, which was a call for all to join with us in this church, he was frank that there are some blemishes in church history and some statements and actions by members and leaders that can be sources of doubt. 

The quote in the post went, 'And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members of leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles, or doctrines.'

He goes on to point out that the church is made up of imperfect people and imperfect people make mistakes, and that 'It is unfortunate that some have stumbled because of mistakes made by men. But in spite of this, the eternal truth of the restored gospel found in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is not tarnished, diminished or destroyed.' He then bears witness as an apostle that 'no decision of significance affecting this Church or its members is ever made without earnestly seeking the inspiration, guidance, and approbation of our Eternal Father.....God will not allow His Church to drift from its appointed course...'

Additional points in the discussion were made about what one writer referred to as 'The Uchtdorf Principle', an idea that maybe some would use President Uchtdorf's statement to let us cherry pick the things the leaders say in conference or elsewhere, discarding those we don't like as being the errors of men. If errors can be made, then how do we trust anything we are told? 

There is a principle that governs this dilemma, and it is encompassed by the principles of faith and obedience. Not blind obedience, but faithful obedience, which doesn't rule out continuing to question. Essentially this means that when we don't understand something, when we question what has been asked of us, we seek further understanding, and while seeking understanding we continue to be obedient, even to the things we question. In course of time, either the issue will be clarified, or it will be changed as new understanding comes. The onus is on the leaders. They are accountable to God for what they do and say. If they are in error on something and we are obedient to it, we are not at fault for following their direction. Similarly, when we or they try to explain something we don't understand using limited knowledge, our explanations can be faulty. In due time this will be corrected, but meanwhile we don't choose disobedience just because explanations are not adequate. 

We have a very pertinent case in point that I can refer to.  I lived in Atlanta, Georgia throughout most of the 1960's and had a front row seat to the civil rights movement. Sympathies in our family were firmly on the side of integration and elimination of prejudice and unequal treatment. Being faithful in a church that practiced its own form of exclusion towards black men was very uncomfortable and hard to understand. At the time as far as anyone knew black men had never held the priesthood. Explanations included speculation about spirits who were less valiant before birth being the ones born with black African heritage. Even so, it was general knowledge that the priesthood would be extended to worthy black men at some point in the future.

In spite of a lot of pressure from outside the church, things were quiet within the church, even among black members. As far as I recall, there were no demonstrations, no organized protests or pressure from within. Black members were anxious for a change, but those with testimonies had the faith to continue being active, humble and patient.

Since the historic day when the restriction was lifted there has been a kind of forensic look at why the restriction existed. I saw a documentary a couple of years ago on PBS that explained essentially what the church recently published about how the policy was established. I won't go into all of that, but we understand now that the explanations were faulty and the restriction based on cultural and political situations at the time previous to the civil war and Utah's bid for statehood.

All the things I'm talking about are illustrated here, including the role of modern day revelation in making the change at the right time and leadership being willing to discern and abandon faulty explanations. While understanding is incomplete, faithful obedience is appropriate and can take place alongside continuing questions and doubts. As a teenager I made a conscious choice to put this issue 'on the shelf' with the belief that the time would come when I would understand. And now I do. I believe my faith was justified.Obedience in this case didn't have anything to do with my obeying the restriction, that wasn't in my power....it meant that I would continue to have faith and sustain the leadership of the church and remain an active, contributing member. It also meant that while I kept the feeling that this policy didn't seem right, I didn't become an activist to pressure the church into changing it. I trusted that the leadership were authorized and inspired, and that they would know when the time was right to change it.

As far as the concept of an 'Uchtdorf Principle', knowing that there is sometimes error in idea and action doesn't say to me that I can pick and choose what I'm going to be obedient to or what I have faith in. That is certainly far removed from the point he was trying to make in the talk, that we shouldn't put our members and leaders on such a pedestal that if any of us makes a mistake it casts everything into doubt. I think it boils down to whether or not I believe the church is true and has the guidance and approbation of God through worthy and inspired leaders. If I believe, I will trust enough to be obedient even with the chance that there might be error in there somewhere, and trust that in a true church with inspired leaders, corrections will eventually be made to any errors as soon as they are discovered to be error.

The LDS Disciplinary Council-Loving or Punitive?

I first started trying to learn about and understand church disciplinary councils when I was in my mid 20s. I was living in Southern Germany at the time and attending the local military branch. We shared a meeting house with the Augsburg German Ward. 

I was waiting in the hallway outside the presidency offices and council room for a meeting with my branch president, who was finishing up with a disciplinary meeting scheduled prior to my appointment. I could hear the murmur of voices, and eventually a sister from the branch who was serving there in the military came out and walked by me. I have no idea what the problem was, or what the decision was, but I went away troubled by the reality that church membership can be suspended or revoked. I saw it as harsh and punitive, and worried about the effect punishment like that would have on someone struggling with weaknesses. 

Since then I have come to a much different viewpoint. Although the loving nature of a council is probably greater or lesser according to what is in the hearts of the leaders who conduct it, there is no question in my mind that it is intended to be administered in love and concern for the individual who is being considered for judgement, and I would speculate that it almost always is done in a spirit of love, concern, and regret for negative actions that are decided upon. 

There are two main factors that form my opinion.

First
The goal is to bring a focus on the things in the life of the person brought before the council that are causing concern so that they realize exactly what they are doing wrong, why it is wrong and serious enough to jeopardize full membership, and offer a chance to turn these actions around so that full membership can be retained or regained. The objective is to bring that person back into harmony with the gospel and allow them to repent and move forward in their progression again.

 In some cases the restriction or revocation of membership is part of a penalty required as part of the repentance process and allows that person to 'pay the price' and prove themselves faithful before being restored to full membership again. Often the council action is not initiated until the person comes to their bishop wanting to resolve the sin and complete a repentance process. That might be the case for members who decide to live together before marriage. No action will be taken until they express a desire to clear this sin from their lives. I knew one sister who had carried the burden of having had an abortion for many years. When she finally went in and confessed it, she was excommunicated because of the nature of the offense, but encouraged to continue to faithfully attend and live a righteous life for a period of time, after which she could be re-baptized, which she did. 

Second
This is my understanding. When someone is committing or has committed a serious sin, or is in rebellion or defiance against church doctrine and leadership, affiliated with apostate groups, or otherwise standing in opposition to the church and even trying to gain support and agreement from others, and is not repentant or willing to change what they are doing or promoting, then it is actually a kindness to release them from covenants they have made. When we make covenants like baptism and temple covenants we become held to a higher standard by the Lord and there are eternal consequences for breaking those covenants. When someone is excommunicated they are no longer liable for breaking those covenants and no longer have to have that weight of sin to pay for after this life.  They are also not eligible for certain blessings, but serious sin, rebellion and apostacy would eliminate those blessings anyway. 

The opportunity to repent and return is always there too, so someone who has been subject to church discipline always has an open door waiting to welcome them back in and they can re-make covenants and be eligible for the blessings again. (Not sure if this applies to first degree murder though, I'm not current on that)

Certainly, to the unrepentant, being disciplined in any way can feel punitive no matter how much love is expressed by those who are making the decisions. Someone can be so certain that they are right and the church is wrong that they feel the judgement and action of the council is wrong and that hardens their feelings against the leadership of the church as they see themselves as wrongly judged. 

Case in point is the quote I read today in the Salt Lake News Tribune from Kate kelly, whose council has been held but the decision not made yet. She says, "I strangely enough feel a lot of hope...because it's not too late for them to do the right thing." My question is, what is the right thing? My opinion is that the right thing is for them to carefully weigh out everything that has been presented before them in their own minds, decide what they think about her possibly being in apostasy enough to be excommunicated or otherwise restricted in her membership, and then pray about what they have decided. That is the pattern we have been given for receiving revelation from God. Then, they should come together and see if their thoughts and impressions from the spirit give them a consensus of what course of action the Lord is in harmony with. This is our checks and balances. More than one person deciding, and taking it to the Lord for confirmation, repeating the process until they feel the approval of the spirit confirming their decision. 

What seems 'hopeful' to me is that this council is taking extra time to get confirmation by personal revelation and mutual agreement before they make a decision. A faithful member of the church has the faith, Knowledge and trust (see my previous post) to be humble enough to take correction, and to trust and be obedient to the will of the Lord. She has the option to let go of deciding what is right or wrong for the council to do and seek in humility with an open mind herself to see what the Lord approves of. It is difficult to let go of a cause when there is so much gratifying warmth and support coming from followers, and I'm not surprised that she is not considering that. The only thing is, that having decided that the church leaders are wrong not to ordain women to the priesthood, and being unwilling to budge from that goal, she is proving the point that she no longer sustains church leadership. By not being willing to stop promoting her views to recruit followers and take down her web site, she proves it even more. She states clearly in her letter to the council deciding this matter that she will not comply with any of their conditions for retaining her full membership, and in that, she has proved their case against her. 

Personally, I feel confident that the decision made about her membership, whatever it is, will be made not just by personal opinions, but by guidance and confirmation of the spirit and that it will be correct for her at this time. Correction by a loving father in heaven is not a punitive thing. It is an invitation to learn and align with his superior knowledge of what is best for us and lovingly sacrifice our own will to his so that we can hopefully go back and be with him forever. Not trusting Priesthood leaders to help with that is a significant clue to what is wrong in this situation.