I am a proud Mantite. Or is it "man-tight"? "Mantise"? "Mantovian"? What ever you want to call me, I am from Manti, a small town in central Utah. While we obviously struggle to find a suitable demonym, virtually everything else about the place is perfect. One of Manti's unique attractions is the Manti LDS Temple. Situated on a hill at the north end of town, the temple stands as a beautiful symbol of the pioneers who built it (it is the fifth LDS temple constructed), and of the same principles for which the city still stands. There are many other benefits to the temple: having a place to stroll on a nice Sunday afternoon, easily accessible temple ordinances, its service as a welcoming sentinel when you come home after a long trip, and as the venue for the yearly Mormon Miracle Pageant.
"The Pageant" as we affectionately call it, is a month of excitement and fun (as well as stress, if you ask certain parents). Our entire town mobilizes with others from around Sanpete County and beyond to provide the 1,000 cast members, numerous stage crew, dozens of ushers, nightly security guards, and many other logistical positions required. It takes a lot of people, time and preparation to welcome the 15,000 visitors who come for the pageant - 15,000 per night, for nearly two weeks. To put that into perspective, that's roughly five times the population of the town, all rolling in on the highway each evening around 6 o'clock. You can see why those growing up in Manti would love this perennial transformation.
Unfortunately, not all of these guests come to enjoy the pageant's spirituality and entertainment. Others come from far and wide in order to save the poor souls of those who are duped into believing the "false doctrines" of the Mormons. Crowds gather on the streets as cross wielding men on soap boxes brandish signs denouncing Joseph Smith and cry repentance on the streets of our little town. And every year, you can expect to hear the same advice from parents, ecclesiastical leaders and friends: don't go argue with the protesters.
This advice, as usual for advice from Church leaders to avoid certain opposing doctrines, comes under fire from both Mormons and non-Mormons who would have us be "more open-minded."
This criticism is seldom well-founded.
In the case of the pageant, the admonition to avoid the hollering protesters is especially legitimate, since I've only very rarely seen a civil exchange of ideas taking place on the cordoned off streets, but rather angry attacks, vicious personal challenges, and absurd "Bible-bashing." Neither party leaves happy or any closer to God. Granted, the lack of value in these exchanges is obvious even to most critics of the pervasive LDS tendency to avoid non-LDS opinions, but they still often accuse Mormon ecclesiastical leaders and opinionists of attempting to shield their membership from opposing views which could shake their faith - presumably because the members would "see the light."
I wholeheartedly agree that a lack of understanding others' viewpoints and feelings is a core reason for many of the banes of society - notably violence, hate and inconsiderate behavior, for example. We need to be more understanding and informed about other people who are not like us. However, I would contend that the idea of avoiding opinions which not only oppose ours but seek only to convince us of the error of our own position is a reasonable position, and is not limited to our religion ideas.
The idea is easier to understand if we compare it to something we all know from our modern age: "yo mamma" jokes. These jokes, which insult the listener by way of their mother, are a form of what is termed a "maternal insult." Maternal insults have been around since antiquity - the Wikipedia article on the subject lists an example from the Bible (2 Kings 9:22) and Shakespeare (Timon of Athens, Act I, Scene 1). These insults are timeless and nearly universal because they play on the virtually ubiquitous phenomenon of "filial piety." That is, it works because nearly everyone loves their parents - particularly their mother - and thinks that they are good people.
You probably wouldn't listen to me very long if I were to walk up to you and presumptuously exclaim, "your mother is a terrible person, and here's why!"
Does it matter if their claims are true? No, not really. I love my mother, but I'm sure that if you really tried, you probably could find something negative to say about her, especially if you looked far enough into the past. I'm guessing your mother is the same. I'm also willing to bet that you, like me, don't really care, and would rather not know every rowdy thing your mother may have done or said in her crazy years anyway, because the fact remains that you were raised by an angelic figure who loves you with all her heart, taught you everything important you'll ever need to know, and sacrificed everything to give you life. And that opinion isn't going to change. So, if you feel the need to inform me otherwise, please ignore that need, because your efforts are not appreciated. But who would actually do that? It's just plain rude!
Similarly, no matter how many silly things Church leaders have said over the years, no matter what contradictory opinions there may have been or how imperfect the Lord's human servants invariably are, and no matter how many doctrines and policies I cannot fully explain, I will not be abandoning my testimony of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ or my love of the church I believe to be His. I cherish them, and am grateful to them, for they have brought me as much happiness as has my mother. So, again, if someone feels the need to inform me that this belief is, in fact, as deceiving as he thinks my mother is, I hope he isn't foolish enough to expect me to read his books and pamphlets deriding it or listen to him argue.
Now, back to our hypothetical situation: you've turned the mother hater away, but, realizing that he can't convince you of your mother's filthy nature, he begins to spread his message among your friends, children and neighbors. What is your reaction? I'm willing to guess that it may be more violent than the reaction of those ecclesiastical leaders who advise their followers not to listen to protestors. Yet, the principle is the same. They love the beliefs which are under attack, and it is clearly not just for anyone to persistently seek to defame them, their comments true or otherwise. So, they warn all they can that this belief will be under attack and they'd best close their ears. Why should we expect any other response?
Clearly, we need to engage in civil discussions about our deepest beliefs and values, including our religious ones. But it must be done civilly, and with mutual respect. I also believe there to be room for proselyting efforts: truth can only be known if it is shared, and every religion has the right to attempt to share that which they love. These efforts must not defile or abuse the closely held beliefs of others, however. There is, after all, a vast difference between an interlocutor who sincerely states "my mother is an amazing person, and you should get to know her," and one who insists with any degree of civility "your mother is worthless."
Saturday, November 19, 2016
Tuesday, November 15, 2016
8. Effectiveness in a Blended Learning Environment - Part I: Wastes in the memorization phase
With the advent of modern technology and the resulting increase in the average person's standard of living, information has become ubiquitous. If I'm holding my smartphone in my hand, I can call its attention by simply uttering "OK, Google" (iPhone users will recognize "Hey, Siri"), then ask any question I want. Assuming there's a relatively good answer to the question somewhere on the internet, Google will respond in kind, voicing a brief explanation. Otherwise, she'll at least google it and give me a starting place for my own search (why Google's female, I don't know. She is).
The possibilities for learning go much deeper than this though.
Let us consider "education" as the product of two factors: memorization (the assimilation of information - numbers, rules, dates, names, whatever) and understanding (a deeper comprehension of a system or theory, signaled by the ability to make predictions about its implications and utilize the knowledge to solve problems and create solutions). That is, it's one thing to be able to say "adverbs modify verbs," but quite another to be able to label all of the adverbs in a paragraph of text, or craft a rich Italian sentence using them correctly. The first is quite useless; the second, theoretically better, but still not terribly helpful in real life; the last alone is education profitably put to good use.
The problem is that different people have different aptitudes for different subjects or learning phases, and certain individuals seem to learn faster than others across all subjects and learning phases.
Traditionally, this disparity led to huge wastes of potential. Let's consider the most extreme example.
Before the invention of the printing press, books were hard to come by. The average person didn't have access to learning materials. If they wanted to learn, they listened, memorized and understood through repetition of the same. Think of pupils sitting at the feet of Plato, absorbing his every word and seeking to memorize and understand. Some were pretty good at it; the average person obviously wasn't, because they stayed in their fields tending their crops.
Imagine a modern math class learning times tables through this method. A teacher stands in front of a dozen students, holding the only copy of the twelve times tables chart up for all to see, and they repeat them all, over and over again, in an effort to memorize and understand.
Assuming that they are all beginners, they all are learning in the beginning, and all are profiting at least in some part from the experience. At a certain point though, those students who are good at the memorization of numbers, sequences, or words will master the chart. The moment that that student has mastered the chart, his utility of being in class is greatly diminished, and the utility of the less to the class collectively is likewise lessened. So what are the options?
The possibilities for learning go much deeper than this though.
Let us consider "education" as the product of two factors: memorization (the assimilation of information - numbers, rules, dates, names, whatever) and understanding (a deeper comprehension of a system or theory, signaled by the ability to make predictions about its implications and utilize the knowledge to solve problems and create solutions). That is, it's one thing to be able to say "adverbs modify verbs," but quite another to be able to label all of the adverbs in a paragraph of text, or craft a rich Italian sentence using them correctly. The first is quite useless; the second, theoretically better, but still not terribly helpful in real life; the last alone is education profitably put to good use.
The problem is that different people have different aptitudes for different subjects or learning phases, and certain individuals seem to learn faster than others across all subjects and learning phases.
Traditionally, this disparity led to huge wastes of potential. Let's consider the most extreme example.
Before the invention of the printing press, books were hard to come by. The average person didn't have access to learning materials. If they wanted to learn, they listened, memorized and understood through repetition of the same. Think of pupils sitting at the feet of Plato, absorbing his every word and seeking to memorize and understand. Some were pretty good at it; the average person obviously wasn't, because they stayed in their fields tending their crops.
Imagine a modern math class learning times tables through this method. A teacher stands in front of a dozen students, holding the only copy of the twelve times tables chart up for all to see, and they repeat them all, over and over again, in an effort to memorize and understand.
Assuming that they are all beginners, they all are learning in the beginning, and all are profiting at least in some part from the experience. At a certain point though, those students who are good at the memorization of numbers, sequences, or words will master the chart. The moment that that student has mastered the chart, his utility of being in class is greatly diminished, and the utility of the less to the class collectively is likewise lessened. So what are the options?
- The class can continue to drill the same thing, because the rest of the students still need it. The student(s) who have it down are basically wasting their time. They could leave, they could stay. Either way, their educational experience is stagnating. These individuals are wasting time in their education as long as they are relearning what they already know, assuming the increase in understanding is negligible from the repeated drilling.
- The class can move on to properties of multiplication. The student who was ready to move on continues to profit; the other students may or may not. They will struggle, because the more advanced principles build on the ones they don't have fully memorized nor understood. Some will manage to stay afloat; others will drown and stop learning. The potential of the drowned is wasted.
Sure, it's an imperfect picture with logical holes, but the basic logical model remains. Seems like a lose-lose situation for the education institution.
Fast forward from Plato's time to the present day. A quick Google search of "learn times tables" yields 6.2 million results. The first result is "http://www.topmarks.co.uk/maths-games/7-11-years/times-tables," let's hit that. Wow, it's a site with 9 different gamified methods for learning times tables.
Each student in our math classroom now has their own digital "teacher and book" (which is far more effective then the "teacher and book" method, but that's outside the scope of this topic). Now, each student works independently, and each is allowed to allocate just enough of their valuable time to learning the topic to not waste time in over learning, but no one runs out of time, either.
No time lost for the fast, no potential lost for the slow.
So, the question is, why do we continue to enroll thousands of students in an educational facility where we do group drilling activities where everyone is forced to spend the same amount of time on learning the same thing? Unless all of our students are exactly the same - and they're not - we're knowing accepting an educational institution which creates waste.
To be continued.
7. The Immortality of Writing
The other day in Italian class we were discussing verbs. Verbs are one of the most beautiful parts of any language, in part because they don't usually translate directly. That is, there is almost always some nuance of meaning that is lost when you translate the verb. Learning to speak another language gives you the opportunity to put yourself into a new mindset and see the world in a different way... More on that in another post.
Back on track. We were studying the different uses of the simplest of tenses: present indicative. "I say," "you say," "he says," etc. While the Italian present indicative is used on several ways that the English equivalent is not, there is one interesting use that they share: providing second hand accounts of written works. That is, such as in the following sentence:
"In his famous book, The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith makes the case for an 'Invisible Hand,' and therefore for free market economies."
Who is the subject in that sentence? Adam Smith. For those who are wondering, Adam Smith was an influential pioneer of economics.1 He published The Wealth of Nations in 1776, and it is still an well known and commonly referenced book on economics.
What is the verb tense? Present indicative: "Adam Smith makes." But he's dead. How can a dead man act in the present?
I've always known that we could use the grammar like this, but I guess it was the first time that it really hit me that writing things down is the best way to immortality known to humankind, because it's the best way to influence future generations. Sure, you can influence them through your actions now, in shaping their environment. But only like this will your intellect, your being, communicate directly with theirs.2
Turns out that I'm not the first one to have thought of this (shucks, another non-original idea). The writer of The Immortality of Writers proved himself right when 3,000 years ago he said, "Man decays, his corpse is dust. All his kin have perished; But a book makes him remembered through the mouth of its reciter. Better is a book than a well built house."3
What significance does this have for me? Well, not a lot. I don't have a huge desire to be immortally dead, and I don't particularly like writing anyway. But, I think it does give reason to pause and think about the power and duration of everything that we write (or record), and perhaps another good reason to keep a journal.
1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Smith ↩
2 OK, not quite. Artistic representations of an artist's viewpoint predate any written writing system, and one could argue that a picture is worth a thousand words. And with the modern era of video cameras and audio recordings, there is no argument that an audio/video recording of someone actually speaking is far more effective than their written words alone. But, for most of human existence, writing has been the best immortality elixir available, and even in today's modern era it is yet easier and natural for many of us to write. ↩
3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Immortality_of_Writers ↩
Back on track. We were studying the different uses of the simplest of tenses: present indicative. "I say," "you say," "he says," etc. While the Italian present indicative is used on several ways that the English equivalent is not, there is one interesting use that they share: providing second hand accounts of written works. That is, such as in the following sentence:
"In his famous book, The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith makes the case for an 'Invisible Hand,' and therefore for free market economies."
Who is the subject in that sentence? Adam Smith. For those who are wondering, Adam Smith was an influential pioneer of economics.1 He published The Wealth of Nations in 1776, and it is still an well known and commonly referenced book on economics.
What is the verb tense? Present indicative: "Adam Smith makes." But he's dead. How can a dead man act in the present?
I've always known that we could use the grammar like this, but I guess it was the first time that it really hit me that writing things down is the best way to immortality known to humankind, because it's the best way to influence future generations. Sure, you can influence them through your actions now, in shaping their environment. But only like this will your intellect, your being, communicate directly with theirs.2
Turns out that I'm not the first one to have thought of this (shucks, another non-original idea). The writer of The Immortality of Writers proved himself right when 3,000 years ago he said, "Man decays, his corpse is dust. All his kin have perished; But a book makes him remembered through the mouth of its reciter. Better is a book than a well built house."3
What significance does this have for me? Well, not a lot. I don't have a huge desire to be immortally dead, and I don't particularly like writing anyway. But, I think it does give reason to pause and think about the power and duration of everything that we write (or record), and perhaps another good reason to keep a journal.
1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Smith ↩
2 OK, not quite. Artistic representations of an artist's viewpoint predate any written writing system, and one could argue that a picture is worth a thousand words. And with the modern era of video cameras and audio recordings, there is no argument that an audio/video recording of someone actually speaking is far more effective than their written words alone. But, for most of human existence, writing has been the best immortality elixir available, and even in today's modern era it is yet easier and natural for many of us to write. ↩
3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Immortality_of_Writers ↩
Sunday, November 13, 2016
6. First Semester Impact
On Wednesday we turned in our Writing 150 research papers. Sweet relief. So, naturally, we had to begin yet another paper in order to stifle our happiness.
Our new paper is a personal narrative on a story of a time that we changed. Since it has to be 3 or 4 pages long, I assume that the story of how I got dressed this morning is going to count.
Today's blog prompt helps me understand better what the paper prompt means: "How has your world view changed since the beginning of the semester?" Apparently it is required that we go a little deeper than just our wardrobe.
Since I got here to BYU, I know I've changed, but I'm not sure if that changes how I view the world. I think this signals I need to view the world a bit more and engage in more metacognitive pondering.
Our new paper is a personal narrative on a story of a time that we changed. Since it has to be 3 or 4 pages long, I assume that the story of how I got dressed this morning is going to count.
Today's blog prompt helps me understand better what the paper prompt means: "How has your world view changed since the beginning of the semester?" Apparently it is required that we go a little deeper than just our wardrobe.
Since I got here to BYU, I know I've changed, but I'm not sure if that changes how I view the world. I think this signals I need to view the world a bit more and engage in more metacognitive pondering.
Friday, November 11, 2016
5. Personal Narrative Brainstorming
When I think of how I've changed in life, I can't think of many specific time periods, events, or things which caused me to change. But if there are two times I've changed, it was either middle school, or my mission.
There was one period in my mission when I and my world view perhaps changed more drastically than at other times in the mission, and that was when I was in Pistoia. I'll take this period of my life as an example.
Place
The time of year is spring in Italy. Cool weather, dark skies, humid but crisp.
My companion and I lived in Pistoia, on the second floor of an apartment.
I had the most time to think while we were on trains between Pistoia and Prato.
Not very clean. Pretty dirty. Beautiful Italian countryside outside the windows. Many people from all walks of life circulating around me.
The beautiful town of Carmignano; Prato Cathedral steps; the dirty park in front of Prato train station, thick with prostitutes while feather-hatted alpini look on with their fully automatic rifles.
People
Me. Learning to lead as a missionary. Changing my view of the world.
My companions were Anziano Lott and Anziano Greene.
We were teaching a) crazy Italians b) refugee Nigerians and Ghanaians. Both types contributed to my world view "changes." The spiritual maladies of sadness and melancholy assailed the majority of the people around us, and the spiritually ill ignored the messengers of healing, as I perceived us. Then there were the poorest, most scarred people I'd ever met and hopefully ever will meet as I tried to teach our African brothers. It was a sort of sad period.
Anziano Lott is always upbeat and faithful. Resilient.
Anziano Greene is a new missionary, still quiet and hesitant.
Plot
- I arrive in Pistoia as senior companion and district leader.
- I became a missionary who led, was proactive, and confident.
- I really began teaching refugees for the first time.
- I got a new companion, Elder Greene, who I was training. More growth.
- We teach even more refugees, and I learn to understand them better.
- Our Italian investigators are a) crazy or b) spiteful against God.
- We meet the Bishop (?) of the Duomo di Prato, and I realize how far gone the world really is.
- I get over it?
Conflict
How did I see things differently as a result of what happened? What things or people seem different to you?
- I came to understand that spiritual/emotional poverty is far more of a plague than economic, even more.
- I cannot base my happiness entirely on others' actions.
Result
This experience really did influence my world view a lot. Rather, my mission did, and this part of my mission was an especially strong part. I could easily write about what I learned there.
However, I will struggle to make it into a personal narrative. How can I represent 2 years in 3 pages of dialog? How about 2 transfers? Oh, boy.
Sunday, October 16, 2016
4. General Conference Rhetoric
I love general conference. Watching 10 hours of prophets, apostles and other Church leaders give talks is fantastically edifying (seriously though, no sarcasm intended). Typically, though, when I'm watch general conference, analyzing the rhetors' strategies is not high on my list of learning strategies. However, because my mind is being expanded by my university experience, I had to put on my Writing 150 cap and look out for a talk that exhibited some rhetorical technique.
Luckily for me, I was able to dedicate my attention to other strategies after the first talk, because the opening discourse of the Saturday morning session was a prime specimen, not to mention a fantastic talk by all other metrics. It was given by President Uchtdorf, a member of the first presidency of the Church, and thus an orator who enjoys natural ethos by virtue of his office. However, there are other aspects of his stye which further add to the ethos which, to me, is the bed rock of his rhetor.
First, President Uchtdorf is from Germany, not the USA. He has a different background than the typical general authority. He represents diversity, equality, and internationality in a Church which is led by a small group of American men (many of whom are not only American, but Utahn!). An aside: I in no way mean that this is an "American" or "Utah" church. I am quite proud of the fact that the majority of Church membership lives outside of the United States and is well represented in so many areas of the world. I love our international brothers and sisters and pray that the restored gospel will continue to reach new areas of the world. I would anticipate that being an "international" general authority will become the norm, rather than the exception in coming decades.
For now, however, President Uchtdorf represents a minority, and at least from my perspective, it builds his ethos as a rhetor.
President Uchtdorf is also fond of story telling, and this talk is no exception, though he refrains from telling as many aviation stories as we all know he'd like to. The two main personal experiences he share are his learning struggles with technology and his attempts to share the gospel.
The former casts President Uchtdorf in a very human light. Despite being one of only 15 people on the planet to whom God has entrusted possession of all contemporary priesthood keys, President Uchtdorf still has struggles which we all can identify with on a daily basis. We see him as a human, not as a robot or as some type of strangely and totally infallible spiritual being. Because we can identify with him, we trust him and are put at ease. At the same time, we see Presidennt Uchtdorf as a seventy year old man who has, despite all odds, learned to use "an email address, a Twitter account, and a Facebook page," and "owns a smartphone, a tablet, a laptop, and a digital camera." By beginning with this experience, President Uchtdorf prepares us to more effectively receive the rest of his message.
The second story I'll mention (sharing the gospel) lends him ethos because it portrays him as a missionary in a normal setting. We further identify with him and his missionary struggles, and admire him for his efforts.
While the ethos alone does not lead to any action or spiritual experience (we don't listen to general conference just so we can admire Church leadership!) it does enable President Uchtdorf to bring ethos and logos together as he reminds us of the Plan of Salvation of our God in order to edify and encourage his audience to be more grateful and appreciative of God's love as we strive every day to become more like Him. And that is why we listen to general conference.
Luckily for me, I was able to dedicate my attention to other strategies after the first talk, because the opening discourse of the Saturday morning session was a prime specimen, not to mention a fantastic talk by all other metrics. It was given by President Uchtdorf, a member of the first presidency of the Church, and thus an orator who enjoys natural ethos by virtue of his office. However, there are other aspects of his stye which further add to the ethos which, to me, is the bed rock of his rhetor.
First, President Uchtdorf is from Germany, not the USA. He has a different background than the typical general authority. He represents diversity, equality, and internationality in a Church which is led by a small group of American men (many of whom are not only American, but Utahn!). An aside: I in no way mean that this is an "American" or "Utah" church. I am quite proud of the fact that the majority of Church membership lives outside of the United States and is well represented in so many areas of the world. I love our international brothers and sisters and pray that the restored gospel will continue to reach new areas of the world. I would anticipate that being an "international" general authority will become the norm, rather than the exception in coming decades.
For now, however, President Uchtdorf represents a minority, and at least from my perspective, it builds his ethos as a rhetor.
President Uchtdorf is also fond of story telling, and this talk is no exception, though he refrains from telling as many aviation stories as we all know he'd like to. The two main personal experiences he share are his learning struggles with technology and his attempts to share the gospel.
The former casts President Uchtdorf in a very human light. Despite being one of only 15 people on the planet to whom God has entrusted possession of all contemporary priesthood keys, President Uchtdorf still has struggles which we all can identify with on a daily basis. We see him as a human, not as a robot or as some type of strangely and totally infallible spiritual being. Because we can identify with him, we trust him and are put at ease. At the same time, we see Presidennt Uchtdorf as a seventy year old man who has, despite all odds, learned to use "an email address, a Twitter account, and a Facebook page," and "owns a smartphone, a tablet, a laptop, and a digital camera." By beginning with this experience, President Uchtdorf prepares us to more effectively receive the rest of his message.
The second story I'll mention (sharing the gospel) lends him ethos because it portrays him as a missionary in a normal setting. We further identify with him and his missionary struggles, and admire him for his efforts.
While the ethos alone does not lead to any action or spiritual experience (we don't listen to general conference just so we can admire Church leadership!) it does enable President Uchtdorf to bring ethos and logos together as he reminds us of the Plan of Salvation of our God in order to edify and encourage his audience to be more grateful and appreciative of God's love as we strive every day to become more like Him. And that is why we listen to general conference.
Friday, October 14, 2016
3. Research Paper Initial Research
In my Writing 150 class, we are writing research papers. The assignment is to find a story from our family history, develop a research question around it, and research it.
I initially chose to research the missions of my great-great-great-grandfather, Simon Christensen, who emigrated from Denmark after his first mission but later returned on two subsequent missions. As I researched, however, I because more and more curious about Simon's family.
Simon Christensen was born on August 13, 1846 in Bindslev, Hjorring, Denmark, to Christen Simonsen, of nearby Tversted and Ane Jensen of Bindslev. Four years later, on October 27, 1850, Christen died, leaving Ane alone to care for their three children: Simon (age 4), Marie (age 2), and Christen, who according to FamilySearch data was born the day before his father's death.
I was immediately curious about what my grandmother did with her three young children. I have done some research among my family, but I have so far not found record of Ane's story. Did she continue life as a widow? Remarry? Move back in with her parents? With her late husband's parents? There is nothing to suggest an answer to any of these questions.
My curiosity was further piqued when I reviewed the story of Simon's conversion to the LDS faith, which I had read in conjunction with the stories of his missions.
Hjorring is a very sparsely populated and agricultural area even today (Bindslev, for example had a population of 1,101 in 2014). Simon began working on a neighboring farm when he was 17 (roughly 1864). This in itself brings new questions. Did the Christensens have a farm? What about Ane's parents? Had she been managing the farm that Christen may have left with her at his death? If any of these answers are true, why did Simon leave the family farm in order to work?
During his time there, Simon met his first Mormons: neighbors to the farm where he was working. There was much opposition to the new religion at the time, but the family that owned the farm where Simon worked were open enough to listen to them present their new religion. With time, Simon came to accept their doctrine as the true gospel of Jesus Christ, and was baptized in June of 1867. The fact that Simon was also involved in the conversations between his employer and their neighbors leads me to believe that he was also living with them. Otherwise, I find it unlikely that he would have been present during the time that they would have been talking about it - probably on Sundays or during any leisure time. This is also supported by the fact that no other member of Simon's family was baptized.
Only two months later, Simon was called to serve a mission for his new faith, which he did for the next 4 years. At the conclusion of his mission, he barely got enough money together to travel from his mission field in Alborg to Copenhagen, and used loaned money to board a ship bound for America.
This makes it seem unlikely to me that he returned home to his family, or had much contact with them.
My research question at this point remains unclear. There are several things I'd like to know: did Ane remarry? How did she survive as a widow? Did Simon stay in contact with them? Were they angry because he joined the Church? Did he ever see them again during his subsequent missions?
I initially chose to research the missions of my great-great-great-grandfather, Simon Christensen, who emigrated from Denmark after his first mission but later returned on two subsequent missions. As I researched, however, I because more and more curious about Simon's family.
Simon Christensen was born on August 13, 1846 in Bindslev, Hjorring, Denmark, to Christen Simonsen, of nearby Tversted and Ane Jensen of Bindslev. Four years later, on October 27, 1850, Christen died, leaving Ane alone to care for their three children: Simon (age 4), Marie (age 2), and Christen, who according to FamilySearch data was born the day before his father's death.
I was immediately curious about what my grandmother did with her three young children. I have done some research among my family, but I have so far not found record of Ane's story. Did she continue life as a widow? Remarry? Move back in with her parents? With her late husband's parents? There is nothing to suggest an answer to any of these questions.
My curiosity was further piqued when I reviewed the story of Simon's conversion to the LDS faith, which I had read in conjunction with the stories of his missions.
Hjorring is a very sparsely populated and agricultural area even today (Bindslev, for example had a population of 1,101 in 2014). Simon began working on a neighboring farm when he was 17 (roughly 1864). This in itself brings new questions. Did the Christensens have a farm? What about Ane's parents? Had she been managing the farm that Christen may have left with her at his death? If any of these answers are true, why did Simon leave the family farm in order to work?
During his time there, Simon met his first Mormons: neighbors to the farm where he was working. There was much opposition to the new religion at the time, but the family that owned the farm where Simon worked were open enough to listen to them present their new religion. With time, Simon came to accept their doctrine as the true gospel of Jesus Christ, and was baptized in June of 1867. The fact that Simon was also involved in the conversations between his employer and their neighbors leads me to believe that he was also living with them. Otherwise, I find it unlikely that he would have been present during the time that they would have been talking about it - probably on Sundays or during any leisure time. This is also supported by the fact that no other member of Simon's family was baptized.
Only two months later, Simon was called to serve a mission for his new faith, which he did for the next 4 years. At the conclusion of his mission, he barely got enough money together to travel from his mission field in Alborg to Copenhagen, and used loaned money to board a ship bound for America.
This makes it seem unlikely to me that he returned home to his family, or had much contact with them.
My research question at this point remains unclear. There are several things I'd like to know: did Ane remarry? How did she survive as a widow? Did Simon stay in contact with them? Were they angry because he joined the Church? Did he ever see them again during his subsequent missions?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)