Love Never Vanishes: Moroni 7 in Finnish

On a recent social media post, I shared some verses from the Book of Mormon that struck me in Finnish more than they ever had in English. I promised to explain, so this is a bit of that.

I think one of many reasons that the Finnish speaks to me in scripture is that while the text is, for the most part, more formal Finnish than you’d hear in casual conversation, it is still modern Finnish. Written Finnish is relatively new, historically speaking, while the English of the Book of Mormon is more like the King James Bible, which was published some 400 years ago, so the language and sentence structure is more in line with what you’d find in a Shakespeare play.

Add to that the fact of words’ meanings changing even in the last 200 years, and you’ve got a situation where the English won’t necessarily be as clear or powerful to the 21^st century reader.

Finnish as a language tends to be direct and to the point. Some would call it blunt. Combine that clarity with modern language, and for me, that equates greater understanding.

One small example: When I first began reading the Book of Mormon in Finnish, I was surprised at how often a verse began with the word “katso” (“look”). Then I glanced at the English and realized that “behold” was in the English at those same spots.

And yes, “behold” does means “look,” but I’d never thought of it as an instruction. I’d seen the old-fashioned English word so many times that it had become almost invisible, a transition word that really didn’t mean anything.

Now, “behold” means something different to me: that the writer wants the reader to pay attention, and they’re saying something important. “Look!”

A caveat: I am not an expert in Finnish. While I attended public school in Helsinki for three years and became pretty fluent, that was over 30 years ago, and only in the last year or so have I really be studying to reclaim the language. The translations and notes below are my personal understanding. A native, or anyone with a better handle on the language, might disagree with my interpretations.

Moroni 7

The passage I quoted in the social media post is near the end of the Book of Mormon, written by Mormon’s son, Moroni. Some of the wording mirrors what Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 13:4–10. We’ll be looking at the English and Finnish of Moroni Chapter 7, verses 44–48.

Verse 44

In English:

If so, his faith and hope is vain, for none is acceptable before God, save the meek and lowly in heart; and if a man be meek and lowly in heart, and confesses by the power of the Holy Ghost that Jesus is the Christ, he must needs have charity; for if he have not charity he is nothing; wherefore he must needs have charity.

Breaking it down: English first, Finnish next, then my alternate translations/notes:

If so, his faith and hope is vain, for none is acceptable before God,

Muuten hänen uskonsa ja toivonsa on turhaa, sillä kukaan ei ole otollinen Jumalan edessä,

“None is” is translated as “kukaan ei ole” (“no one is”), which makes perfect sense. Moroni is clearly talking about people, not things. To me, “no one” sounds more personal than “none is.”

“Acceptable” is translated at “otollinen,” which also means “favorable.”

Before God

Jumalan edessä

The Finnish feels like we’re talking about being physically in front of God, facing him on His throne—again, it feels personal. Literally, it’s almost “in God’s front.” It implies a close physical proximity. The English certainly can mean the same thing, but the same English phrase could also refer to God’s view or opinion about someone.

To me, this section says that only those who are capable of withstanding God’s glory will be able to stand in front of Him. If we aren’t found “favorable,” we won’t be there.

Up next, we learn the qualities of those who will be able to stand in front of God:

save the meek and lowly in heart;

paitsi sydämeltään sävyisät ja nöyrät;

(Except for those into whose hearts are mild/tame/even-tempered and meek/humble)

The Finnish flips the phrasing, putting the heart (sydän) first instead of last and conjugating the word as roughly “into the heart,” specifically referring to a singular third person (he/she). Finnish has one third person pronoun, “hän,” and all singular third person endings are the same, so this could refer to any individual.

That gender-neutral pronoun, “hän,” is similar to “one” in English, except that it’s used in everyday conversation, which, of course, “one” isn’t.

The verse so far says to me that those who can stand before God are those who bring into their hearts the qualities of being mild, meek, and humble.

and if a man be meek and lowly in heart,

ja jos ihminen on sydämeltään sävyisä ja nöyrä

(And if a person takes into their hearts mildness and meekness)

No matter how often you remember that “man” in scripture refers to all human beings, it’s a nice reminder when it's translated as “a person” (“ihminen”).

Then we return to the third person singular individual: if a person has the qualities of mildness, meekness, and humility in their heart . . .

  

and confesses by the power of the Holy Ghost that Jesus is the Christ,

ja tunnustaa Pyhän Hengen voimasta, että Jeesus on Kristus,

(And acknowledges, with the Holy Spirit’s power, that Jesus is the Christ,)

The Finnish word for “confess” is “tunnustaa,” which, yes, does mean “confess.” But it can also mean “acknowledge” or “recognize.” 

I suppose, “confess” can mean those things in English, too, but I hadn’t thought of the word in those terms. To me, “confess” has some baggage in English, making that statement feel forced or somehow shameful on the part of the person saying it.

“Tunnustaa” is also related to “tuntua,” which means “feel.” So individuals will not only be acknowledging Jesus, but they will also feel that He is their Christ.

Another element here is how English does a weird thing with the word “of.” So often, we lose the concept of ownership and instead just have two things that are closely related. In this case, “the power of the Holy Ghost” puts Spirit at a distance for me, as if the power is something out in the universe somewhere in an unknown nebula or something.

However, saying, as it does in Finnish, “the Holy Ghost’s power” suddenly makes me picture something new and different, something more, well, powerful. Many languages use the regular possessive in situations like this (for example, The Book of Mormon is translated as Mormon’s Book). In cases like this, I prefer that construction.

Let’s combine the two concepts (first, acknowledging Christ and second, doing so with Holy Ghost’s power): In Finnish, I get the sense that acknowledging Christ is something that takes strength. Perhaps this means actually seeing Him, being in His presence, as we acknowledge that he is our personal Savior.

In that case, it would make sense that we’d need heavenly power, that from the Holy Ghost, to withstand Christ’s glory to make such an acknowledgment.

he must needs have charity; for if he have not charity he is nothing; wherefore he must needs have charity.

hänellä täytyy olla rakkautta, sillä ellei hänellä ole rakkautta, hän ei ole mitään; niinpä hänellä täytyy olla rakkautta.

(He must have love, for if he/she doesn’t have love, he/she is nothing; he/she needs to have love.)

The archaic English gets in the way here. Sure, we know that “he must needs have” means “he must have,” but having it stated so clearly in Finnish is a good reminder.

Also, remember that it’s not “he” in Finnish. It’s “hän” which can refer to any individual. We must all have charity.

The word “charity” in English, as we saw with “confess,” carries baggage that I don’t think was intended. In Finnish, it’s translated simply as “love.” It’s the same word you’d use when talking about a parent or child or your best friend, so it means a lot more than doing a big service project for people in another country. It’s caring for those directly in your sphere and loving them all in word and deed.

I love how “wherefore” is translated. It could have been simply “niin,” but instead, it’s “niinpä.” Those extra two letters (–pä) add urgency and emphasis to what comes next, almost saying, “No, really, you must have love. It’s a requirement. That’s just the way it is.”

Verse 45

Here’s where we get into the direct parallels with 1 Corinthians: defining and describing charity. Again, in Finnish, the word used is simply “love.”

And that fits for Latter-day Saints, because we believe that charity is the pure love of Christ—a definition that comes from this passage in a bit. To me, swapping “charity” out and adding “love” helps emphasize that meaning.

Also note that each time something is listed as a characteristic that charity/love is not, the Finnish adds another emphasizing syllable. “Not” could be just “ei” here, but it’s “eikä,” making it roughly “also not” and with a “really, it’s not” sense.

I’m going to break this verse down phrase by phrase, with the English on top, the Finnish beneath, and my translation of the Finnish in parentheses after that, along with any other notes or thoughts.

And charity suffereth long

Ja rakkaus on pitkämielinen

(And love is long-minded)

and is kind

ja lempeä

(and kind/gentle)

and envieth not

eikä kadehdi

(doesn’t envy)

and is not puffed up

eikä pöyhkeile

(isn’t arrogant)

seeketh not her own

ei etsi omaansa

(doesn’t seek for his/her own)

This is another verse where the archaic English stands in the way of an otherwise clear meaning. The imagery of actively searching something out comes across clearer to me in the Finnish.

is not easily provoked

ei vihastu helposti

(doesn’t get angry easily)

thinketh no evil

ei ajattele pahaa

(doesn’t think bad things/of badness)

and rejoiceth not in iniquity

eikä iloitse vääryydestä

(doesn’t rejoice in unrighteousness)

but rejoiceth in the truth

vaan iloitsee totuudesta

(only rejoices in the truth)

beareth all things

kaiken se kestää

(everything, it endures)

The word “kestää” doesn’t have a simple English translation. It definitely means “endure,” but it means much more than that. When you “kestää,” you are holding on. You have strength.

Inanimate things can “kestää” (or not), too. If you’re walking over icy snow, and then suddenly it breaks and your boot goes through, the snow didn’t “kestää” under your weight. So “kestää” implies a strength and resilience that “endure” doesn’t.

believeth all things

kaiken se uskoo

(everything, it believes)

hopeth all things

kaiken se toivoo

(everything, it hopes for)

endureth all things

kaiken se kärsii 

(everything, it endures/suffers)

“Kärsii” implies pain, so while it does mean “endure,” it’s a different kind of endurance than the kind implied by “bearing” all things.

Verse 46

Wherefore, my beloved brethren,

Jos siis, rakkaat veljeni

(If so, my beloved brothers)

if ye have not charity, ye are nothing,

teillä ei ole rakkautta, te ette ole mitään,

(you don’t have love, you are nothing)

for charity never faileth.

sillä rakkaus ei koskaan katoa.

(for love doesn’t ever vanish/disappear)

This is one of my favorite parts. The LDS women’s organization, Relief Society, has “Charity never faileth” as its motto, which took on much greater meaning for me when I thought of it as “Love never vanishes/disappears.”

Wherefore, cleave unto charity,

Pitäkää sen vuoksi kiinni rakkaudesta,

(Hold on tight because of that to love)

which is the greatest of all,

joka on suurin kaikista,

(which is the greatest of all)

for all things must fail—

sillä kaiken täytyy kadota—

(for everything must vanish/disappear)

An interesting note: 1 Corinthians 13:8 in the King James Version of the Bible reads like this (emphasis mine): 

Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

Where in English we have “faileth” and “vanish away,” Finnish uses the same word: “katoa,” meaning “vanish away.” 

Love from God will never leave you alone. It will never disappear.

Verse 47

But charity is the pure love of Christ,

mutta aito rakkaus on Kristuksen puhdasta rakkautta,

(but authentic love is Christ’s clean/unpolluted/innocent love)

How cool is this one? This is the one time that the English “charity” isn’t translated directly as “love.” I imagine that’s because the next needs to be more specific; it’s distinguishing types of love.

And real, genuine, authentic love is Christ’s love. Christ’s love is clean and pure and innocent.

and it endureth forever

ja se kestää ikuisesti

(and it endures/lasts/holds on with strength eternally)

Remember what I said about “kestää”? We see it again here, and it means so much more than enduring with gritted teeth.

                                                   

and whoso is found possessed of it at the last day,

ja kenellä sitä havaitaan olevan viimeisenä päivänä,

(And whoever is detected to have it on the last day)

it shall be well with him.

hänen käy hyvin.

(He/she will be well/good/fine.)

Verse 48

Wherefore, my beloved brethren, pray unto the Father with all the energy of heart,

Rukoilkaa siis, rakkaat veljeni, Isää koko sydämen voimalla,

(Pray then, my beloved brothers, to Father with your all of the heart’s power.)

Note that the -kaa added to the first word (“rukoila,” meaning “pray”) is another intensifier, making it an important instruction.

that ye may be filled with this love,

että täyttyisitte tällä rakkaudella,

(that you may be filled with this love)

which he hath bestowed upon all who are true followers of his Son, Jesus Christ;

jonka hän on suonut kaikille Poikansa Jeesuksen Kristuksen tosi seuraajille;

(which he has bestowed to all His Son’s, Jesus Christ’s, followers)

that ye may become the sons of God;

että teistä tulisi Jumalan lapsia;

(that you may become God’s children)

Again with the possessive “of.” For me, if a sentence is put into regular possessive, it’s more powerful. I can become one of God’s children. Wow.

Also note that the Finnish says we may become God’s children. Not just sons.

that when he shall appear we shall be like him,

että me hänen ilmestyessään olisimme hänen kaltaisiaan

(that we, when he appears/is revealed, may be what in his likeness)

WOW AGAIN. We can be like Him when He appears! The Finnish “ilmestyessään” is more active, and can also mean “when he is revealed” Much more powerful for me. than merely appearing.

for we shall see him as he is;

sillä me saamme nähdä hänet sellaisena kuin hän on;

(for we’ll be able to see him in the way that he is)

Hard to explain why the Finnish affects me so much on this one, but it does; the idea that we’ll be able to see God as He actually is amazing—and it’s a reminder that our tiny mortal brains have no clue what God is really like. That whatever mortal blinders we’ve lived with will be removed, and we’ll be able to see eternity and God as they really are.

that we may have this hope;

että meillä olisi tämä toivo;

(that we may have this hope)

that we may be purified even as he is pure.

että meidät puhdistettaisiin niin kuin hän on puhdas.

(That we may be cleansed as he is clean)

Amen.

Aamen.

~~~

Now for something rather vulnerable. (As if discussing my faith weren't already!) For anyone wanting to see the whole thing altogether, hear it, and/or follow along: Below is the full Finnish text of this passage as well as a recording of me reading the passage in Finnish.

44 Muuten hänen uskonsa ja toivonsa on turhaa, sillä kukaan ei ole otollinen Jumalan edessä, paitsi sydämeltään sävyisät ja nöyrät; ja jos ihminen on sydämeltään sävyisä ja nöyrä ja tunnustaa Pyhän Hengen voimasta, että Jeesus on Kristus, hänellä täytyy olla rakkautta, sillä ellei hänellä ole rakkautta, hän ei ole mitään; niinpä hänellä täytyy olla rakkautta.

45 Ja rakkaus on pitkämielinen ja lempeä eikä kadehdi eikä pöyhkeile, ei etsi omaansa, ei vihastu helposti, ei ajattele pahaa eikä iloitse vääryydestä vaan iloitsee totuudesta, kaiken se kestää, kaiken se uskoo, kaiken se toivoo, kaiken se kärsii.

46 Jos siis, rakkaat veljeni, teillä ei ole rakkautta, te ette ole mitään, sillä rakkaus ei koskaan katoa. Pitäkää sen vuoksi kiinni rakkaudesta, joka on suurin kaikista, sillä kaiken täytyy kadota—

47 mutta aito rakkaus on Kristuksen puhdasta rakkautta, ja se kestää ikuisesti; ja kenellä sitä havaitaan olevan viimeisenä päivänä, hänen käy hyvin.

48 Rukoilkaa siis, rakkaat veljeni, Isää koko sydämen voimalla, että täyttyisitte tällä rakkaudella, jonka hän on suonut kaikille Poikansa Jeesuksen Kristuksen tosi seuraajille; että teistä tulisi Jumalan lapsia; että me hänen ilmestyessään olisimme hänen kaltaisiaan, sillä me saamme nähdä hänet sellaisena kuin hän on; että meillä olisi tämä toivo; että meidät puhdistettaisiin niin kuin hän on puhdas. Aamen.

My Speech as President

The awards gala honoring the best fiction published by LDS writers in 2014 was held on Saturday, May 16. As the program's outgoing president, I gave a speech prior to the presentation of the awards. I'll share some thoughts and feelings about my year as president another time.

For now, here's a photo of that night when I asked the finalists present to join me on the stage, which was an incredibly cool moment with so much talent in one place. And below that, the speech I gave next. Being the Whitney Awards president has truly been an honor, one I did my best to live up to.

2014 Whitney Awards Gala

May 16, 2015

I have literally spent the last year pondering what to say tonight. I have a file on my computer where I dumped quotes and ideas. It’s ridiculously long, but I promise that my remarks won’t be.

Many of you have been acquainted with the Whitney Awards for a long time, while some here tonight know little about the program, so I’ll begin with a little background.

In your program, you’ll see a section called “by the numbers.” I thought it might be interesting for attendees to get a feel for the scope of the awards. A book must receive 5 reader nominations to become an official nominee. For 2014, we had nearly 400 books receive at least one nomination. The total number of nominations is the official recorded number, but the real number is higher, as some books received more than five nominations.

About half of the nominated titles became official nominees, which sent them to the judging round. Each of the 8 award categories had 5 judges who read and ranked each book in their category on a Condorcet-style ballot. The result was 5 finalists in each category, for a total of 40 finalists. Essentially, a book had a shot of one in ten of becoming a finalist.

Once the finalists were announced in early February, the voting academy gets to read them and cast their ballot. The academy has about 400 members made up of writers, editors, reviewers, judges, and other industry professionals and experts.

The academy ballots were due on April 30, and tonight, the winners will be announced.

So that’s how they function in a very large nutshell. But I thought it might be good to share how the program came into being as well.

Fellow novelist Robison Wells was on a mission to continually raise the bar on literature written by Latter-day Saints. He began that journey by creating a database of reviews, making it as comprehensive as he could. But he soon realized that criticism, while important, isn’t enough by itself.

At what I believe was the 4th annual Storymakers conference, he had the realization that honoring the best among us would naturally raise the bar, and he set to creating an awards program to do just that.

I remember talking to him at the conference and getting excited about the idea of a purely Mormon literary award. I wasn’t on the first committee, but I did get to watch pretty close by as the program was created. Robison studied the Hugos and Nebulas and many other awards programs to come up with the best mix of input and voting, wanting to include the general readership and fans as well as professionals and industry peers.

He also wanted a name for the awards that would reflect the goals of the program and would also be uniquely Mormon. One night as I made dinner, he called to brainstorm ideas for a name, as nothing quite felt right yet—the Golden Plates award and such felt a bit too cheesy.

I suggested that we name the program after a literary figure from our Church history. The first name to come to mind was Eliza R. Snow. But, I pointed out, she was primarily a poet. Who else? We wanted someone who related to fiction.

I offhandedly said that well, there’s that one really cool talk by Orson F. Whitney all about literature and fiction. You know, the one about how we will one day have Miltons and Shakespeares of our own. But did Elder Whitney write fiction?

(To be honest, I hadn’t actually read the talk, but I knew that one prophecy.)

Rob latched on to idea and never let go. Today, at the 8th Whitney Awards gala, I’m honored to be president. And it’s kind of neat that I helped name the program, even if people generally think that “Whitney” refers to a 1980s cheerleader. I’ve even been called “Whitney,” and once, a bank teller who apparently didn’t read closely called me “Wendy.”

Orson F. Whitney gave his famous talk a few weeks before his 33rd birthday and about 18 years before his call as an apostle. He gave the speech at a large youth conference, and it was published the following month. On this year’s program, we used a younger photo of him than we’ve often seen, taken closer to the age he was when he gave his famous speech.

When I suggested his name, I didn’t know that Elder Whitney was a writer himself, but he was. He wrote fiction, poetry, and nonfiction, including the biography of his grandfather, Heber C. Kimball. Our modern hymnal includes two of his songs, “The Wintry Day, Descending to Its Close,” and “Savior Redeemer of My Soul.”

His father set type for the Deseret News and worked with the paper for 21 years, so in some respects, the written word was likely always part of Orson’s family life and childhood.

Elder Whitney was a proponent for education, reading, and writing. In his famous talk, he said, “It suffices me to know … that this people are the friends, not the foes, of education; that they are seekers after wisdom, lovers of light and truth, universal Truth, which, like the waters of earth, or the sunbeams of heaven, has but one Source, let its earthly origin be what it may.”

Education is all well and good, and considering the period, he was way ahead of his time about it. But he also understood that the arts themselves are significant.

He declared that God’s people must progress; their destiny demands it. And he seemed to see that the progression would happen through the arts, saying that even as “the glory of God is intelligence,” so is “culture … the duty of man.”

Think about that. Culture is our duty. In context, it’s clear that by “culture,” he means the arts, in all their forms. Culture is our DUTY.

So much for those people who think that fiction is a waste of energy. Next time you run into someone at a book signing who is concerned for your eternal salvation, you can calmly assure them that oh, no, they’re quite mistaken—your soul is quite safe and by writing, you’re doing your eternal duty.

As fun as that would be to actually say to someone, the idea that writing can be our duty is profound. We believe that we are here on earth for a purpose, with special talents and missions.

Quoting Brother Whitney again: “It is by means of literature that much of this great work will have to be accomplished: a literature of power and purity, worthy of such a work. And a pure and powerful literature can only proceed from a pure and powerful people. Grapes are not gathered of thorns, nor figs of thistles.”

In other words, for many of us, writing is part of our mission and purpose, and God can use our words for good and for advancing His work.

And that doesn’t mean our stories must feature Mormon characters and story lines, although they may. It doesn’t mean that our stories must include sappy morals. It doesn’t mean they have to be so whitewashed to avoid offense that they’re stripped of voice and personality.

I will always remember what Dan Wells said when he accepted his Whitney Award for Best Novel by a New Author. Keep in mind that he won the award with a HORROR novel. And the sequel also won a Whitney. And so did the third book of the trilogy.

This is all paraphrasing, of course. He said that some people consider horror as a very “un-Mormon” genre. How could he consider himself a good Mormon if he wrote “bad” stuff? And now he was being honored by his peers for that very work.

But horror, he said, could arguably be the most Mormon of genres. Horror at its core is about good versus evil, and his series is especially so—a young man fighting his natural man, struggling to do the right thing when every impulse is to do the wrong one. When Nephi preached about the natural man, he might as well have been talking about John Cleaver.

Regardless of the genre or age group or market we’re writing for, the things we write matter. Our words have the potential to influence and change lives. There is power in words.

The scriptures strengthen that idea:

In the beginning was the WORD.

Alma counsels us to test our faith by planting a seed, and that seed is THE WORD.

Captain Moroni called his people to action and saved their lives through a few powerful words written on his coat and held up as a banner.

And in the New Testament, the armor of God is described with a list of DEFENSIVE items: the helmet of salvation, the breastplate of righteousness, the shield of faith, and so on.

Only ONE item is OFFENSIVE, which to me means that it can have an EFFECT. It’s the one item that isn’t reactionary but can take ACTION.

What is it? The sword is the word of God.

Of course we aren’t channeling the word the God onto our keyboards. But I believe that literature has a place in the plan and that God is willing and eager to help us with our writing.

Back in 1996, way before blogs and online newspapers and e-books, at a time when we had fewer things to choose in the art and entertainment we consume, Elder M. Russell Ballard said:

With so many choices for viewers and listeners, the artistic works of the Latter-day Saint … must be excellent to set them apart from the worldly and the mediocre. People deserve alternatives of quality, the kind that Latter-day Saints are capable of providing through the influence of the Holy Spirit.

And further:

If we are determined to live by Heavenly Father’s plan … we will use the inspiring opportunities around us to increase our talents.

Brother Whitney prophesied that we would have Miltons and Shakespeares of our own. Today, those two writers are taught in the classroom as classics, but in their lifetimes, they were the poplar genre writers. They were the Stephenie Meyers, the Orson Scott Cards, the Shannon Hales, the James Dashners, the David Farlands, the Brandon Sandersons of their day.

The prophecy continued, saying, “In God’s name and by his help we will build up a literature whose top shall touch heaven, though its foundations may now be low in the earth.”

So has the prophecy been fulfilled? Do we have Miltons and Shakespeares of our own?

Some may say yes. Others say no.

I don’t think we can know, not in our lifetimes. I have a suspicion that maybe we do have Miltons and Shakespeares—and more than two—but we can’t know who they are.

And we won’t know for another 400 years, when, from the other side, we’ll take a peek through the veil to see whose books are still being read, whose words are still influencing lives long after we’ve passed.

I’ll say one more thing, and then we’ll move on to the actual awards, which is why you’re here.

After the first gala, I wrote out my impressions on my blog. Here’s a snippet from that post:

Our table was dead center at the back of the room. As a result, I had a great view of the large crowd that had gathered for the awards. A lot of amazing people were inside those four walls. Some I’d go so far as to call legends.

As the evening wore on, I felt a surging sense of awe and privilege. That night represented the beginning of something very big. And I got to be a small part of it. I even got to be involved a tiny bit in its creation. I was sitting in the middle of a piece of history. The thought was overwhelming. I felt so honored to be in the company of those around me, to bear witness to the birth of something so much bigger than myself, something meaningful, something that I believe Orson F. Whitney himself smiled down upon.

I still believe that Orson F. Whitney is aware of the program bearing his name. And I believe that he’s pleased with the program and pleased to see the literature of his people continue to grow and expand in both quantity and, more importantly, in quality every year.

It may be a small thing to most people, but my belief that he’s looking down on all of this was reinforced when I learned that tonight’s gala falls on the 84th anniversary of Orson F. Whitney’s death.

Click here to see the list of winners. 

Author Interview: Jenny Hess

This interview is different from others I've posted here. I hope you'll stick around and read the whole thing; it's that valuable.

A few years ago, I had the fortune of crossing paths with Jenny Hess and being able to read a draft of the manuscript that would become a published memoir about her young son's sudden death and the journey of grief that followed.

Every year, I read a lot of books and manuscripts, but few stay with me the way Jenny's book has. Years later, I still think of her, her son Russell, and their story, with regularity. 

Sometimes it's when I'm out for a run and I remember the time Jenny was out running early one morning shortly after Russell's death. (I won't tell you what happened, but trust me; you won't forget it either.) When I hear an ambulance siren, I think of the trip Russell took to the ER and what happened there.

But I also think of Jenny's story when I see someone in pain. Someone grieving. I remember it when I face my own struggles. And when I discover someone else who has gone through a sudden loss and the subsequent grief. I like to think that learning of Jenny and her journey through pain and loss has taught me how to be more compassionate with others (and with myself). It's a story of pain, but it's also one of hope, joy, and, eventually, healing.

It's a book everyone should read, whether or not you've experienced something similar. This mortality thing is rough; chances are, you still may undergo a sudden loss. Chances are even better that you know someone who already has or who will soon go through a traumatic time and who must grapple with the grief that follows.

Here's our interview about her remarkable book.

AL: How would you describe your book: memoir? How-to? Other? And why?

JH: I would definitely describe my book as a memoir and not a how-to. Grief is an intensely personal experience to a deeply individual loss. People are given a disservice and tend to bristle when told how to grieve. In His Hands is simply my experience with the grief of losing my son Russell, and I hope it gives a grieving reader the validation that these strong, profound, overwhelming emotions are normal and that they are not alone in their pain.


AL: What prompted you to write about your experiences surrounding your son’s death?

JH: I was having so many conflicting emotions—the deep, dark, ugly wretchedness of missing Russell along with the holy, sacred and beautiful new insights into the Atonement of Jesus Christ. I felt these needed to be chronicled before they were lost in the fog I was engulfed in. But really, I began writing because through an
honest misunderstanding I’d inadvertently led my two-year-old son to believe Jesus kidnapped his older brother. I think I’ve resolved the issue, but I kept thinking then, that, if as a teenager, Joey wondered why deep down he didn’t like Jesus, I would have it there for him in print—that it was my fault.


AL: What was the writing process like? How long did it take? Did you always plan to publish it?

JH: I was writing Russell’s biography when I knew I needed to write this book. In His Hands is a book that tells how the loss affected me and my family, previous life experiences I felt prepared me for the loss, and the heavy and holy experiences of grief I experienced later.

Some days I wrote feverishly, the words just pouring out. Other days I wrote timidly, tip-toeing through painful memories. Some days I couldn’t write—not for a lack of material, but because it was just too much to handle.

I was really just writing for me and for my immediate family. Especially for Joey, so he’d hopefully have a vibrant and faith-filled relationship with our Savior. It seemed to take forever to write, but I think it was mostly done within six months of starting it. I hadn’t intended to get it published, but some close friends
encouraged me to try.


AL: What makes your book on the topic of grief different? 

JH: This book is different than any other grief memoir I’ve read. Unfortunately, there aren’t enough in the LDS/Christian market, although I’ve noticed more being published lately. While they maintain a belief in God that’s uplifting and inspiring, most seem to be written years after the loss, and the grief experience has lacked
the rawness of new grief. This diminished the significant emotions that were overwhelming me and left me feeling alone and misunderstood.

In contrast, secular memoirs I’ve read tend to open up and share the vivid and intense pain of grief. This validated my bleeding emotions and helped me feel like I’m not crazy. But a common theme to these books is the question, “How could a kind, loving God allow this to happen?” and it breaks my heart and sometimes my spirit to read how their faith is not only questioned, but seemingly crushed and broken beyond repair.

I know how a kind, loving God could allow this to happen, but I still felt so despondent that I could barely function. In His Hands is a realistic, faith-promoting look into the abyss of grief with a loving Heavenly Father at my side.


AL: Who do you think would benefit from reading the book? 

JH: Surprisingly, I’ve received feedback from people of all backgrounds telling me they’ve benefited from reading this book. We’ve all experienced loss to some degree, whether they be through death of a loved one, debilitating health issues, abuse, divorce, or even the loss of not having the life you imagined you’d be living by now. While those losses differ, many of the emotions are the same.

People who haven’t experienced much loss have expressed they learned from reading about the inner turmoil of my grief and as a result, gained a better understanding and compassion for friends and family who had.


AL: What is the greatest/most important lesson you’ve learned as a result of  Russell’s death? 

JH: My testimony of Jesus Christ has deepened and strengthened through the death of my son. My love for Heavenly Father and my appreciation for His plan have grown in immeasurable ways. I’ve always known They love me, but now I’m starting to see how much.

I’ve learned through the kind acts of others how important it is to “mourn with those who mourn,” and how I may feel lonely at times, but I’m never really alone.


AL: What would be your advice to someone facing a big trial, whether it deals with the death of a loved one or something else? 

JH: In His Hands was written during my worst grief. I’m still grieving the loss of Russell, but I’m not experiencing the profound grief that you’ll read about in the book. I’m in a much better place now. Please remember that while time itself doesn’t heal, it takes away the sharpness of the pain. It’s easier to see answers to “Why?” and lessons learned after—sometimes years after—the experience.

Trying to understand these lessons before they’re apparent is frustrating and breeds doubt. Just hold on through this. It will get better.

We recently marked the six-year anniversary of Russell’s death. For the first few years, I was just surviving. Don’t overdo things in the beginning of a difficult trial—it’s harder to survive that way. Sometimes you just have to slow down and feel. It’s painful. Healing from a traumatic wound usually is.

Around year three, I was back in a regular routine. I was able to function in a seemingly normal way. To the naked eye I was a “regular” person, although I still felt broken. I still broke from time to time, but I found my inner strength was able to usually get me through challenging situations.

Around year five, I realized I still wasn’t happy. I could experience happy moments, but I wasn’t happy. I wasn’t always depressed, either, which was good. So I gave up trying to be happy. I just tried to enjoy and appreciate. I figured I wouldn’t reach the level of “happy” until I was with Russell again. Letting go of  the unattainable goal of happiness allowed me to enjoy moments even more.

One average day, about 5 1/2 years after Russell died, I realized that I was feeling more than happy moments. I was feeling happy. Just in my everyday life. I was even happy to be alive. It just sort of snuck up on me.

And while I fall back down into the hole occasionally (especially during the time of year of his death), I’m still happy. And I know I’ll eventually make my way back out.

Grief is a long process, and it’s different for everyone. Please don’t lose hope if you can’t make your way through as fast as you’d like. Just hold on. There are good days and better times ahead.

* * *

About the Author
Jenny Hess was born in Boston, Massachusetts. She is an avid quilter and loves the outdoors. After serving a mission in Denmark, Jenny graduated from California State University Long Beach, where she met her husband, Kirk. They have five kids—four living on earth and one living in Heaven. As a family, they love spending time together surfing, camping, hiking, biking, exploring, rock climbing, and canyoneering. Jenny's story can be found on Mormon.org, and a video vignette detailing how the scriptures helped heal her is currently being shown at the Los Angeles Temple Visitor's Center in California. Jenny is the Grief Group Facilitator for her stake and spends time helping grievers on their path. Visit her at jennyhess.wordpress.com.

Buy the book HERE.

LDS Writers Blogfest: "Desire"

Last April, I participated in a blogfest that involved several LDS writers, each blogging for a day about one element of our beliefs. (My post is HERE.)

We're doing it again, this time with a slightly different focus; we're blogging about our favorite talks from the recent general conference. With such a great conference this year, picking one favorite was pretty much impossible. I finally had to settle on one of many that made an impact on me.

My choice: "Desire," by Dallin H. Oaks.

(I'll be quoting Elder Oaks a lot, because he says it all so much better than I could.)

To start off, I have to admit that at times I struggle with one vital and important part of mortality and my hopes for eternal life: enduring to the end. At times I get discouraged, wondering if my devoted efforts from ten years ago really mattered. In the end, it's what I'm doing today and tomorrow that will determine my destiny.

That may sound silly, but without going into details, enduring, keeping the course, and maintaining and acting upon the right priorities and desires can be hard at times, especially when I compare my past efforts with others'. (Comparison and those issues are another post altogether . . .)

Some events have made me angry at times, wanting to drop the spiritual "ball" and let someone else be the valiant one for once. But when I let that happen, over time, I, of course, find my own spirituality suffering.

I have to accept one simple fact: God doesn't want a lukewarm disciple. I must endure.

Elder Oaks said:

The desires we act on determine our changing, our achieving, and our becoming.

I love that it's not just our desires that ultimately determine our becoming, but the desires we act upon. Big difference. It goes back to all those great intentions that never happen but instead pave a special path to you-know-where.

We have so many desires, and many are good. That's when we must set aside some of them, making others our highest priority. Then, with that list in hand, we act upon those. As Elder Oaks said in another general conference talk in 2007, sometimes we must choose between good things; we may have to set aside the good for the "better" and set aside "better" for "best."

Elder Oaks goes on to discuss the struggle of Enos from the Book of Mormon and then comments on it:

Note the three essentials that preceded the promised blessing: desire, labor, and faith.

Desire isn't enough. Here he points out that our deepest desires will actually show up in our actions (our works), and those are what we'll be judged by. In other words, God knows our deepest desires because of our actions.

. . . in modern revelation the Lord declares that He “will judge all men according to their works, according to the desire of their hearts” (D&C 137:)

Let's see: I meant to go to the temple more often. I planned to have Family Home Evening regularly. I sure thought I'd get around to studying my scriptures.

The list could go on forever. But, um, nope. Not gonna cut it.

Are we prepared to have our Eternal Judge attach this enormous significance to what we really desire?

That thought could be intensely comforting or intensely disconcerting.

Elder Oaks discusses the story of Aron Ralston, the hiker who had to eventually cut off his own arm, trapped by a boulder, to survive. Referring to that event, Elder Oaks says:

Most of us will never face such an extreme crisis, but all of us face potential traps that will prevent progress toward our eternal destiny. If our righteous desires are sufficiently intense, they will motivate us to cut and carve ourselves free from addictions and other sinful pressures and priorities that prevent our eternal progress.

And here's where the endurance part comes in: true desires, and the actions from those desires, determine who we are. They, then, are part of enduring. And they are not optional.

We should remember that righteous desires cannot be superficial, impulsive, or temporary. They must be heartfelt, unwavering, and permanent.

In interpret that to mean that God doesn't give us brownie points for every commandment we keep, tallying up in the end how righteous we are and what glory we deserve. There's no bar to climb over, just squeaking by, no letter grade or percentage level, that says, "You get to enter the celestial kingdom because you reached this minimum level. But nope, that person doesn't get in because they didn't fast enough times."

He doesn't want us doing the bare minimum. That smacks too much of the lower law, which didn't have the power to save. He wants our devotion entirely.

Elder Oaks continues by listing a few of the desires and actions we should cultivate:

If this seems too difficult—and surely it is not easy for any of us—then we should begin with a desire for such qualities and call upon our loving Heavenly Father for help with our feelings.

. . . it is our actions and our desires that cause us to become something, whether a true friend, a gifted teacher, or one who has qualified for eternal life.

That's where I am right now: asking the Lord to help me develop the qualities I need to become the handmaiden He desires of me. Then to act on those things to fully qualify for those blessings.

The process will continue for the rest of my mortal existence. I hope to find some success along the way when it comes to true discipleship, forgiveness, and qualifying for the blessings I desire in the next life.

Other posts in today's LDS Writers Blogfest:
Annette Lyon: “Desire”
Annie Cechini: “The Spirit of Revelation”
Ben Spendlove: “The Atonement Covers All Pain”
Chantele Sedgwick: “LDS Women Are Incredible!”
Charity Bradford: “LDS Women Are Incredible!”
Jackee Alston: “The Eternal Blessings of Marriage”
Jenilyn Tolley: “What Manner of Men and Women Ought Ye to Be?”
Jennifer McFadden: “Establishing a Christ-Centered Home”
Jessie Oliveros: “Establishing a Christ-Centered Home”
Jolene Perry: “It’s Conference Once Again”
Jordan McCollum: “What Manner of Men and Women Ought Ye to Be?”
Kasey Tross: “Guided by the Holy Spirit”
Kayeleen Hamblin: “Become as a Little Child”
Kelly Bryson: “The Atonement Covers All Pain”
Krista Van Dolzer: “Opportunities to Do Good”
Melanie Stanford: “What Manner of Men and Women Ought Ye to Be?”
Michelle Merrill: “The Eternal Blessings of Marriage”
Myrna Foster: “Opportunities to Do Good”
Nisa Swineford: “Desire”
Sallee Mathews: “The Eternal Blessings of Marriage”
Sierra Gardner: “The Atonement Covers All Pain”
Tamara Hart Heiner: “Waiting on the Road to Damascus”
The Writing Lair: “Waiting on the Road to Damascus”

The Mormon Writer Blogfest: Joseph Smith

Not long ago, blogger Krista V from Write. Mother. Repeat. approached me about participating in a blogfest with the aim at shedding some light on what Latter-day Saints believe.

My topic is one near and dear to my heart: The Prophet Joseph Smith.

But to talk about Joseph Smith, I have to back up a bit.

Latter-day Saints believe that following the Resurrection of Jesus Christ that His apostles had the required priesthood keys that granted authority to administer His church, perform ordinances, receive revelation from God, and more.

With the death of the original twelve apostles, that priesthood power was lost from the earth, and with it, authority from God.

Faithful Christians carried on as best they could, but inevitably, without priesthood keys in the hands of authorized leaders, things began to change over the centuries. Doctrine was interpreted differently by various groups, incorrect rituals and beliefs crept in, and so on. The truth was lost.

We call this period the Apostasy, prophesied by Paul and others, such as in Thessalonians 2:3.

We believe that God inspired many men to pave the way for a Restoration of His true church, which would bring back correct doctrine and full priesthood authority. Those men include Gutenberg, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and many others, including the Founders of the United States.

In 1820, a great fervor arose surrounding religion during what has been termed The Second Great Awakening. Joseph Smith, whose large family lived in poverty in Palmyra, New York, were very much a part of that religious excitement. His family read the Bible, prayed, and were devout Christians, yet like many in that time and place, they didn't know which denomination to join. Some of Joseph's family felt warmly toward the Methodists, but Joseph himself, then only 14 years old, was troubled and couldn't decide what to do.

One day, he read a scripture that changed his life and the course of history, James 1:5

If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

In Joseph's own words:

Never did any passage of scripture come with more power to the heart of man than this did at this time to mine. It seemed to enter with great force into every feeling of my heart. I reflected on it again and again, knowing that if any person needed wisdom from God, I did; for how to act I did not know, and unless I could get more wisdom than I then had, I would never know; for the teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passages of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible.

At length I came to the conclusion that I must either remain in darkness and confusion, or else I must do as James directs, that is, ask of God.

On an early spring day of 1820, Joseph went to a secluded grove near his home to pray, to ask God with real intent, with faith, what he should do:

I kneeled down and began to offer up the desires of my heart to God. I had scarcely done so, when immediately I was seized upon by some power which entirely overcame me, and had such an astonishing influence over me as to bind my tongue so that I could not speak. Thick darkness gathered around me, and it seemed to me for a time as if I were doomed to sudden destruction.

But, exerting all my powers to call upon God to deliver me out of the power of this enemy which had seized upon me, and at the very moment when I was ready to sink into despair and abandon myself to destruction—not to an imaginary ruin, but to the power of some actual being from the unseen world, who had such marvelous power as I had never before felt in any being

Joseph held on, praying in his heart and mind for deliverance. And then it came:

just at this moment of great alarm, I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me.

It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!

Joseph was told in answer to his burning question that none of the churches were correct, that he was to join none of them, and that Joseph himself had a mighty work to perform. He was taught other things as well in what we now refer to as "The First Vision."

Joseph grew into his role as prophet over the years, literally being tutored by a resurrected angel, Moroni. This angel had lived his mortal life in the Americas and buried a record of his people: scriptures his father Mormon had gathered and which they both knew would never be read by their own descendants but instead by future generations.

Through the power of God, Joseph received that record, which was engraved on gold plates. In spite of harsh persecution and multiple attempts by others to steal the plates, they were miraculously preserved until Joseph had translated the ancient record, after which he returned them to Moroni. That record was published as The Book of Mormon, named after the man whose life work was compiling records and words of the prophets who had lived on the Western Hemisphere.

Joseph and others were visited by other resurrected beings who conferred the priesthood upon them. With the official organization of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on April 6, 1830, the Restoration of Christ's church had finally occurred and the long Apostasy was over.

There was still more to be revealed, line upon line, but after centuries of darkness, the essentials were in place: Christ's power was again on the earth. Authority to act in His name had been brought back. Once again, needed ordinances could be performed. The heavens were finally open, and revelation for the Church at large was available through a living prophet, someone like Moses, Abraham, and Jacob.

Those same priesthood keys have been passed along through living Apostles from the time of Joseph's cruel martyrdom in 1844 to the present day. Our current prophet, President Thomas S. Monson, can trace his priesthood keys back to Jesus Christ Himself.

Thanks to Joseph Smith and his work, I, along with over 13 million other members of the Church worldwide, have the privilege of listening to a living prophet, his counselors and apostles, twice a year in general conference, which is broadcast across the world, streamed on the Internet, and printed later in magazine form as well as on the Church website. We learn and can later review what has been taught then try to incorporate teachings and characteristics that will bring us closer to becoming the servants Christ would have us be.

Tomes have literally been written about Joseph Smith, and a simple blog post can hardly touch the surface of the man and his legacy, but in summary, to quote Joseph F. Smith, the Prophet's nephew, who later led the Church as prophet:

Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it.

Other Stops in Today's Blogfest:

The Book of Mormon and missionary work with Kayeleen Hamblin
Faith in Jesus Christ with Myrna Foster
Families with Charity Bradford
Family history with Laura D
Restoration of Jesus Christ’s church with Kelly Bryson
Stories from the Book of Mormon with Kathi Oram Peterson

Temples with Krista V.