From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #32 Reply-To: aml-list Sender: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk aml-list-digest Monday, May 8 2000 Volume 01 : Number 032 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 11:42:25 -0600 From: Thom Duncan Subject: [AML] Reading the Scriptures Kathleen Woodbury wrote: > I guess the reason why this intrigues me so much is that the > beginning-middle-end structure of the stories Mormon selected to include in > his abridgement go so contrary to certain modern (or would that be > post-modern?--I still don't have those straight) writers who insist that > real life doesn't have a beginning-middle-end structure and so realistic > stories shouldn't either. I think writers who insist on this no beginning middle and end idea are not looking at life with a large enough focus. Perhaps it's true that there is no beginning middle and end over any given oine week period, but surely over a couple years, or a lifetime, there are plenty of examples of such. But that brings up another point. Does it harm the worth of the BofM stories if we posit that, perhaps, some of the stories aren't event-by-event true and that the structure was imposed by the editor? IOW, have the prophets done what historical writers do all the time, pick and choose the events that serve their end and, in some cases, maybe fudge some minor facts? I'm not suggesting a Paul Dunn kind of fictionalization, just one that takes out irrelevant things to get to the point faster. An instance from recent history may serve my point: In most histories about Joseph Smith which deal with the martyrdom, you won't find mention of an event that John Taylor (in DHC volume 7) said took place: Joseph gave the jail keeper's son some money to buy wine which, when purchased, was then passed around to all present to calm them down and to help relieve their depression. Depending on your reason for writing the history, you may or may not include this interesting bit of history. Today's audiences, for instance, would find it problematicaly, asking more questions than it answers: Why did they drink wine back then after the Word of Wisdom was given, etc.? -- So, to avoid having to deal with that issue, you the writer of the Joseph Smith bio, overlook that. Is the story of Joseph's final days substantially harmed if you left out that little incident? Of course not. The spirit of the surrounding story remains intact, complete with all the drama of the mob attack, etc. Could something similar be happening in Scripture? In Genesis, for instance, it is not explained where Cain's and Abel's wives comes from (another creation?) It seems as though the writer of Genesis failed to include that part of the story for whatever reason. Was that on purpose or an editorial error? Does it really matter, since the main story of Adam and Eve remains intact. Just some thoughts to add to the discussion on Scripture as literature. Thom Duncan - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 22:02:30 -0700 (MST) From: Benson Parkinson Subject: Re: [AML] Reading the Scriptures I'm catching up on this thread, so I hope I'm not saying something that's been covered already. Colin wrote: | Whatever are the reasons for not giving serious, critical, | literary attention to the scriptures, and a lot of it, we need to do | differently. To do differently we need to establish a method (or methods) for | such study with which students of Mormon literature who hold vastly varying | degrees of faith in the religious message are comfortable. What would you say are the advantages of finding such methods? (One thing that occurs to me is that it takes literary interpretation, at least temporarily, out of the hands of those with religious authority and puts it in the hands of those with scholarly authority. But that's got at least as many drawbacks as advantages. | This is pretty | elementary, but it seems to me that the question of authorship is a good | place to start. People who assume that the scriptures are authored directly | by God, and people who assume that they are human artifacts created by people | who claim experience with God as their material, will approach the "words on | the page" differently, will deal differently with a multiplicity of types of | ambiguity. I assume the latter, though I also am a believer in the prophetic | mission of Joseph Smith. Now, it seems to me that the literary and the | doctrinal intersect at this point. Is my premise--that the scriptures can be | treated as, because they are, human artifacts--tenable for a believer in the | prophetic mission of Joseph Smith? And if it is, does it create ground on | which believers and nonbelievers can meet for productive conversation? I can see ground for productive conversation, but I suspect it will always miss something fundamental. When I think of intellectual stances, artistic theories, social trends, etc., I like to try to project myself forward a few, or a few dozen or hundred, years and imagine what it looks like through millennarian eyes. (You can try to project yourself into the spirit world with the same results.) If you find a way of talking about the scriptures that everyone is comfortable with, then scriptures have no power to change anyone--which is the whole point of scripture. I'd like to take part in the conversation, but the goal for me is always integration. How do I read the scriptures in a way that brings all my powers (literary, legal, empathic, historical, psychological, spiritual) to bear. I keep wanting Mormon literary and scholarly movements to acknowledge that--and in ways that neither tie us in knots trying to accomodate the world nor build up walls to separate us from the world. Hard line to walk. Benson Parkinson - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 01:19:49 EDT From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN God's Army weekend gross: Excel Entertainment Press Release [from Mormon-News] From: Excel Entertainment Press Release To: Mormon News Subject: MN God's Army weekend gross: Excel Entertainment Press Release 2May00 A4 Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 22:30:00 -0400 God's Army weekend gross Excel Entertainment Press Release 2May00 A4 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH -- God's Army had a strong opening weekend in Southern California--full houses across Orange County, Riverside County and into LA. The trend of negligable Sunday box office numbers being more than made up for on Monday is continuing strongly. In most California theaters where the film opened, Monday's box office out-performed Friday or Saturday. The film will play at the Vine Theater in Hollywood through Thursday, and open in Simi Valley and Ventura this Friday, with theaters in Glendale and Pasadena still pending. Theaters in San Jose and Sacramento will open on May 12; San Diego, Fresno and Bakersfield theaters will open on May 26. Las Vegas, Phoenix and Boise theaters continued to pull strong crowds over the weekend, and also on Monday. Three more towns in Southern Idaho will open on May 5--Mountain Home (Take One), Gooding (The Cinema) and Montpelier (Centere Theater). Utah theaters also continue to perform well, 8 weeks into release. Weekend Gross $100,965 (on 53 screens) Total Gross $1,364,054 >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest ________________________________________________________________ - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 05:00:41 -0700 (MST) From: Benson Parkinson Subject: [AML] Reading the Scriptures One more thought here. The first time I read the scriptures, my last couple of years of high school and my first semester of college (late '70s), it struck me we ought to pay close attention to how the scriptures interpret themselves. In the Old Testament what I noticed was how unfamilar some of the most familiar passages were in context. In many cases it seemed clear to me it meant something different to it's original hearers. I'm not so much talking about history as just placing a verse in context of clearly related verses before and after. Sometimes the text would present you with people reacting to what had just gone by in the text in ways that would seem incoherant if you didn't allow for a different, local interpretation. This tendency was all the stronger in the New Testament, where the narrative often seems so much more modern and comprehensible in feel. And yet whenever I saw Christ or the Apostles interpreting the Old Testament, again and again they did so in ways that seemed foreign to what I heard in Sunday School. Again and again they found surprising metaphorical meanings and totally ignored the context. A third thing I've noticed is that when the Lord speaks in His own voice, either in the Book of Mormon or the Doctrine and Covenants, again and again He speaks in language borrowed from the Old Testament and all the scriptures. One of the major subtexts of the D&C and Pearl is that the scriptures _are_ unified and should be read as a whole. Again and again in the D&C the Lord uses ancent phrasings to illucidate contemporary situations, which might be quite different from what you'd think those phrases referred to if you didn't have the D&C. Again and again in the Pearl you see the Lord or old prophets using wordings and concepts you would have assumed got their start much, much later in the game. What we get afresh with each dispensation is basically what we had from the beginning but so diluted we no longer recognized anything but a few forms and phrases, which now had to be reinvested with their ancient meanings. The common thread through this is that the scriptures tend to interpret themselves typologically. I should add that Book of Mormon leaders and groups are always trying to construe themselves as recapitulating Old Testament stories. The irony of Mormon scriptural exegesis of the past generation is that all our most striking Biblical interpretation is typological (for example seeing Joseph Smith, Martin Harris, and Professor Anthon in Isaiah 29), but we're so unfamiliar with typology that we read such passages as though they're literal and have no other context or interpretation. Those readings were given to us whole, by revelation or through the speeches and writings of our first generation of inspired commentators. But as a people we never learned to read that way. Typology has had a great resurgence among Church writers in the past 20 years. More and more of it is working its way into Church manuals, for example. But we're not at ease with it yet, and my impression is that a lot of it either lacks nuance or is overly belabored. I think what's lacking is a few guiding principles (one would be that types always eventually get back to Christ), and an organic model of how typology comes into being (a couple of principles here would be that prophets speak first in context, and that God knows the end from the beginning). One more principle: you have to be able to feel the Spirit in it. Speaker and hearer, writer and reader, have to understand each other and rejoice together. Maybe that's harder to talk about in strictly literary terms. Perhaps you can apply some theory of communication or the psychology of reading. On the other hand, the old language works, the language of the scriptures themselves. That's how the books themselves tell you to read them. (One project I've had in mind for a long time is a series of essays or columns exploring the typology of the scriptures, starting with Genesis, in which I'd try to work out these issues. Pretty overwhelming project, really. I've thought that should be a mark of Mormon literature, that it ought to be in more or less constant dialog with the scriptures on a figurative level, and I've tried to make that an ongoing theme in my own fiction.) Benson Parkinson - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 01:19:49 EDT From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Friends Of Gilgal Still Need A Little More To Complete Sale: Salt Lake Tribune From: Kent Larsen To: Mormon News Subject: MN Friends Of Gilgal Still Need A Little More To Complete Sale: Salt Lake Tribune 29Apr00 A4 Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 22:10:00 -0400 [from Mormon-News] Friends Of Gilgal Still Need A Little More To Complete Sale (Race Is On to Preserve Gilgal Garden) Salt Lake Tribune 29Apr00 A4 http://www.sltrib.com:80/04292000/utah/45121.htm By Rebecca Walsh: Salt Lake Tribune SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH -- Salt Lake's Gilgal Garden is on its way to becoming a city park. The group of preservationists trying to save the property now only needs to raise an additional $75,000 to seal the deal. Unfortunately, the group has about one month left until the scheduled transfer date, June 10th. "We're so close now," said Julia Robertson from Friends of Gilgal. "We can't let that happen. But we have to have the purchase amount before we can talk about anything else." The Friends need $25,000 to complete the purchase of the garden and an additional $50,000 for one-time restoration and repairs of the sculptures in the garden and the property. Without the money, the deal could crumble and the unique sculpture garden destroyed. The garden is the creation of LDS bishop Thomas Child, a stonemason and sculptor Maurice Brooks, who filled the garden with an eclectic group of sculptures and stoneworks, many of which reflect LDS themes. When Child died in 1963, the garden was purchased by Henry Fetzer, who's children are now trying to sell the garden because the liability and maintenance have become too much for the family. The Friends of Gilgal started three years ago, persuading the Fetzer family to not sell the garden to a Canadian real estate company that wanted to build condominiums. Persuading the San Francisco-based Trust for Public Lands to intervene and buy an option on the property, they then started raising the money needed to make the purchase. The LDS Church pledged $100,000, as did the Eccles Foundation. Salt Lake County then pledged $400,000, nearly completing the purchase price. Even the Fetzer family has decided that it is important to preserve the garden, "This has been going on for quite a while," Brian Fetzer said. "But I want it preserved. This is a treasure." >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest ________________________________________________________________ - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 01:19:49 EDT From: Larry Jackson Subject: [AML] MN Saga Of A Hoffman Forgery May Be Made Into Film: Village Voice From: Kent Larsen To: Mormon News Subject: MN Saga Of A Hoffman Forgery May Be Made Into Film: Village Voice 3May00 P6 Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 22:00:00 -0400 [from Mormon-News] [AML-LIST MODERATOR NOTE: This post from Mormon News provides an interesting example of the kinds of decisions I'm finding myself having to make, based on a week's worth of experience as moderator. Hoffman himself and his forgeries aren't really on-topic for this List. But this is about the forgery of a poem...and it's being made into a movie...and my gut instinct is that it falls within the List-related interests of a large proportion of List members...and traffic isn't too heavy right now, so I pass it along...] Saga Of A Hoffman Forgery May Be Made Into Film (The Silence of the Iambs) Village Voice 3May00 P6 http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0018/cotts.shtml By Cynthia Cotts Forged Poem Becomes Hot Literary Property NEW YORK, NEW YORK -- The saga of a poem forged by Mark Hoffman could eventually be made into a movie, if author Simon Worrall is successful. Worrall wrote the story of a document Hoffman created and passed off as the work of famous poet Emily Dickinson. Even after Hoffman was jailed for murdering two LDS Church members in an attempt to cover up his forgeries, which centered around Mormon historical documents, the poem still appeared on the market, and was sold by the world-famous auction house, Sotheby's. Worrell stumbled across the story of the poem in 1997, when it came up for auction at Sotheby's. Acquired by the Jones Library in Amherst, Massachusetts, a curator at the library became suspicious, and was eventually able to get the poem ruled a fake. Worrell then traced the poem back to Mark Hoffman through Las Vegas rare document dealer Todd Axelrod. But even after he had spent six months researching and writing the article, Worrell had trouble selling it. The New Yorker said no eventually, after holding it for months, worrying that the lawsuit might cause a libel lawsuit. Harpers also struggled with it, eventually deciding it wouldn't work. But the Sydney, Australia Morning Herald carried a version of the article [See Mormon-News' summary at http://www.mormonstoday.com/000213/A4Hoffman01.shtml], and the Manchester Guardian carried a version of the article on April 8th. Now, the Paris Review has picked it up for U.S. publication, after editor George Plimpton personally went over the text with a libel lawyer line by line. Happy with how it has turned out, Worrell has agents Phillip Spitzer and Joel Gotler working on a book and movie deal based on the story. Undoubtedly, a book or movie would need to give some background on Hoffman and his forgeries of Mormon documents. See also: The Impersonation of Emily Manchester UK Guardian 8Apr00 A4 By Simon Worrel and http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0941214877/mormonnews More about Salamander : The Story of the Mormon Forgery Murders at Amazon.com and http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0451401522/mormonnews More about The Mormon Murders : A True Story of Greed, Forgery, Deceit, and Death at Amazon.com >From Mormon-News: Mormon News and Events Forwarding is permitted as long as this footer is included Mormon News items may not be posted to the World Wide Web sites without permission. Please link to our pages instead. For more information see http://www.MormonsToday.com/ Send join and remove commands to: majordomo@MormonsToday.com Put appropriate commands in body of the message: To join: subscribe mormon-news To leave: unsubscribe mormon-news To join digest: subscribe mormon-news-digest - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 11:11:38 EDT From: Paynecabin@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Dramatic scripture reading A dramatic reading of the scriptures, at least in recorded form, would probably not be welcomed by the general church leadership. Some years ago, the composer Marden Pond and I put together an extensive proposal and a demo of the Book of Mormon being read (I like to believe) with a little more passion than usual, with musical underscoring. After a couple of years of preparation, we were told by various tape duplicating facilities in Utah that the church had asked them not to manufacture new versions of the Book of Mormon for enterprises other than the church. We abandoned the idea. Marvin Payne - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 10:29:39 -0600 (MDT) From: Ivan Angus Wolfe Subject: Re: [AML] Reading the Scriptures The first essay I ever read that made me realize that feminist criticism could actually be used for genuine, real and insightful (rather than rabid, acidic and poltiical) readings of scripture was for a "Bible as Literature" class at BYU (the section I took was not taught by the famous Dr. Walker who usually teaches it - in hindsight I wish it had been). Unfortunately in class what happened was a vocal minority took control of the class discussion (this was even encouraged by the teacher) and spent the entire class tearing apart the Bible for it's rigid patristic views, horrible depections of women and overall maleness. The rhetoric was particularly acidic and I was not in a good mood (nor was most of the class). later on in the semester, in a section covering parables, the same minority spent quite awhile discussing why the parables of Jesus were flawed, what was wrong with them, why they didn't work and even how they were horribly constructed and presented. when I asked the teacher why he allowed this particualr group to speak, he said that it wasn't such a big deal and that we needed to look at the parables anew and "get past our primary images" of them. I don't accept this - it's almost the same argument as "only an unbeleiver can be truly objective about religion." I am past my "primary images" of the parables, and being an English major I can appreciate them at a literay level and realize that some of them should only be taken so far. (The parable of the sower works great on the surface level - but if read too deeply, it could produce a calvanistic reading). But I also beleive the Bible to be inspired - flawed perhaps only in the fact no human is perfect, and a sexist culture will most likely write more favorably about men than women - But I see no reason to use literary readings to tear the Bible apart and reveal it for "what it really is" (you know - a horribly written piece of propoganda produced by several authors and many otehr compilers like R, J, E, etc. produced by a sexist/racist culture and filled with incredibly flawed metaphors). There is a difference between faithful literary readings and unfaithful ones. Unfortunately, I've come across too many of the "unfaithful" types - thus leaving me nearly as cyncial about "Literay studies of the Bible" as CS Lewis and TS Eliot were (both of whom were very much against the study of the "Bible as Literature.") But being an English major, I can't help but not to employ my training in reading the scriptures. That's the way it is with all of us. I know a chemist who describes some scriptural relationships (like Abraham and Sarah) as "Covalent bonds" or Laman and Leumel "istopes of each other." BTW - Richard R. Hopkins book "Biblical Mormonism" is a masterpiece - it should be considered a classic in Mormom apologetics. It was the first really well done, solidly grounded refutation of Anti-mormon claims that I had read - and it went well beyond quoting 1 Cor. 15:29, defining baptism and asking "who was Jesus praying to in the Garden?" It is very academic and is written so as to be more than just the "same old thing" you get in most other refutations of Anti-Mormons on the market out there. - --Ivan Wolfe - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 11:26:12 -0600 From: "Richard R. Hopkins" Subject: Re: [AML] Reading the Scriptures Ben's comments both below and in another message on this subject show how well Latter-day Saints do hermeneutics naturally. There are, I believe, two ways to interpret the scriptures, which, if combined, give the greatest possible value. One is by literary means, i.e., using the rules of hermeneutics, and the other is through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. My personal study suggests that the result is the same for both, if done carefully, but a literary analysis can produce many new and previously hidden treasures of knowledge, if combined with attention to the guidance of the Spirit. Most LDS have never used the literary method, only the spiritual one, which seems more readily available to them than it has been to the hoard of Bible scholars who have been studying the scriptures over the past 4000 years (including the Old Testament). So we need to do some homework in this field, so to speak. Those who look up the rules (or have read chapter 1 of my book, eh, Colin?) will recognize well established rules of hermeneutic or literary analysis in each of the statements Benson makes below. (See interlineated comments.) >>One more thought here. The first time I read the scriptures, my last couple of years of high school and my first semester of college (late '70s), it struck me we ought to pay close attention to how the scriptures interpret themselves.<< Richard: There are a whole set of rules in hermeneutics aimed at letting the scriptures interpret themselves. One is: "Light may be thrown upon a doubtful or difficult passage by comparing it with other statements of the author on the same subject." >>One of the major subtexts of the D&C and Pearl is that the scriptures _are_ unified and should be read as a whole.<< Richard: Again, this is major tenet of hermeneutics. One Bible scholar has said it this way: "The individual word is properly understood within the sentence and the sentence by means of its words. This reciprocal relationship is called the 'hermeneutical circle.' It spirals out from individual words to the entire Bible. There is mutual dependence of general knowledge on the particular and the particular on the general." >>The common thread through this is that the scriptures tend to interpret themselves typologically.<< Richard: Typological interpretation comes within the framework of figurative as opposed to literal interpretation. There are a whole set of interesting rules for telling the difference, then interpreting the figurative or typological language. One of those is an interesting caution: "We must be careful not to demand too many points of analogy [in a type or figure]." This is an interesting discussion and one that has been an interest of mine for many years. I'm pleased to see LDS beginning to examine this issue. I hope those who are interested in this will take a little time to look up the rules of hermeneutics and bring themselves up to speed. LDS have been criticized for decades on their lack of knowledge of hermeneutics. Personally, I think it's because we have relied quite nicely on the spirit, thank you very much, but I also think it is time that we joined the rest of the Bible-believing world in gaining an understanding of the principles of literary analysis commonly used by them (sometimes instead of the spirit, I'm sorry to say). It is a way to get a much greater insight into the scriptures, IMHO. Richard Hopkins - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 May 2000 13:58:22 -0600 From: Thom Duncan Subject: Re: [AML] Dramatic scripture reading Paynecabin@aol.com wrote: > > A dramatic reading of the scriptures, at least in recorded form, would > probably not be welcomed by the general church leadership. I agree, but I suspect the membership would eat it up. I had a similar idea years ago. My plan was to read the scripture verbatim, but when other characters were mentioned, another actor would read that line, and so on. To turn into a reader's theatre if you will. I still think it would sell. Thom - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 18:13:28 EDT From: CDoug91957@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Reading the Scriptures In a message dated 00-05-05 12:09:48 EDT, Benson wrote: << Whatever are the reasons for not giving serious, critical, | literary attention to the scriptures, and a lot of it, we need to do | differently. To do differently we need to establish a method (or methods) for | such study with which students of Mormon literature who hold vastly varying | degrees of faith in the religious message are comfortable. What would you say are the advantages of finding such methods? >> So we can present papers to the AML? Colin D. - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 May 2000 02:29:03 EDT From: CDoug91957@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] Reading the Scriptures In a message dated 00-05-05 19:19:54 EDT, Ivan Wolfe writes: << I've come across too many of the "unfaithful" types - thus leaving me nearly as cyncial about "Literay studies of the Bible" as CS Lewis and TS Eliot were (both of whom were very much against the study of the "Bible as Literature.") >> Amen. I have tried to make it clear that what I am talking about is nont "the Bible as literature" or the "Book of Mormon as literature" in the way that those things are usually meant. I am talking about opening up a dimension of meaning in the scriptures that is usually ignored, by bringing to them the methods of literary "close reading." Lewis himself was pretty good at that; see _Reflections on Psalms_. Colin D.[ouglas] - - AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature http://www.xmission.com/~aml/aml-list.htm ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #32 *****************************