The Human Drama of Family History Work

Charles Watson was born in 1844 in the village of Old Brampton in the county of Derbyshire, England. He was the fourth of seven sons. Brampton was a small farming community two miles outside of Chesterfield, the second largest town in the county. His father was a farmer and Charles grew up on his father's farm.

A central teaching of the Church of Jesus Christ is performing vicarious religious ordinances or rituals for those who have died. We consider these ordinances, properly performed by those who have authority, to be essential for salvation and even those who may have been baptized in another church while they were alive needs to have a properly authorized baptism performed for them. While the choice to accept the ordinance still rests on each individual, we believe that a physical action must be done for each and every individual ever born.

Hannah Parsons was born in the village of Old Brampton in 1846, three weeks before her parents were married. Because her parents were not married at the time she was born, she did not officially have her father's last name, and had only the maiden name of her mother. But later in life everyone just assumed, including perhaps Hannah herself, that her name was Hannah Fretwell. But the "Parsons" part of her name was remembered and appeared in later records. She was the first of ten children.

In support of the endeavor to find each individual and perform religious rituals for them, members of the church do extensive family history work, or genealogy, to find the names of those who have died and have not had the opportunity to have the proper authorized ordinances performed while alive. In doing this work we tend to focus on the work of sifting through records, finding the names and dates, and making sure our sources are correct before we submit the names to the Temple so that the proper, authorized religious rituals are performed for them.

Hannah and Charles both lived in the small village of Brampton, and in 1870 they were married. At the time Charles was working as a coal miner. His father had passed away before Charles was married, and the family had sold the farm. All of Charles's brothers were working as coal miners to fuel the raging industrial revolution in England.

While most of genealogy work may be dry and boring, sifting through records and names, looking at images of records and trying to decipher the cryptic handwriting of some parish priest, every once in a while a story comes out of records. It is a story told not in verse or sweeping epics, but in names and dates. In the middle of the most boring historical records imaginable, emerges a tale of human drama, death, heartache, and uncertainty that would be fit for any dramatic tale.

Hannah and Charles had their first child in 1869, and they named her Sarah Parsons Watson. At that time and place it was unusual for people to have three names, but Hannah, who was born Hannah Parsons, kept that part of her name in the name of her first daughter. Over the next seven years they had three more daughters, Mary, Emma Parsons, and Charlotte.

As members of the Church we are encouraged to remember our ancestors. But there are some ancestors who tend to get more coverage than others, while there are those who quietly fade into the background. In these less commonly traversed branches of the family tree are found the quiet human dramas that make up the human experience.

In July 1878 tragedy struck the Watson family. Charles died. There is no record of how he died, only that he was buried in the church yard of St. Thomas in Brampton. Given his work as a coal miner it is possible his death was related to that. This left his wife a widow with four small daughters aged 8, 6, 4, and 2. As a widow living in a poor working class community it would have been very difficult.

There is a perception that history is made by well known, great individuals who through force of will or strength of character form the axis of history. But most of human history is made up of normal people, going about their lives, quietly living out the everyday dramas that make us human.

Within two years Hannah had remarried. Her new husband, William Gregory, was a widower with six children of his own. William was also a coal miner. The marriage produced no more children and it may have been a marriage of convenience. Hannah needed a way to support her daughters, and William needed someone to watch his small children while he worked in the coal mines. 

However the family did it, all 10 children lived in a modest house in poor working class conditions. That is, until 1887 when Hannah passed away. Again there is no record of how she died, or even where she was buried. We do not even know the exact date of her death since it is only recorded in a England death registry which only gives the year and quarter (range of three months). At the ages of 17, 15, 13, and 11 Hannah's four daughters were left orphans. At the time they were living with their stepfather and his six children. 

There is very little known about what happened to Hannah's four daughters in the intervening years, but I managed to find all four of them in the 1891 census.
Sarah Parsons married Isaac Burt in 1890. She would go on to have eight children, with the last two born in Illinois in the United States. Her husband Isaac was a coal miner, and near the end of the 1800's the coal in Derbyshire was running out. In 1905 they emigrated to the US so that Isaac and his sons could work as coal miners in Braceville, Illinois. 

In 1891 Mary Watson, Charles and Hannah's second daughter, was working in a cotton mill while living with her grandparents Francis and Fanny Fretwell. In 1893 she married Daniel Hughes and they had four children. They stayed in Chesterfield, Derbyshire their entire lives. 

By 1891 Emma Parsons Watson, the third daughter, was 16 years old and was living as a domestic servant to a well-to-do family in Chesterfield. After this she disappears from the record and I can not trace her life after that. I do not know if she got married, had a family or died alone. Her life, right now, is an unknown drama. 

Shortly after her mother died, Charlotte Watson went to live with another family. At the age of 11 she began working as a domestic servant. Shortly after moving in with her employers the family moved to somewhere near Sheffield, which is in Yorkshire, the county next to Derbyshire. She was still living with them four years later in 1891 when she appears in the census. Like her sister Emma, she disappears from the records after this and I can't trace her. 

Encapsulated in the family of Charles and Hannah is great portions of modern human history. There is the disruption of traditional farming communities by the industrial revolution, and the fuel of the revolution was coal. The families lived in poor conditions in a town that grew around industry and coal. Chesterfield expanded because of the industrial revolution, and while it ultimately helped lift people out of poverty, the process was difficult and painful. There were families who lost their fathers, and children who were left orphans. We only have to read a Charles Dickens novel to learn of harsher side of the industrial revolution.

After becoming an orphan, their eldest daughter, survived and started her own family. That family now lives in the US and they may not remember where they came from.

The second daughter stayed in England and navigated the changes that came after the industrial revolution. They were a working class family where the children dropped out of school by the age of 12 and started working.

Anyone who does enough family history work knows that sometimes people disappear from the written record. The other two daughters, Emma and Charlotte, and emblematic of those who quietly disappear in the milieu of history. Hopefully they can be found someday, because everyone should be remembered.

Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren

There are plenty of Hollywood movies out there that are ready to show the full force and destruction of "God's judgement" but they never seem to ask just what it was that people did to deserve the "judgement". If the movie does try to ask that question the answer usually is a nebulous "we were doing evil, like polluting the earth". This always makes God's judgements seem arbitrary and capricious. But I think that the worst judgement that God can pass on us is that we have to live with the consequences of our actions. We cannot escape the world we create for ourselves.

Usually if we were to think of the things that God might judge us for we tend to think of the big and drastic things, like murder or blasphemy. But I think that in the end the things that God cares about the most are how we treat our own children, because how we treat our own children, who are wholly dependent on us, is a greater indicator of who we are, both individually and as a society.

It is well known in psychology that how children are raised can make a big impact on the later life outcomes of the children. It is also well known that if there are too many broken families that cannot adequately provide for their children in a certain area or city then crime rates will soar and society as a whole will suffer. When most people look for God's judgements they look for fire from the sky and plagues of locusts everywhere, but they fail to see that high crime rates, a general breakdown of social order and well being are just the indicators of God's judgements that they should be looking for.

In "the great and last day, when all people, and all kindreds, and all nations and tongues shall stand before God, to be judged of their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil" the great determining factor in God's judgements will be how all nations, kindreds, tongues and people have treated the least of those among them, because how they treat the least among them will determine what they will become. That is, how a society treats its children will determine what kind of society they will become. It determines what will be transmitted to the next and subsequent generations. If they fail to care for those who come to them naked and a stranger to this world then they will fail to continue and God's judgements will be upon them. This test of how a society treats its children is the great determiner of the success or failure of that society.

Once a society forgets this and places present pleasures over eternal pleasures then begins the process of decay and a loss of stability. It is not something that happens overnight. It may take a generation or two, but eventually the judgements of God will come, not in the form of fire from heaven or rivers of blood, but in manifestations of man's inhumanity to man that will make people wonder, "How did we get to this point?". In a sense it all started when we ignored "the least of these my brethren".

So if we take the time to reconsider that famous passage from the Book of Matthew, and realize that our children come to us as strangers, naked, hungry, thirsty and in need of our constant care, and we must clothe them, feed them, give them drinks, and care for them when they are ill, we can see that one of the things that will divide the righteous from the wicked, those nations, kindreds, tongues and people that will continue on and those that will not, the eternal societies from the temporal societies, is how we treat the least of those among us. How we treat the most vulnerable among us is how God will judge us.

31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

And remember to "suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven."

Stories from My Mission: "Just imagine how they would behave if you weren't a member of the church!"

In my last area of my mission I got to know a particular member family fairly well. They were one of the few very active families in the ward (yes! a ward! the only one I had in my entire mission) and we could rely on them to always be at church and not have to worry about them getting offended because someone looked at them cross eyed and never coming back to church.

One day I decided that we should pass by their house. We had not seen them at church on Sunday so I had a brief thought to pass by and see how they were doing. At the time I thought I was just being lazy and we didn't have anything better to do so I thought, "Well we'll just go stop by to kill some time." Little did I know that our visit would help the family. When we got to their house we could tell that not everything was familial love and peace at home. There was yelling and much commotion. I wondered if we should just walk on by without stopping but we did stop and stood at the gate and clapped. No one immediately answered our call but soon some of the younger children (early teens to pre-teen) came out of the house. Let's just say that there were some uncharitable words exchanged in front of us quickly followed by some physical violence, immediately followed by extended yelling.

The children went back into the house, and we could hear some more commotion coming from the house including general punishments being given out by the mother. At this point one of the older children came out and with a rather embarrassed look on her face asked what we wanted. I told her that we were just stopping by to see how they were doing. She gave me an icy glare that said, "Can't you tell? What are you deaf and dumb (not mute)?" Trying to suppress a smile I asked with a slight hint of sarcasm in my voice if there were a more convenient time for us to stop by. Again she gave me an icy glare through her embarrassment and told us that we could stop by later that evening. I told her that we would and then said goodbye.

Later that evening we did return to a much more peaceful house and a few less embarrassed and icy glares. We sat down with the mother and her two oldest daughters (one of whom was the one who tried to burn me away with her icy glare). The mother was slightly embarrassed that we had to witness the "dysfunction" of her family. She told us that she tried so hard to make her children behave but they never seemed to listen to her. At this point I asked about their absence from church on Sunday and she said that it had rained very hard the day before (it had) and the roads were extremely muddy (they were) and they had overslept (church is at 9 am) so they didn't really have the motivation to get to church.

I also asked if they were having family scripture study and prayer. She said that they tried but the past two weeks they had been a little vago (lazy) about it. I asked about family home evening and again she said that they had not had it for two or three weeks and at this point one of the daughters stopped me and said, "And that is why we were fighting! We weren't doing any of those things!"

But her mother then said, "I try so hard to teach them to behave, and in the church we are taught to teach our children to behave but it seems like they never listen and they never learn! Don't you agree Elder? They are some of the worst behaved children at church! I thought that going to church and living the gospel would teach them to not fight and to behave but they can't learn anything! That is why we joined the church in the first place, but they can't behave! Don't you agree Elder!?! They just behave like savages!"

So here I was in a friendly predicament, on the one had I had to agree with the mother her kids were quite a rowdy bunch. On the other hand I had her two oldest daughters there (aged 21 and 18 I think) and I couldn't just readily agree with the mother that they were a bunch of savages with her daughters there with both of them looking like hungry wolves ready to pounce on me if I agreed with their mother's sentiment that they were a bunch of savages. So that is when I hit on a brilliant way out of this predicament.

I said, "If you think about how bad they behave now, just image how bad they would behave if you weren't a member of the church!"

The eldest daughter looked at me and laughed and said, "Ah! You are very intelligent Elder!"

I had successfully agreed with the mother while at the same time praising the children for being better than they could be. We all laughed and the mother commented about how it was true what I said. She said that they had let many of the things they normally do, such as family prayer and family home evening and because of that contention and animosity quickly entered their home.

The next Sunday they were all back at church, the kids were wiggly and noisy, but still reverent and they were all getting along and there was obvious love in their family. They were back into their routine of family prayer, scripture study and church attendance. The children weren't perfect but they were better than they could have been.

This is one of the experiences that taught me that the gospel does not make us better than other people, but it does make us better than ourselves.

Allison Bowers (1999-2010)

This week my niece tragically died in an accident. She was hit by a car while riding her bike. It is one of those things that you hope never happens, and you pray you never have to live through, but when it does we learn what is truly important, and learn to love a little more.

This is a picture that I took of Allison back in 2006 when we were hunting for geodes in Utah. It was around Thanksgiving and it was rather cold out. You may notice the rocks sitting on top of the frozen water. It was cold and windy, but Allison had a warm smile.

I took this picture when I was in Arizona for a birthday party for Allison's sister Johanna in 2005. The one thing that stood out to me even then was her warm smile. It was contagious, and still is.

My sisters and brother have also expressed their feelings on our loss:

Consider the Lilies

TheAncestorFiles

This Journey

Florida Family Times

I Find it Ironic

One of the most painful ironies of our current society is how feminists have chosen to react to the immoral and unethical actions taken by some men. Years before the feminist movement there were a number of men that shirked their family responsibilities, abandoned their wives and placed personal ambition over the the welfare of their posterity. In paying obeisance to this self-serving lifestyle it was only natural that they demand that those who looked up to them for support and affirmation degrade themselves and hold themselves in involuntary servitude. I should emphasize that this was the actions taken by only a few, but it was enough so that when we as a society began to speak of freedom and equality for blacks it was natural for those enslaved by immoral men to think about freedom.

What happened next constitutes one of the saddest ironies of our current society, instead of demanding that their wayward and self-serving husbands return to their family duties, the feminists decided to commit the same error as their enslavers. They too abdicated their place in the family, disparaged their true identity and took upon themselves the very sins that lead to their enslavement. In demanding equality they did not demand that their identity be treated with equal importance or that they be respected as women, but rather that they be allowed to participate in all of the immorality of those who held their greatest work in derision and contempt. Thus began the teaching of a lie that if a woman was to be equal to a man, the only way she could accomplish it would be by becoming a man, or at least doing everything a man does.

I find it ironic that in finding a way to break free from their "enslavement" feminists chose to embrace the very thing that enslaved them in the first place, the selfish and egotistical power mongering of those who had abandoned their responsibility to care for and love their families. I find it ironic that in trying to become free and establish their identity, feminists abandoned their identities and sought to follow after the teachings of those who oppressed them. To this I ask, "Where is your freedom? Where is your liberation? Men still tell you what to do, how to act and where to live. And what is worse is that in abandoning your families you have left no one to raise your children, and they have gone out of the way, because you were not there to teach them. Thus they were left to teach themselves or to be taught by those wicked men who were your first oppressors. How is this freedom?"

Unfortunately after the so called sexual revolution of the 1960's a greater number of men joined the ranks of the immoral and abandoned their families. Thus the doctrine of women's liberation found fertile ground as there were now more who were willing to abandon family and responsibility and join with those whose sole purpose is to debase and degrade all members of the human race. It is ironic that a movement that started out with the aim of bettering the lives of women and preventing their abuse, would ultimately turn out to be the thing that would contribute to their continued enslavement, degradation, debasing and belittling. All because they chose to take upon themselves the attributes of their oppressors rather than finding a more excellent way.

If women want to find liberation and fulfillment then it would make the most sense to do so by expressing their feminine identity, that which makes them women, rather than by emulating all the frailties and selfishness of men. As for men, when they can view women as who they are, and not as objects for manipulation, and when they view their families as worthy of their of their greatest dedication, only then can they be Men and both women and men will be free.

Herein is the Great Lie

Many people consider the recent movement to legalize same-sex marriage consider homosexuality to be something that is unavoidable for some people, and should be viewed as common and just as acceptable as heterosexual relations. All this comes from the idea that just because we have an inclination to do something then we must do it, and it is inevitable that we will do it.

I recently read the transcript of an interview regarding the LDS Church's stance on same-gender attraction and one quote I found particularly interesting was, "One of the great sophistries of our age, I think, is that merely because one has an inclination to do something, that therefore acting in accordance with that inclination is inevitable." (Elder Wickman)

The reason why same-sex marriage is even an issue is because normal heterosexual relations outside of marriage are already considered to be acceptable. If this first were not considered acceptable then the other would not even have been considered as a serious issue of consideration. Those who have attempted to affect and direct society first taught us that these things were normal and that we have urges that not only should we give into them, but that it is inevitable that we give in to our urges and desires. Once that idea had been established in our collective forma de ser (way of being) then the other question, that of homosexuality was raised. Given the forgone conclusion of the former idea, the latter conclusion seemed natural.

The only reason why some people think, "I don't see why that is a problem, it's not that different and in some ways better than what 'normal' people do." is because they are so deep inside the Greatest Lie and Sophistry of our time that they cannot see it clearly for what it is. These people may realize that if homosexual relations are truly wrong then all other sexual relations outside of marriage are also wrong, but because that idea was banished years ago from our society they see no problem with allowing the next logical step. They see it as a logical progression from allowing one thing, to allowing another and finally all things. Unfortunately there is an inevitable end to all of this and it is precisely this end they wish to ignore, for it was because of this natural conclusion that these things were not allowed in the first place.

They deny that allowing these things (not just homosexuality, but also relations outside of marriage) will lead to a fracturing of society and will destroy the foundation, or that which perpetuates, our society. But those who actively preach this doctrine do not wish to promote the consequences, they only want to promote the idea that these things are inevitable, or that there is only one natural way of progression, and this is it. Herein is the Great Lie of our time.

A Stabilizing Influence

Many years ago when I was in Argentina I had the opportunity to hear a story about the settling of Paraguay by the Spanish. The Paraguayans that told me the story said that many years ago when the Spanish were first exploring the area that would later become Paraguay they came up with a method to conquer the local Guarani Indians. They brought over 1000-2000 (depending on who told the story the number varied, but the rest of the story was the same) men from Spain and when the boat carrying them reached the point on the Paraguay River where Asuncion now stands they disembarked and there by the side of the river were met by an equal number of Guarani women and there they were all married by a Catholic Priest.

This story is reminiscent of a similar act performed by Alexander the Great. After conquering the Persian Empire Alexander went on to invade India, but after his failed attempt to conquer India he came back and proceeded to consolidate his empire. To accomplish this he conceived of the idea of having 7,000 of his Greek troops marry an equal number of Persian women in the city of Babylon, and they married using Persian rituals. This act allowed the Greeks that came after Alexander to keep and form a cohesive culture that would affect many different societies around the world. So more than conquering kingdoms and empires by military might Alexander was able to win cultural and social battles long after he was dead by establishing the precedent of transmitting Greek culture through family relations. While the effect of Greek culture extended far beyond the literal descendants of those 7,000 it was that critical fact that those families were formed giving the basis through which the culture, values, knowledge and social practices could be given to future generations and societies.

Returning to my story of the 2,000 some odd Spanish men and Guarani women, they too represented the merging of two cultures, and through these unions the Paraguayan people got their sense of identity and social cohesiveness. Even to this day they are defined by that act. It is still tradition in Paraguay that the mother will raise her children speaking Guarani and the men when they are together will speak Spanish. Because of this Paraguay is officially and practically bilingual. The point is that these marriages, while they are not the romantic marriages of our "modern" world, nor were they the marriages of "equal partners" as defined by our contemporary society, but these marriages formed the basis of their society and gave them an extremely strong sense of national identity. Anyone who is familiar with the history of Paraguay and in particular the history of La Guerra de la Triple Alianza (The War of the Triple Alliance) then they are familiar with the nationalistic fervor that attended the defense of their country. Even though this cohesiveness did not solve all their problems it certainly allowed them to do more than they could have had they not received this defining trait through the family relationships that were established with the marriages formalized between the Spanish men and the Guarani women.

My purpose in mentioning these two examples is to showcase the idea that the fabric of our society is formed out of the family relationships made between men and women. If the Spanish men had not married the Guarani women then they would not have formed the strong national identity of the Paraguayan people. In effect the reason why the society still exists today is because of those strong family relationships that did so much towards creating that identity. It would not have mattered how strong a bond those Spanish men may have formed or held in some way, if they were unable or unwilling to transmit that identity, and the same goes for the Guarani women, then that national identity and society would not exist today. The same goes for the Greeks. Even if Alexander had conquered the whole world then his influence and Greek culture would not have been passed down to our day. They would have been like the Mongols who won many military campaigns but their cultural influence did not leave nor extend past the boundaries of their own lands. Whatever influence they may have had was swallowed up by the cultures they supposedly conquered.

In our day we are not confronted with threats of invading armies but we are threatened by a different destructive force. The concept of the family, which forms the basis of our society, and of all societies, is under attack. If it is destroyed by those who would see its end, if they accomplish their aims then there will be no mechanism to transmit our society, our values and our history. On the Eastern facade of the National Archives there are inscribed these words, "This building holds in trust the records of our national life and symbolizes our faith in the permanency of our national institutions." If we allow the foundation of our nation, our families, to be altered and destroyed in such a way that our identity and our national life cannot be transmitted to a new generation then our faith has been in vain and there will come a day when our national institutions will fail. Without the mechanism, the family, in place to transmit our national identity from one generation to another our society will lose its identity and will suffer the fate of all failed societies in history. But we can prevent this and we can overcome this destructive force. We do not have to give in to the "natural course" of human nature. Because we have God given abilities we can overcome the slippery slope of "modern thought" and not consider the current state of our nation, and our families and the given and common way that families must be. There is a better way and it does not have to be the fractured and weakened state of the modern family. If someone is sick you do not say, "It is human nature and that is the way it is." We do not have to accept the dysfunctional, the alternative, the nonexistent or partial family as the norm. We can rise above this and be strong.

The solution lies in the simple phrase "Husbands, love your wives. Wives, love your husbands. Husbands and wives, love your children." A family can be founded on love and respect and the children can be taught honor and virtue, and we do not have to accept a definition of marriage that only allows for personal gratification. Marriage is not and should not be defined as a means to gratify personal desires. We do not have to think or to agree with the current trends of our culture and our society. We do not have to accept the redefining of marriage to allow for personal freedom. Personal freedom can be had without attacking the foundation of our society. If we allow these trends to continue then the mechanism that worked for so long, the mechanism that brought Greek culture to the world, the mechanism that created Paraguayan national identity and the mechanism that gave us our national identity, will cease to function and our culture, our society and our national life will not be transmitted to a new generation and our history, our identity, will be lost.