Mormon Coffee

It's forbidden, but it's good!

The official blog site of Mormonism Research Ministry

Monday, October 30, 2006

The most criticized book

by Eric

Along with about 60 of my senior students from the Bible classes that I teach at a private Christian high school, I recently traveled to three different religious venues for educational visits. We visited a conservative Jewish synagogue, a Hare Krishna temple, and an Islamic mosque, spending two hours at each venue. We had visited the Mormon Battalion Center in Old Town, San Diego several weeks before.

While driving home after the Sunday afternoon mosque visit, I suddenly realized how the groundwork for all four faiths was the same. This commonality goes beyond the fact that all three deny that Jesus was God in the flesh, that they think justification before God requires effort on our part to achieve, or that they teach how a person must belong to their faith in order to get the best God has to offer.

Let me give you some hints by providing you with real quotes of these leaders:

Mormon: “We believe it’s true, but we can’t be sure it’s translated correctly.”

Jew: “It can’t be trusted historically. I believe in its spiritual nature, but I’m not foolish enough to believe in stories like the Creation account [the rabbi is an Evolutionist] or Noah.”

Devotee: “Christian leaders took the word reincarnation out of it at the Council of Constantinople in AD 550.”

Muslim: “Its stories about Jesus were written so late that we can’t be sure they are really true. In addition, Paul so tainted it with his personal philosophy.”

Can you guess what the “it” was? Were they talking about the Book of Mormon? The Talmud? The Bhagavad-Gita? The Qur’an? Guess again. In fact, all four spiritual leaders found time in their lectures to criticize the Bible and the lack of reliability they said it had. What is strange is that three of the four men (the Mormon, Jew, and Muslim) made a special point to tell the students how much they like the Bible!

Fortunately, our students have been well grounded on the pertinent issues surrounding the transmission of the biblical text. When I politely corrected the Krishna devotee about his facts and explained how it would have been impossible to have taken reincarnation out of the biblical text in AD 550 since we possess complete copies of the Bible that were copied several hundred centuries earlier, he fumbled around before finally admitting, “Well, I’m no expert on the Bible.”

I felt like saying, “No, sir, you’re not, but maybe you ought to do a little more study before stepping out on a limb and making statements to my students that have no basis in fact.” As for me, I am willing to put the Bible next to any of these religions’ writings, none of which could stand up to the historical/critical tests like the Bible. After all, it is the B-I-B-L-E, and that’s the book for me!

Labels: ,

Friday, October 27, 2006

Inviting Non-Mormons:
Bring the Good With You

by Sharon

LDS President Gordon B. Hinckley is gracious toward people of other faiths. In his October First Presidency Message, written primarily to new members of the LDS Church, President Hinckley wrote:

…there are many good people in other churches. There is much of good in them. Your family and your prior religious traditions may have taught you many good things and established many good habits…Bring the good things with you, keep them, and use them in the Lord's service. (Ensign, October 2006, page 5)

On another occasion President Hinckley said to non-Mormons,
To these we say in a spirit of love, bring with you all that you have of good and truth which you have received from whatever source, and come and let us see if we may add to it. (Ensign, November 2002, page 78)

I have a friend who, when reading statements like these from President Hinckley, asks, "What 'good' could there possibly be in any organization that is classified as an 'abomination' before God that was 'hatched in hell' and is as 'corrupt as hell'?"

At these times my friend is thinking of (and quoting) statements about Christianity made by Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and John Taylor (respectively), the first three presidents of the LDS Church. My friend has a good point; just what "religious traditions" from these "corrupt" churches would President Hinckley like to see incorporated into the LDS Church?

Shall I bring my understanding of God as Trinity? Or my church's teaching that we are saved by grace apart from all we can do? Or my knowledge that God hates polytheism -- even the very idea of other Gods?

May I bring to the LDS Church the teaching that God created me in my mother's womb--created me out of nothing--and that the natural always comes before the spiritual? Or that Jesus was God from the very beginning? Or that Christ's blood is able to cleanse us from all sin?

Would I be welcome to bring with me the firm belief that the Bible is entirely trustworthy and is all I need in matters of faith and salvation? Or the certainty that the need for the temple was done away through the all-sufficient atonement of Christ? Or my conviction that God the Father has been the only true God for all eternity?

It is not possible to dovetail these biblical Christian teachings -- these truths that have captured the hearts and souls of God's people -- with the teachings of Mormonism. And President Hinckley knows it. So what does he mean when he invites people to come to the LDS Church and bring all the good that they have? Of what good does he speak?

Maybe President Hinckley is thinking of behaviors rather than truths. Maybe he's thinking of things like giving to the poor or helping the elderly or caring for children. The Mormon Church would certainly welcome new members with these values.

But there's a problem with this. The prophet Isaiah said,
You [God] are indeed angry, for we have sinned -- In these ways we continue; and we need to be saved. But we are all like an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses [righteous deeds] are like filthy rags; we all fade as a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. (Isaiah 64:5-6)

If Isaiah spoke the truth, people who embrace corrupt and abominable spiritual teachings are incapable of doing anything pleasing to God. Everything they do is tainted by their sin and is therefore unacceptable to Him, even things that appear good and righteous. The apostle Paul said,
There is none righteous, no, not one. (Romans 3:10, quoting Psalm 14)

Surely President Hinckley is not engaging in a ruse in order to make people comfortable with the prospect of embracing a new faith, but I can't seem to reconcile his attitude and invitation with the Bible, which says,
This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord, that you should no longer walk as the Gentiles walk, in the futility of their mind, having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart;… put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt… (Ephesians 4:17-22)

The apostle Paul wrote,
One thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. (Philippians 3:13-14)

So while I appreciate President Hinckley's kindness toward those of other faiths, I keep thinking a true prophet of God would sound more like the biblical prophets, calling people to forsake all for Christ. President Hinckley's invitation to hold on to favorite traditions and see if the LDS Church can add a few more just doesn't ring true.


Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Questions of Mormon Racism -- Again

by Sharon

In September and early October republican Representative Russell Pearce from Mesa, Arizona bought himself some trouble A supporter of tougher immigration laws -- suggesting the deportation of undocumented immigrants -- Rep. Pearce, who is a Mormon, made public comments that caused an outcry calling for an end to racist language and bigotry.

An article in the Arizona Republic reported on October 13th that the religious and community leaders in Mesa held a rally during which they asked
Pearce and all elected leaders to engage only in public discourse that treats all people, including undocumented immigrants, with respect and dignity. They invited Pearce to start a dialogue with those he has "hurt" with his "insensitive" words.

Leaders from Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, and other churches spoke at the rally; but leaders from the Mormon community did not attend. According to the Arizona Republic, the rally was "too political" for the LDS Church to be involved in.

Today, in the East Valley Tribune, columnist Slim Smith published a commentary he titled "Mormon Church’s silence is a little peculiar." In the commentary Mr. Smith says the LDS Church has "taken some heat" for not attending the rally.
From LDS officials’ point of view, the rally was a political event and church doctrine prohibits the church from endorsing -- or denouncing -- candidates…

Still, I believe the church made a mistake in not participating in the rally.

There [are] a few reasons. First, Pearce is a Mormon. If his statements don’t reflect the church’s values, the church should say so. Silence suggests approval, it could be argued.

Second, as a Christian, I know that I am charged to be “salt and light" in a secular society. Maybe Mormons adhere to a different standard. I don’t know. But I do know that history shows that many of the most significant social reforms have their origins in a church pew. People of faith have an obligation.

After citing the fact that until 1978 the LDS Church restricted Blacks from holding the priesthood, Mr. Smith wrote,
The rally was a missed opportunity for the church to clearly express its position. Now, some folks question the church’s sincerity on matters of race.

I would say that "some folks" have never stopped questioning the LDS Church's sincerity on matters of race, as evidenced by the Church's prominent clarifications and denials. On, the LDS web site for non-members, the FAQ section includes a statement to the effect that there are no race or color restrictions within the Church. On the main web site of the LDS Church there is a section which deals with the "Myth-conception" that the LDS Church is racist with respect to Blacks:
The Church views all humankind as children of the same Heavenly Father, literally brothers and sisters. As stated by the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in 1987: "We repudiate efforts to deny to any person his or her inalienable dignity and rights on the abhorrent and tragic theory of the superiority of one race or color over another."

Nevertheless, questions persist. It's hard to accept the assertion that there are no race restrictions within the LDS Church when, year after year, the General Authority Chart remains almost exclusively "white and delightsome" (pre-1981 Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 30:6). The G. A. Chart from October 2006 appears to include only six non-Anglos (Hispanic and Asian) out of 100 men pictured, with none in the highest tiers of LDS leadership. (For more information on this topic see "Non-Anglos Need Not Apply?")

Columnist Slim Smith suggested the LDS Church should have taken a stand against racism at the rally earlier this month. He wrote:
My take: Stand for your principles and let the chips -- political or otherwise -- fall where they may…

The LDS church doesn’t have to listen to me, of course.

But it should listen to its conscience.

Perhaps it did.

Friday, October 20, 2006

Mormon Church and Romney Politics

by Sharon

It's all over today's news. Yesterday the Boston Globe reported that the Mitt Romney camp consulted with Mormon leaders to "map out plans for a nationwide network of Mormon supporters to help Romney capture the presidency in 2008." The Boston Globe suggested the LDS Church is officially involved in supporting Governor Romney's political campaign.

According to the Globe,
...documents indicate that Jeffrey R. Holland, one of 12 apostles who help lead the church worldwide, has handled the initiative for the Mormons and that he hosted a Sept. 19 meeting about it in his church office in Salt Lake City...

Holland, a former BYU president, suggested using the alumni organization of the university's business school, the BYU Management Society, to build a network for Romney…

On Oct. 9, [Steve] Albrecht and Ned Hill, the [BYU Marriot School of Management] dean, sent an e-mail to 50 Management Society members and 100 members of the school's National Advisory Council asking them to join them in supporting Romney's potential bid for the presidency. Hill and Albrecht signed the message with their official BYU titles, sent the e-mail from a BYU e-mail address, and began the message "Dear Marriott School Friend."…

Both the church and BYU, as tax-exempt, nonprofit organizations, are prohibited by federal law from advocating on behalf of a particular candidate or political party.

LDS Church owned Deseret Morning News today published an article, "Church faults Mitt story," seeking to set the record straight. The LDS Church called the Globe article "inaccurate" and reaffirmed the Church's long-standing policy of political neutrality.

Today the Boston Globe reported that the alleged actions of the LDS Church and BYU in support of Mitt Romney may not be illegal after all.
Milton Cerny, a retired lawyer who formerly oversaw tax-exempt groups for the IRS, said the actions of BYU and the church did not appear to violate federal law, because Romney is not officially running for president.

Peggy Riley, a spokeswoman for the Internal Revenue Service in Boston, said she could not comment.

Time will tell, I suppose, but this whole thing seems like a tempest in a teapot to me.

An interesting post on Article VI Blog by LowellB takes a reasoned Mormon look at the Globe report. LowellB writes
To me, the Globe story, by Scott Helman and Michael Levenson, combines several elements:
  • The Globe's apparent desire to find an alarming story where there really isn't one.
  • Dumb but harmless mistakes by Romney supporters at BYU (now corrected).
  • Something that looks an awful lot like prejudice-baiting by the Globe, whether that was intended or not.

I may not agree with everything LowellB writes, but I like the counter-balance his comments provide. I encourage you to read it. What do you think?

Wednesday, October 18, 2006

Christ and False Christs

by Sharon

Yesterday the Southeast Missourian News ran an online article titled "Growing up Mormon." Author Melissa Sirrine is a student at Brigham Young University but visits relatives in southeast Missouri each summer. Her article seems to be written for the purpose of informing her non-Mormon audience about the tenets of Mormonism, and specifically that Mormons believe in Christ.

Noting that when in Missouri "I… find myself surrounded by those who don't know a whole lot about what I believe," Ms. Sirrine writes about her faith in Christ, the LDS health code known as the Word of Wisdom, the fact that Mormons do not practice polygamy, and her gratitude for membership in the LDS Church.

Ms. Sirrine concludes:
I am grateful for the chance I have had to live in Southeast Missouri each summer. The area is dotted with churches filled with good Christian people who worship the same Savior who cares even when the littlest sparrow falls to the earth. I'm thankful for my faith. I've loved every minute of growing up Mormon.

Can you guess which part of Ms. Sirrine's conclusion caught my attention? I'm confused (though not surprised) that she identified the LDS Savior and the Jesus worshiped in non-LDS churches as the same Being.

Many people don't understand the concept of "another Jesus"; they say there is only one. And yes, it's true that there is only one true Christ; but Jesus Himself warned about others:
For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive… (Matthew 24:24)

I don't know much about the Jesus Ms. Sirrine worships; all she tells her readers is that He answers prayer and cares about things even as insignificant as sparrows. But it's reasonable to make the assumption that she worships the Christ promoted by her LDS Church. And this Christ is not the same as the Christ non-Mormons worship.

Late LDS Apostle Bruce McConkie taught:
…virtually all the millions of apostate Christendom have abased themselves before the mythical throne of a mythical Christ… (Mormon Doctrine, "False Christs," page 269)

Consider these additional statements from LDS authorities:
  • It is true that many of the Christian churches worship a different Jesus Christ than is worshipped by the Mormons or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (Seventy Bernard P. Brockbank,Ensign, May 1977, page 26)

  • [There are those outside the LDS Church who say Latter-day Saints] do not believe in the traditional Christ. No, I don't. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. (President Gordon B. Hinckley, Church News, 20 June 1998, page 7)

  • As a Church, we have critics, many of them. They say we do not believe in the traditional Christ of Christianity. There is some substance to what they say. (President Gordon B. Hinckley, Ensign, May 2002, page 90)

Certainly, the question could be raised (and should be raised) asking which--the LDS Christ or the "traditional" Christ of Christianity--is the true Christ (if either one). But Ms. Sirrine's public assertion that they are both the same is really unfortunate. Her intended purpose in writing for the Southeast Missourian News was to inform people about her religion. Instead, she has misinformed them on one of the most important and foundational doctrines of Mormonism.

We've seen that if any newspaper prints a statement suggesting polygamy is in any way connected to the LDS Church, it receives letters from Mormons explaining the error of that report. Do you think any Mormon will contact the Southeast Missourian News to set the record straight on the LDS doctrine of Christ?

Monday, October 16, 2006

The Validity of the Mormon Church

by Bill

Naturally I receive a lot of mail from well-meaning Latter-day Saints telling me how I will never be able to “disprove” the claims of Mormonism. Personally, I find such a comment a tad bit on the arrogant side since it exposes a sense of “omniscience” that no Mormon owns. A recent comment I received stated:
"You will never conclusively, objectively disprove the testimony of the Prophet Joseph can't be done, because in reality, the Father and the Son appeared to him in answer to his humble prayer.”

Smith’s “First Vision” has always been a major argument used by Latter-day Saints. Mormon President Gordon Hinckley stated:
“Our whole strength rests on the validity of that vision. It either occurred or it did not occur. If it did not, then this work is a fraud…upon that unique and wonderful experience stands the validity of this church” (“The Marvelous Foundation of our Faith,” Ensign (Conference Edition), November 2002, p.80).

What is interesting about this claim is that Smith’s alleged “First Vision” is one of the very issues that disprove Smith’s testimony. Smith’s encounter in the “sacred grove” gradually evolved to the point where, in 1838, he declared that in the spring of 1820 that God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him and told him that all the churches were wrong and that all of their creeds were an abomination. However, Exodus 33:20 in the King James Version, used by every English-speaking Latter-day Saint of which I am aware, reads:
“And he [God] said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.”

Under direct orders found in the Doctrine and Covenants 73:3-4, Joseph Smith reworded Exodus 33:20 to make this warning even stronger. Exodus 33:20 in Smith’s “Inspired Version” (also known as the Joseph Smith Translation or JST) was “corrected” to read:
“And he said unto Moses, Thou canst not see my face at this time, lest mine anger be kindled against thee also, and I destroy thee, and thy people; for there shall no man among them see me at this time, and live, for they are exceeding sinful. And no sinful man hath at any time, neither shall there be any sinful man at any time, that shall see my face and live.”

Now a Mormon has one of three choices he can make in light of this:

1) He can insist that Joseph Smith saw God because he was not sinful (thus contradicting Romans 3:23; 1 John 1:8, and Smith's own personal testimony in Joseph Smith 1:28).

2) He can insist that Joseph Smith saw God while arguing that the main point of Exodus 33:20 in the King James Version and every other version, including Smith’s “Inspired Version,” is inaccurate.

3) He can admit that the main point of Exodus 33:20 in the King James Version, and every other version, including Smith’s “Inspired Version,” is accurate and Smith was lying about his first vision experience thus confirming that his work was a fraud.

I pick number three. I wonder which one Mr. Hinckley would choose.


Tuesday, October 10, 2006

Personal Worthiness Required

by Sharon

At the LDS Church's most recent General Conference held in Salt Lake City a little over a week ago, Elaine Dalton took the stand. Directing her remarks to the general membership of the Church, Mrs. Dalton delivered a talk she entitled, "Look toward Eternity!"

Near the beginning of her talk, Mrs. Dalton asked,
Do you understand why it is so important to remain clean and pure?…

I desire for every young man and woman, every young adult, and indeed each one of us to feel and know the importance of living a worthy and pure life. It is our personal worthiness that will qualify us to fulfill our individual earthly missions.

Mrs. Dalton identified our "earthly mission": making the choices that will enable us to return to Heavenly Father's presence and claim all the blessings He has in store for us.

It is, therefore, our personal worthiness that will qualify us to spend eternity in the presence of God.

In her talk Mrs. Dalton gave a nod to the need for Jesus Christ and faith:
It is through our faith in the Lord Jesus Christ that we can resist temptation. Our faith will enable us to shun evil.

To become unspotted from the world requires not only faith, but repentance and obedience. We must live the standards and do those things which will entitle us to the constant companionship and guidance of the Holy Ghost…

Personal worthiness is essential to enter His holy temples and to ultimately become heirs to "all [the] Father hath." … we can confidently enter the holy temples of God with a knowledge that we are worthy to go where the Lord Himself goes. When we are worthy, we can not only enter the temple, the temple can enter us. The Lord's promises of salvation and happiness become ours… (emphasis retained from the original)

So the bottom line (for a Mormon) when looking toward eternity is personal worthiness. It is necessary to be clean and pure by one's own merits. Our choices, our obedience, our purity, our worthiness will "qualify" and "entitle" us to go where the Lord goes and receive salvation.

Apparently, though grace through God's mercy is available, it's not a good idea to count on it.

According to Mrs. Dalton, she and her husband were given counsel on their wedding day from LDS President Gordon B. Hinckley:
"Always live in such a way that when you need the Lord's blessings, you can call upon Him and receive them because you are worthy. There will come times in your life when you will need immediate blessings. You will need to live in such a way that they will be granted--not out of mercy but because you are worthy."

President Hinckley's counsel is antithetical to the teachings of the New Testament. There the apostles put God's mercy at the very heart of His blessings and promise of eternal life. Consider these passages:
  • It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. (Romans 9:16)

  • When the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, not by works or righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. (Titus 3:4-7)

  • Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life. (Jude 1:21)

Mrs. Dalton expressed her gratitude for the counsel given her by President Hinckley:
Daily, these holy habits and righteous routines have helped steady us on the path that leads back into our Father's presence. And today I say, "We thank thee, O God, for a prophet to guide us in these latter-days."

I, too, am filled with deep gratitude, but not for a prophet who's unbiblical pronouncements place me under the heavy burden of making myself worthy of Heaven. I am thankful for the sure promises of God found in His Holy Word. With King David I wholeheartedly throw myself upon the astonishing mercy of Almighty God:

O LORD, hear my prayer,
listen to my cry for mercy;
in Your faithfulness and righteousness
come to my relief.
Do not bring Your servant into judgment,
for no one living is righteous before You…
Let the morning bring me word
of Your unfailing love,
for I have put my trust in You.

-from Psalm 143-

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, October 05, 2006

A Strange System of Terrorism

by Sharon

This might be old news as the blogoshpere goes, but it's worth noting nonetheless.

About 2 weeks ago (24 September) the Salt Lake Tribune ran an interesting article under the "Living History" banner. Sporting no byline, the article drew comparisons between LDS history and radical Islam. Here are a few excerpts.
  • What if a Muslim cleric in Riyadh said, "The intention of the Great Satan is to destroy us... If the United States persists in sending armies to destroy us, in the name of Allah we shall conquer them... they will find their own buildings in flames."

    What if a radical imam said, "They raise a force to come and slay all the Muslims, men, women, and children... I will raise my sword and slay those who wish to destroy Allah's people!"

    As an American, you might feel threatened. You might even send in the troops to smoke terrorists out of their holes.

    Oh, did I forget to mention the above quotes are from Brigham Young? Mostly, anyway. I've substituted "Allah" for "God" a time or two…

  • The story of early Mormonism is one of violent persecution. Harassment, imprisonment, dispossession and murder chased the Saints into Utah. Mormons can make a case for being the most persecuted white people in America.

    But not all Mormons meekly hummed "Come, Come Ye Saints," while being pistol-whipped. There is The Nauvoo Expositor, for instance, destroyed at the instigation of Joseph Smith. It printed, accurately as it turned out, stories detailing Smith's extracurricular matrimonial activities. The same righteous fervor that burned in the mob's breast that smashed The Expositor animated the Muslim crowds that burned Danish embassies over a cartoon defaming their prophet…

  • Once in Utah, Young started grousing that maybe the people of the beehive should become an independent nation with God as their sovereign, and to hell with the USA.

    Washington took notice. The Mormon militia employed classic insurgent tactics when Col. Albert Sidney Johnston's army was sent to restore order. Cattle were run off and supply wagons burned.

    As the army approached, it is well-known that Young threatened to burn and blow up everything in its path -- homes, farms, towns -- and fight from mountain redoubts. What isn't as well-known is that he claimed to have agents provocateurs awaiting orders to burn down cities throughout the Midwest and in California.

    [U.S. President James] Buchanan wrote that he was told that "such is believed to be the condition to which a strange system of terrorism has brought the inhabitants of that region, that no one among them could express an opinion favorable to this government . . . without exposing his life and property to peril."

Early Mormonism and radical Islam -- sharing a strange system of terrorism.

The LDS Church promotes the idea that,
There are too many divisions in the world. Let us go forward proclaiming common ground and common goals. (LDS Bishop Alan Tong)

I bet these are some commonalities the LDS Church would rather not see proclaimed.

Monday, October 02, 2006

A Time of Loss

by Bill

Last night, Jerald Tanner, co-founder of Utah Lighthouse Ministry, passed away quietly after an eight year struggle with Alzheimer’s. I first had the privilege of meeting the Tanners back in 1977 when my wife and I took our first vacation to Salt Lake City. At that time Utah Lighthouse Ministry was known as Modern Microfilm and their bookstore was in their home.

In my opinion there was probably no better researcher when it came to the history and doctrines of the LDS Church than Jerald and I would venture to say that even many LDS apologists would have to admit candidly that he was a formidable opponent when it came to the subject of Mormonism. I think it is also safe to say that anybody who has had an interest in sharing their faith with Mormon friends and relatives have benefited in some way from the Tanner’s research.

Having personally watched his health decline over the past few years I view his passing with mixed emotions. Selfishly I will miss his meticulous, and cutting-edge research that has helped me personally assist many Latter-day Saints who were/are questioning their faith. However, knowing that Jerald has received the ultimate healing and now rests in the presence of the God and Savior he loved so well, brings comfort at this time of loss.

We hope that you will join us as we continue to pray for Sandra and the rest of the Tanner family during this time. He will certainly be missed by many.

  • Condolences can be sent to

  • In lieu of flowers the family asks that donations be sent to the Rescue Mission of Salt Lake, 463 South 400 West, Salt Lake City, Utah 84101-2202, (801) 355-1302.