It’s that time of year again, when after a grueling summer of study and anxiety, law school graduates are learning that they’ve passed the bar exam. I wrote this poem in 1980, when I learned I had passed the Arizona bar exam and would soon be licensed to practice law. I was relieved and humbled.

On Admission to the Bar

The field of Justice has become my ground,
and some name me as an adversary.
But I have adversaries of my own,
and I ask to appear, for my own sake,
in Mercy’s court. Yet not for my own sake—
dear Lord, be there for my sake, take my case.
I bluster brave before the earthly bar
but cannot practice in the highest court.
Still I need Thee to be my Advocate.

–Lisa Bolin Hawkins

published in the April 1984 Ensign

Ministering (formerly called “visiting teaching”) is the Lord’s program in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to ensure that every woman in the Church is cared for, contacted as needed,  and has at least two other sisters praying for her, to whom she can turn in a time of need. Yet we sometimes struggle with this essential calling. As Elder Jeffrey R. Holland of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles has said of the similar ministering (formerly called “home teaching”) program, in which the men of the Church are called to contact and watch over each family:

[M]ay we briefly examine the . . . duty that has been described as “the Church’s first source of help” to its individuals and families. Entire forests have been sacrificed providing the paper to organize it and then reorganize it. A thousand pep talks have been given trying to encourage it. Certainly no Freudian travel agency anywhere could possibly arrange the number of guilt trips this subject has provoked. Yet still we struggle to achieve anywhere near an acceptable standard of performance regarding the Lord’s commandment “to watch over the church always” . . . . (Jeffrey R. Holland, “Emissaries to the Church,” Ensign, October 2016, references omitted, available on lds.org).

As a longtime visiting teacher and ministering sister (going on 46 years now) who has not always had a perfect record or a perfect attitude about it, I have discovered some things that sisters say to themselves that can get in the way of completing this essential assignment. Here’s the first one:

Myth 1: “Ministering is just ‘assigned friends’; I don’t want to push into someone’s life and pretend to be her friend.”

Ministering is, in a way, an assignment to be a friend, if possible—but it is so much more than that. This is not just a social relationship, nor are we expected to “pretend” anything. The Church Handbook on Administering the Church, at section 9, available at lds.org, describes the responsibility of visiting teachers (now ministering sisters) as follows:

Visiting teachers [ministering sisters] sincerely come to know and love each sister, help her strengthen her faith, and give service. They seek personal inspiration to know how to respond to the spiritual and temporal needs of each sister [to whom they minister].
Taking into account each sister’s individual needs and circumstances, [ministering sisters] have regular contact . . . with those they are assigned. When a personal visit is not possible, [ministering sisters] may use phone calls, letters, e-mail, or other means to watch over and strengthen sisters. . . .
[Ministering sisters] give compassionate service during times of illness, death, and other special circumstances. They assist the Relief Society president in coordinating short-term and long-term assistance when invited.

That sounds like a responsibility that is not exactly the same as friendship, or an assignment to be someone’s friend. The definition of friendship can vary depending on the people involved. The definition of ministering has been set, as above and on lds.org under “Ministering,” by prophets of the Lord. It is to be hoped that the sisters we teach will come to see us as friends. Meanwhile, we are the Lord’s representatives to them. The Lord, the bishop, and the Relief Society president need our hearts and hands to serve, teach, and minister to our sisters, and to recognize their special circumstances. Ministering is the organization the Lord has created to watch over each sister in the Relief Society. And we may find ourselves becoming a friend to our companion and the sisters we teach—if so, that’s a special bonus!

Edited 4 August 2018.

Voices from the (Household) Dust

These are the crumbs of our civilization,
Smudges of our day-to-day world—
Witnesses whisper from bookshelves,
Cling to electronic screens,
Peek from window blinds.
Someday we’ll clean them away—
Microfibered memories.

Come take a tour before they’re gone:
Cup rings on tables circle our laughter,
Kiss remnants pucker Grandma’s photo glass,
Carpet dents shape repeated knees,
Bedsheets crumple slumber, sickness, love.
Counters wreathe garlands of mismeasured flour,
Petals remember a Valentine rose,
Tears spill everywhere—angry, sad, joyful;
Aromas waft—Sunday dinner, apple pie, bubble bath.

Before they are lost,
Listen to the voices from our dust—
We’ll whisper more tomorrow, and forever.

–Lisa Bolin Hawkins

Photo: Viola and her Nurse (Betsy Mugavero and Leslie Brott) from Shakespeare in Love

These are the three plays we saw this year at the Utah Shakespeare Festival–next year, we hope to see five! Two winners and a shockingly big loser; never disappointed in a play at this festival before now, and we’ve attended for years! But my hopes are high for the future of excellent plays at this professional theatre.

• Shakespeare in Love, based on the screenplay by Marc Norman and Tom Stoppard; adapted for the stage by Lee Hall, directed by Brian Vaughn. This love letter to all things Shakespeare is a lovely story and production, with romance, tragedy, and comedy in a satisfying mix. Quinn Mattfeld and Betsy Mugavero are perfect as struggling playwright Will Shakespeare and his muse, and aspiring actor (women were not allowed on stage in Elizabethan England), Viola de Lesseps. Will is working on his next play, Romeo and Ethel the Pirate’s Daughter, but he is not having any success until he meets Viola, who is disguised as a young man so she can audition for the play. Many additional characters add to the fun. Shakespeare in Love is full of clever references to Shakespeare’s plays. The play pretty much tracks the 1998 Best Picture Academy Award-winning film, but the stage production is well worth seeing. It mostly glosses over the fact that Shakespeare was married (a cold and loveless marriage entered too young, according to the play–but that doesn’t justify his behavior)  and the playgoer will have to suspend judgment on that for best enjoyment of the play. The production is especially effective because it is presented in the Globe Theatre-like Engelstad Shakespeare Theatre. I drifted out of the theatre in a delighted haze. This is a must-see at the 2017 Shakespeare Festival and could become a popular, repeated feature of the event.
• Guys and Dolls, based on stories and characters by Damon Runyon, music and lyrics by Fran Loesser, book by Jo Swerling and Abe Burrows, directed by Peter Rothstein. Styled “a musical fable of Broadway,” this 1950 Broadway hit has become a classic of the American musical stage with the stories of gambler Sky Masterson, Salvation Army-like missionary Sarah Brown, gambler Nathan Detroit, and his long-suffering fiancée, Miss Adelaide. The Damon Runyon characters are a lot of fun and the music and dancing are great. Melinda Parrett is a standout as Miss Adelaide and Quinn Mattfeld as Nathan Detroit seems almost to have to restrain himself from stealing the show. Brian Vaughn is good as usual, although his portrayal of Sky Masterson is avuncular, without the dangerous edge and passion that seem to be a part of the character. A worthwhile and enjoyable show.
• William Shakespeare’s Long Lost First Play (Abridged), by Reed Martin and Austin Tichenor, directed by Christopher Edwards, is the worst play I have ever seen, unfortunately, and I’m stunned that it was chosen for the festival. I say this not to be unkind, but to try to save theatre-goers from wasting their time and money. The production is fine–acting (three young men play all the parts), lighting, costumes, and overall staging are well done. It’s the play that’s the problem. I got all the humor and allusions; I know Shakespeare included elements of bawdy and farce in his plays, but this play is all bawdy and farce and no plot and no nobility or progress of characters, as Shakespeare included in all his plays. The playwrights need look only across the festival to Shakespeare in Love to see how this can be accomplished. The play in question centers around a supposed feud between Ariel (of The Tempest) and Puck (of A Midsummer Night’s Dream) and goes on to introduce some of the Bard’s many characters in mixed-up circumstances. There are some clever comparisons of Shakespeare’s canon with the Disney’s work. Some of the meet-ups, such as the ever-indecisive Hamlet with the ever-decisive Lady Macbeth, are really a good idea. But many other audience members seemed as uncomfortable/bored/waiting-for-this-to-get-good as I was. Shakespeare appears at the end of the play as a self-proclaimed deus ex machina, and announces that the play is awful and should never be produced. Someone should have listened.