Environmental Repentance

The company I work for, the Mosaic Foundation - a non-profit that seeks to help women and children while promoting greater understanding of the Arab World, is working on a major grant for this coming year that will address water access and sanitation and how it affects society's most vulnerable: women and children. Anyone who knows my family knows that my father is obsessed about water. Growing up, we were always the first to have low-flow toilets (which instilled in a me a fear of overflowing toilets that persists to this day), low flow faucets, drip irrigation (for the roses), and, of course, timers on our showers to keep us wasting too much water, which we generally ignored when my father was not at home. So I was generally more in my comfort zone than my fellow employees as we discussed these issues with the technical people we are partnering with. I knew something of aquifer depletion, watersheds, osmosis desalinization, and so forth.

Despite my rudimentary familiarity, I have been reading extensively on the subject in several books including, "Water: The Fate of Our Most Precious Resource" by Marq de Villiers and "Last Oasis" by Sandra Postel. At the core of both books, and numerous others, is the idea that water scarcity cannot be solved solely through technological innovation. What must occur is that society at large must change fundamentally its attitude toward water and stop regarding water as a free given, but as a finite, fragile resource that must be conserved and protected. This, they argued, would lead to changes in behavior regarding water and ultimately to, as Ms Postel terms it, a new water ethic.

As I read this, I was brought forcefully back to my youthful Sunday school classes. This was repentance! Every piece fit: recognition that our actions were harming the environment, remorse for our past bad actions and a desire to change, restitution through environmental restoration, reformation through changing water use habits and, in a new agey sort of way, absolution by coming to more connected to nature and our place within ecosphere (i.e. atonement with the natural world). Every step as my youthful instructors had sermonized was present.

Repentance is changing behavior to be in harmony with spiritual realities and eternal law; ought not all behavior therefore be subject to repentance including pillaging our natural resources and our water? It made sense. What strikes me, though, and here I will tempt the stagnant cesspool (to expand an appropriately hydrological metaphor) of politics - something I normally avoid - is that people on the so-called "left" reject the idea of repentace as being "right wing" or "conservative."

Let me state that I detest the terms Right, Left, Conservative, and Liberal. I almost never use them in describing myself or anyone else. There is so little agreement as to their meaning that in public discourse they become more than confusing, they become dangerous. All words are subject to being understood by different groups differently (ask a Mormon and an Evangelical what grace means and watch the fireworks!), but these four terms have been more abused than any other similar set of terms. Ambrose Bierce, an American humorist from the early 20th century, once defined Liberal and Conservative as follows:

Conservative: A old liberal

Liberal: A young conservative (Source: The Devil's Dictionary)

A British comedian, whose name I forget, one said of Britain when trying to describe its political parties to an American audience that there were, in fact, two parties in England: the Labor Party, or as Americans would call it, the Liberals, and the Conservative Party, or as Americans would call, the Liberals. These terms are so fluid, so relative, that in cross-ideological terms they are useless. A Liberal in the 1880s would be a Conservative in the 1980s while the conservatives of 2000s would could actually be termed Neoliberal in their approach to government, but conservative in policy. A Liberal in 1990s would be a progressive in the 1890s and on and on. It can give you a headache. I propose the following definitions: a conservative is anyone who calls themselves a conservative and a liberal is anyone who calls themselves a liberal. Not quite a tautology, but it plays dangerously close to the edge.

My reasoning for going into this aside, is to set up what comes next. Among many described as Leftist or Liberal in America, meaning that they advocate a policy of using government power to recreate society through redistribution of wealth and who are the inheritors of the social progressives of the late nineteenth and early twentieth, there is tendency to eschew any and all religious colorings in policy to the extent that now they often bend over backward to avoid letting the majority cultural norms have any say on policy (and even go to the extreme of letting minority views rule). This movement generally has environmental protectionist leanings and believes that government should be the locus of societal change, including of environmental protection. The Progressives, at least 100 years ago, believed that social mores and practices followed scientifically describable patterns and could be controlled and developed. This led to social engineering programs and ultimately to the excesses of forced sterilization and eugenics programs, which were supported, regrettably, by so-called liberals and conservatives alike. How would you describe a person like Samuel Gompers, founder of the American Federation of Labor who advocated both socialism, nativism (i.e. restricting immigration, esp. to non-whites), and eugenics? It seems like a strange amalgation of right and left as frequently defined today. You can see why I hate those labels.

Returning to the "Left." As typically understood, this movement is for environmental protection through government action, minority rights, affirmative action, gay rights, abortion, and so on. In essays and speeches I have heard over the years, proponents of this viewpoint argue that we must accept others as they are. This seems to me to be espousing total moral relativism, but though their words seem to indicate this, leftists cannot mean it, for that idea, taken to its logical conclusion, would mean that we could not require intolerant people to tolerate others, which would contradict a whole slew of leftist legislation which require us to tolerate others regardless of race, religions, ethnicity, etc. I recall a conversation I had as a Mormon missionary with someone who argued that I had no business telling other people to change their behavior (i.e. calling them to repentance). He apparently did not see the irony in telling me to stop telling other people to stop doing something. He felt that tolerance was the highest good, though he could not, apparently, tolerate my intolerance!

I have come to realize that the basic principles of the gospel, most especially faith and repentance, are near universal, even amongst the non-religious. To act one must have faith. We would not work if we did not believe we would get paid. Now, we have experiences that teach us this faith is warranted, but ultimately, I do not know that I will get paid. Confidence in the company and in the ability of the judicial system to defend should my rights be trampled ensure that I am confident enough to keep working. A farmer does not know his harvest will come when he plants, but he has experience that tells him it will if he does certain things like water and weed his crops. Repentance is changing one's behavior either to accord with one's prior beliefs (a behavioral realignment, perhaps), or to accord with new-found beliefs as in conversion. How we know what we know is another matter. I am not speaking of faith in terms of how we come to believe, but rather faith as an operational, motivating principle. Under this definition, then, it is faith when scientists shoot a rocket to Mars to be guided by the mathematics of Newton and Einstein even though the knowledge and/or assumptions underlying it were gathered empirically. That is because we are discussing how this knowledge/belief drives us to behave not how it originated.

It is a mistake, therefore, for "Leftists" to claim they do not believe in repentance. They do. They are calling for people to change their behavior to stave off global warming. This is not say I think that we ought not work to conserve and recycle. In fact, I am a big advocate of it and likewise I believe that in all probability anthropogenic global warming is real. I am merely saying that the Left and the Right (understanding all my prior caveats) both believe in repentance, it is merely that they have different values and standards toward which they seek to conform behavior. It would seem, then, that left and right are really more alike than I suspect truly partisan practitioners would likely admit. They just cannot see it and so spin their tires arguing about all the wrong things. However, the right thing to argue about is even more intractable for it concerns the origins of our beliefs, the beliefs which, by faith, compel us to repent.

The Good News of the Book of Mormon

The Gospel

The fourth Article of Faith of the Mormon Church says:

We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

This represents the basic foundation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by the Mormon Church. These steps are what a person must do to enter a covenant with Christ and enter the path that leads to Eternal Life. The word Gospel is a contraction of “Good” and “Spell” and means literally the good story or good news. The Good News of Jesus Christ is that He suffered for our sins, died, and was resurrected from the dead. This constitutes the Atonement of Jesus Christ through which all mankind can be saved in the Kingdom of Heaven through faith, repentance, baptism, the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost, and endurance to the end. The Book of Mormon usually refers to this as the Doctrine of Christ.

Mormons teach that the fullness of the Gospel, or the complete teachings about the Gospel as well as the authority to perform baptism and the covenants God makes with man were lost from the earth in the centuries following Christ’s death and resurrection and that these teachings and this authority were restored through modern day prophets beginning with Joseph Smith. Part of that restoration was the Book of Mormon, which the Lord gave to help us understand more fully this essential doctrine. In a revelation given to Joseph Smith, Jesus Christ said, “the elders, priests and teachers of this church shall teach the principles of my gospel, which are in the Bible and the Book of Mormon, in the which is the fullness of the gospel” (Doctrine &Covenants 42:12). Contrary to critical attacks, the Book of Mormon does explain the fullness of the Gospel. Shortly after his resurrection, Jesus Christ appeared to some of the ancient inhabitants in the Americas and said this:

Behold I have given unto you my gospel, and this is the gospel which I have given unto you--that I came into the world to do the will of my Father, because my Father sent me. And my Father sent me that I might be lifted up upon the cross; and after that I had been lifted up upon the cross, that I might draw all men unto me, that as I have been lifted up by men even so should men be lifted up by the Father, to stand before me, to be judged of their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil--And for this cause have I been lifted up; therefore, according to the power of the Father I will draw all men unto me, that they may be judged according to their works. And it shall come to pass, that whoso repenteth and is baptized in my name shall be filled; and if he endureth to the end, behold, him will I hold guiltless before my Father at that day when I shall stand to judge the world. And he that endureth not unto the end, the same is he that is also hewn down and cast into the fire, from whence they can no more return, because of the justice of the Father [ … ] And no unclean thing can enter into his kingdom; therefore nothing entereth into his rest save it be those who have washed their garments in my blood, because of their faith, and the repentance of all their sins, and their faithfulness unto the end (3 Nephi 27:13-17, 19; pg 459, emphasis added).

This describes the basic elements of the Gospel according to Mormonism:

1. Jesus came into the world to do the will of the Father
2. The Father’s will was that he die on the cross and draw men unto him through the Atonement and Resurrection
3. Men will return to Father to be judged of their works
4. Only those who have faith, repent, be baptized and endure to the end will be saved
5. Through faith, repentance, baptism, and endurance to the end through the power of the Holy Spirit, a person’s sins are cleansed by the blood of Jesus Christ which atoned for all sin.

The Apostle Paul said something very similar about the basic nature and emphasis of the Gospel. He said to the Corinthians, “[W]e preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness” (1 Cor 1:23). To the Romans he said, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek” (Rom 1:16). Through the power of the Gospel, the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ becomes active in a persons life, and they become clean from all sin.

This is the good news that lifts up mourning hearts, brings hope to those in despair, comforts and restores lost souls, and makes possible every good thing. This is the foundation of the teachings of the Mormon Church. The Prophet Joseph Smith said,

The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it. But in connection with these, we believe in the gift of the Holy Ghost, the power of faith, the enjoyment of the spiritual gifts according to the will of God, the restoration of the house of Israel, and the final triumph of truth (Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 vols. 3:30).

Faith

Faith is more than believing Jesus exists, it means believing Him when He says that you will be forgiven of your sins and saved in His Kingdom. This faith includes two parts:

1. The belief that all who live on Earth are granted salvation from death (physical resurrection) through the Atonement

2. That salvation from sin (or spiritual death) is obtained through sincere repentance, resulting in forgiveness for sin through His grace, and by following the teachings and commandments of Jesus Christ.

Mormons are encouraged to develop their faith through study, prayer, service, and obedience to God's commandments. Faith is a form of spiritual work and character-shaping, in conjunction with the miracle of Christ's Atonement. Mormons often refer to their personal faith as their testimony and refer to telling others about their faith as "bearing testimony."

The Book of Mormon discusses how to develop faith (see Alma 32:18-43, pgs 289-291). We begin by being humble and teachable. If we are arrogant, the Spirit of God cannot work within us. Second, we desire to believe. The Book of Mormon compares this to planting a seed and watering it. We plant the seed by desiring to believe in Jesus Christ and in the Book of Mormon, which teaches of Him. We nurture the seed through prayer, scripture study, service to others, and keeping the commandments. As we do this, the Holy Sprit will enter our hearts and we will know that what we are studying and doing is true. If we do not experiment with our faith by keeping the commandments, praying, and attending church, the Spirit will not tell us whether the scriptures are true.

Repentance

Once a person begins to develop faith, the next step is repentance. Repentance is a wonderful gift from a loving Father in Heaven. Through repentance we can overcome weaknesses and move beyond mistakes we have made in the past.

To repent we must acknowledge our mistakes and weaknesses. We must take responsibility for our own actions and recognize that what we have done has hurt others and offended God. Second, we must forsake the sins. This means we must stop doing it and never return to it again. We must, if possible, make restitution. This means that if we stole something, we should return it or pay the person for what we took. If we lied or hurt someone’s feelings, we must apologize. Restitution is not always possible, but we must always apologize and ask for forgiveness from those we offended or hurt. God is able to heal all wounds and when we trust in Him, we can be forgiven. Finally, we must ask for forgiveness from God through prayer.

When we have done this, we have this promise from God:

Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more. By this ye may know if a man repenteth of his sins--behold, he will confess them and forsake them (Doctrine and Covenants 58:42-43, pg 106).

When we have sincerely repented, we have God’s promise, and God cannot lie, that we are forgiven. To become clean from all our sins and become a new creature in Christ, we must follow repentance with baptism. However, as everyone continues to make mistakes, we must repent throughout our lives and continually turn towards God for strength and forgiveness. Through the sacrament, called by other denominations the Eucharist, which Mormons partake every Sunday, we renew the covenants made at baptism and thus renew the cleansing of the Holy Spirit. The Doctrine and Covenants of the Mormon Church says:

Yea, repent and be baptized, every one of you, for a remission of your sins; yea, be baptized even by water, and then cometh the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost. Behold, verily, verily, I say unto you, this is my gospel; and remember that they shall have faith in me or they can in nowise be saved And upon this rock I will build my church; yea, upon this rock ye are built, and if ye continue, the gates of hell shall not prevail against you (D&C 33:11-13).

Since this Gospel is the rock upon which the Mormon Church is built it follows that these are the first steps taken by converts to the Mormon faith. After faith and repentance, a person is baptized by immersion for the remission of sins.

Baptism

Baptism by immersion is a symbol of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Apostle Paul said, “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection” (Romans 6:3-5)

Baptism also serves a sign of one’s covenant with Jesus Christ to take His name upon you and serve Him and keep His commandments until death. Mormons call this the baptismal covenant. It includes:

1. Taking the name of Jesus Christ upon us and become one of His people
2. Bearing one another’s burdens
3. Mourning with those who are suffering and comfort them
4. Standing as a witness of God at all times and in all places
5. Serving God and keeping His commandments (See Mosiah 18:8-10, pg 181)

God in turn promises that those who keep their baptismal covenants will

1. Receive a greater portion of His Holy Spirit
2. Be redeemed (i.e. saved)
3. Rise in the first resurrection, the resurrection of the just Inherit Eternal Life

Since a person must exercise faith by following the commandments and repenting of one’s sins, Mormon do not baptize children until they reach the age of accountability, which is understood to be around eight years old.

Baptism by water for the remission of Sins

When a person is Baptized, he or she commits to follow Jesus Christ. Those who are to be baptized dress in plain white clothes to symbolize humility and purity. The person baptizing must hold the priesthood, which is authority from God to perform ordinances in the Church. All adult male members of the Mormon Church can be ordained to the priesthood. The prayer for baptism is simple and straightforward. The officiator holds his right arm up, bows his head and says:

Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, amen.

The officiator then dunks the person completely under the water to symbolize the death of the old self, burial, and the promised resurrection through Jesus Christ.

Baptism by Fire and the Holy Ghost

Baptism is actually composed of two parts: baptism by water and baptism by fire. John the Baptist said, “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire” (Matthew 3:11). It is through this baptism of the Holy Ghost that a person will be cleansed of his or her sins. In the Mormon Church, this ordinance is called confirmation and it typically occurs in the Sunday services in the week following baptism.

In confirmation, also called the laying on of hands, a priesthood holder lays his hands upon the new members head and gives him or her a blessing. This blessing is similar to a prayer. He will call them by name and through the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, confirm them a member of the Mormon Church and give them the Gift of the Holy Ghost, which means the right to have the Holy Spirit as a constant companion. Finally, he pronounces blessings and promises as the Spirit inspires him and will close in the name of Jesus Christ.

Enduring to the End

Jesus Christ said to his disciples, “strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it” (Matt 7:14). Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is the gate that leads to the Way. The Book of Mormon teaches this more clearly:

For the gate by which ye should enter is repentance and baptism by water; and then cometh a remission of your sins by fire and by the Holy Ghost. And then are ye in this strait and narrow path which leads to eternal life; yea, ye have entered in by the gate; ye have done according to the commandments of the Father and the Son; and ye have received the Holy Ghost, which witnesses of the Father and the Son, unto the fulfilling of the promise which he hath made, that if ye entered in by the way ye should receive (2 Nephi 31:17-18; pg 114).

Once we have entered the path, we must continue on the path that leads to Eternal Life. Mormons call this enduring to the end. Again, the Book of Mormon gives us a good explanation of what this means. It says:

Wherefore, ye must press forward with a steadfastness in Christ, having a perfect brightness of hope, and a love of God and of all men. Wherefore, if ye shall press forward, feasting upon the word of Christ, and endure to the end, behold, thus saith the Father: Ye shall have eternal life (2 Nephi 31:20; pg 114).

We must endure with steadiness in obedience to Jesus Christ’s commands, being filled with hope and love. We must feast on Christ’s words, which means we must continue to study His words in the scriptures and as given by revelation through living prophets. This corresponds to what the Apostle Paul said as he discussed faith, hope, and charity (see 1 Corinthians 13). Enduring to the end does not means that Mormons expect to be perfect. Part of enduring is continuing to improve oneself through repentance whenever something is out of harmony with God’s will. Because people continue to make mistakes, the Lord has provided a way to renew these covenants. Every Sunday Mormons partake of the Sacrament, usually called the Eucharist or Lord’s Supper in other churches. The Sacrament consists of broken bread and water to symbolize the body and blood of Jesus Christ. For faithful Mormons this represents a renewal of the covenants and commitments made at baptism and an opportunity to meditate upon the atoning mission of Jesus Christ.

Enduring to the end also requires service to others. The Book of Mormon teaches that “when ye are in the service of your fellow beings, ye are only in the service of your God” (Mosiah 2:17; pg 148). A person endures by growing in Godly attributes. Elder Dallin H. Oaks, a modern prophet like Joseph Smith in the Mormon Church said:

The Apostle Paul taught that the Lord's teachings and teachers were given that we may all attain "the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ" (Eph. 4:13). This process requires far more than acquiring knowledge. It is not even enough for us to be convinced of the gospel; we must act and think so that we are converted by it. In contrast to the institutions of the world, which teach us to know something, the gospel of Jesus Christ challenges us to become something (The Challenge to Become, Conference Report, October 2000)

He says further,

From such teachings we conclude that the Final Judgment is not just an evaluation of a sum total of good and evil acts--what we have done. It is an acknowledgment of the final effect of our acts and thoughts--what we have become. It is not enough for anyone just to go through the motions. The commandments, ordinances, and covenants of the gospel are not a list of deposits required to be made in some heavenly account. The gospel of Jesus Christ is a plan that shows us how to become what our Heavenly Father desires us to become.

Peter said something similar in his general epistle. He counseled the righteous followers of Christ in his day to become “partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust” (2 Peter 1:4). To do these, he says, we must “add to [our] faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; and to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; and to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity” (2 Peter 1:5-7).

The Book of Mormon described one individual who endured righteously. His name was Ether and he was a prophet to a wicked people. Of him the Book of Mormon says:

For he did cry from the morning, even until the going down of the sun, exhorting the people to believe in God unto repentance lest they should be destroyed, saying unto them that by faith all things are fulfilled---Wherefore, whoso believeth in God might with surety hope for a better world, yea, even a place at the right hand of God, which hope cometh of faith, maketh an anchor to the souls of men, which would make them sure and steadfast, always abounding in good works, be led to glorify God (Ether 12:3-4, pg 509).

This path of hope and faith in God which brings men to do good is the narrow path that Jesus spoke of that leads us toward Eternal Life, which is to know Jesus Christ and God (see John 17:3) because we have become like them (see 1 John 3:2). Then, through power of the atonement and resurrection of Jesus Christ, those who have followed this path will be cleansed from their sins and taken at last to Heaven to dwell with Christ and God for ever.

Laus Clamitatis: The Praise of Failure

While speaking to a mouse whose house his plow had just overturned late in the autumn of 1785, Scottish poet Robert Burns wrote his most famous misquotation:

The best-laid schemes o'Mice an' Men
Gang aft agley
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy.

Some thing in his brogue makes it difficult for folks to remember this quote accurately, though strangely no one ever struggles with Auld Lang Syne, another product of Burns' prolific and pilfering pen. Still, I should not be sidetracked by linguistic pursuits. I have a story to tell.

Burns, as many poets, being a disillusioned romantic, only tells half the truth. The bleak half. Men's schemes do often go "agley," but not always to man's detriment. We are fortunate, in fact, that our plans do not always work out, for man is a myopic, tendentious, and narrow beast whose dreams, born of the detritus and debris of a cluttered subconscious, are too insular to befit truly the majesty of opportunities available in this world. Ways, as Frost said, lead to other ways and we cannot return and I believe we are the better for it. We must move forward. That is the only way to travel. Regrets and other attempts to live in the past fail. Always. It is a fundamental law of the universe. Time flows onward.

We should therefore keep living life, because we never know where it will take us. Try not to fail, of course, but if, after failing, we pick ourselves up, bruised and bloody though we may be, even these failures may be stepping stones and not grave stones.

* * *

It had been a weekend of feverish preparations. I'd read two complete books and countless websites and articles to get ready. I had written three condensed reports. I had learned the proper protocol and consulted everyone I could. Still, sweaty and shaky, my mind in a haze, I was admitted to Her Royal Highness's presence.

The ups and downs of fate that had brought me to have an audience in the private chambers of a Saudi princess are a testament to the importance of not giving up. I have failed as often as I have succeeded and am ashamed to admit that I have let my failures too often weigh heavily upon me. Pride is damning. It was pride that kept me from admitting that I had failed at my attempts to graduate from Princeton all alone. It was a destructive selfishness that drew me in upon myself to the point that I could not see beyond my own misery. It was pride that put me in the position to fail in the first place, because I had said to myself: sink or swim I'll go it alone. Still, there is something to learn in our failures, for in them we can see revealed our weaknesses. A weakness hidden, especially from oneself, is a dangerous minefield. We require signposts to warn us of our own pitfalls.

Fate, fortunately, had something else in mind. It brought me to Maryland to the home of my brother. In the year and some months since then, I have learned more than in any comparable period of time save only my mission, a likewise difficult and sometimes painful experience. I got a job much to quickly for a college drop out by using (or abusing) contacts. A few emails to an old boss put me in touch with my current boss working at a medium-size non-profit in DC which specialized in the Arab World. It is a stressful job that requires me to leave my comfort zone on a daily basis, but in time, the absolute necessity of a paycheck kept bringing me back and I found my comfort zone expanding and some of my former confidence, broken by scholastic failures, returning. I am reminded of what Alma and Amulek taught the Zoramites: sometimes terrible circumstances force us to be humble and humble people are meek and meek people are open to learn. So, stressed as I was, I endured.

I have learned a great deal about office life and my circumstances force me to deal with the same people day after day, something I am typically loathe to do. I used to rotate cafeterias and restaurants at school lest any of the workers or fellow diners get to know me and start talking to me. This is not to imply that I am somehow gregarious now, but I have improved. I have learned one of the key lessons of life: I am not that special. My circumstances are not so unique that the laws of life and the world do not apply to me. It is pride that says: I do not need to abide by the rules of others. It is arrogance to assume that we can travel our idiosyncratic path and not follow the same "rules of the game" as others.

After nearly a year in this position I received a breathless phone call:

"Are you still interested in doing that project on King Faisal we talked about?" my coworker said as her slight Texan drawl sneaked through a few vowels.

"Sure," I said, "but this is a very time consuming assignment. I'm not sure I can do it and still work here and help get things ready for the Gala."

"No, that's fine. I understand. The Princess would like to meet with you."

"I'm sorry, what?"

"The Princess would like to meet with you and hire you to research her father. Can you meet with her tomorrow?"

There was a moment of silence until I found the bottom of my jaw and finally responded with a yes. A moment later and a phone call from my boss repeated the above conversation and added that I was to devote the next ten hours to preparing.

I left off work early and walked to clear my thoughts. I called every family member I could reach and was buoyed by their boisterous yeses. I walked vaguely in the direction of my apartment, 20 miles away, following the roads under which ran the subway. DC is a strange city. It has both depth and superficiality all stacked one on top of the other. There is beautiful architecture that uplifts and exalts and the most base, perfunctory soviet-style concrete that does not even deserve to be called architecture all of which is intermingled and interpolated. I walked for miles and could not bring myself to enter the stifling tombs of the Metro underground. My thoughts fly more freely in the open air.

I thought about a lot of things. I was planning to return to school. I was planning to buy a better car. I had a kinds of things in the works. I had plans, dang it. Of course, I had had plans before. I had planned to graduate Princeton and get a nice quiet academic job. I had planned to work for the CIA. I had planned to travel the world. I had had plans. Yet, here I was, despite all those plans, walking down the streets of DC contemplating a job offer that had never crossed my radar.

I had been recommended to work for a princess of Saudi Arabia as a researcher to help find materials to found an archive dedicated to her father, the late King Faisal of Saudi Arabia, was died in 1975. It was not, in my original understanding at this time, to be a very exciting job. Still, a princess is a princess and an invitation to a royal audience is to not be accepted or rejected lightly.

A strange thought occurred to me in my wanderings in and amongst the impressive array foreign embassies along Massachusetts and Connecticut Avenues. I looked back over my past many years and then recalled something my boss, who is Mormon, said. She said that she thought God had placed me here for this job. That she and I met many years ago in passing at BYU, where I worked for a summer, just to get me to a place where I could work here and get hired by the Princess. Now, I believe in the scriptures, but there are things in them that I don't understand or concepts that I still struggle to accept. One of these has been the concept that God is operative in all aspects of our lives. On the surface I can accept it, but when I think about the thorny territory of human agency versus divine fiat, I struggle.

As I walked, I thought this just might be true. God had given me some scattered and completely random experiences that were beginning to come together. I had worked during my time at USU at the USU Special Collections and Archives where I processed and created new collections. I spent time assisting with book collections, photo collections, and even some limited time with the people who repair manuscripts and books, though I cannot claim any expertise. I had met Mona in passing only once, but both of us remembered the meeting and then we wind up in DC at the same time, me needing a job, and her needing to fill a job with someone with knowledge of the Arab World. At Princeton, though I did not graduate, I had worked in the map archives translating and cataloging maps of the Middle East and Europe. My gift for research and my penchant for calligraphy are what brought me to the attention of HRH Princess Haifa who asked me do some research. Though my initial efforts were at best abortive, I nevertheless must have made an impression.

So, here I am, about to meet with a princess for an amazing job opportunity. I, a little farm boy from Utah who isn't even sure his farm qualifies as a farm, full of doubt and prevarications, am about to go into the service of a world-famous princess to work on a project that will last for generations. I was admitted to her suite in DC with my boss and a coworker who also works for the Princess. I would say she is not what I expected, but I cannot honestly say what I expected a princess to look like. My only knowledge of princesses comes from tabloids about British royalty and Disney cartoons. She is a remarkable woman of grace, with graying curls and a Mona Lisa smile. I managed to introduce myself and fumblingly handed my report to her for her review. She introduced me to her two teenage sons who shortly excused themselves to visit stores in the area.

I had anticipated talking more and while I would normally have described myself as one nonplussed by celebrity and royalty - I did, after all, once meet Charles Grodin! Yet I was totally plussed. I spoke as clearly as I could and she complemented my research up to that point as my coworkers smiled at me and I turned beet red. It is not an easy thing to endure a compliment. We discussed details of my project and when I stumbled, my coworkers helpfully filled in the conversation.

It became clear to me that I had underestimated the project for which I was being tasked. I had expected a job that would take several months and involve culling newspaper archives and a few libraries, but Her Royal Highness quickly asked whether I would be able to visit every country His Majesty King Faisal had visited, and those countries which had relations with Saudi Arabia in order to acquire a thorough collection of all primary documents relating to his life.

I said yes. I said yes!! What was I thinking. Who agrees to that? I just said I was capable of creating an archive of the entire life of one of the most important political figures of the twentieth century. I am utterly insane. I am giving up school, a settled apartment, any chance of a long term relationship for the next year at least, all for a project I'm not sure I can do!!!

Her Royal Highness graciously thanked me and expressed her confidence saying she had finally met someone in whom she had confidence to do the work she needed done. The conversation turned to other matters, but I wanted out. My mind was whirring at the prospect of what I had just agreed to do, to become. Before we left, it was agreed that I would come to Riyadh in May for an exhibit on the life of King Faisal and there see the archives as they existed now in order to assess what needs to be gathered to complete the records.

I was then hit with the next in a line of many shocks that day: Prince Turki, brother of Princess Haifa and former Ambassador to the United States would like to meet with me. He, too, was impressed with the preliminary research sketches I had done and my plan for the archives. After a nervous lunch during which I managed to pronounce all Italian menu items as French and the French items as Italian, I was escorted to the suite of HRH Prince Turki there to discuss some more details. He had a dignified bearing and way of being silent that bore into my soul as I sat on the couch. We discussed much of what I had discussed with Princess Haifa, but this time I was all alone, save for the Prince's British secretary. We discussed his father, the King, and what he would like to see. He promised to have his people send me copies of all materials already gathered and then he asked me to draft an employment agreement, an agreement, not a contract, because, "Agreements are between friends and we are friends." It's the same legally, I suppose, but words are important in Arab culture in a way we utilitarian Americans struggle to grasp as we casually throw words around ignorant of their history and their impact.

The rest of the day and the days following have been amazingly normal. Normality seems miraculous when juxtaposed with the miraculous. So now I am preparing myself for a job that will take me to nearly every part of the world, from Texas to Paris, from Cairo to Moscow and, of course, here in Washington, DC. All this because I failed at college. Had I not dropped out, I would undoubtedly be in a comfy but staid tenure-track position having missed out on a great opportunity because I had never failed.