- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Since it’s beginning, the Church has continued to evolve. Some changes were big: Polygamy, Blacks in the priesthood, Importance of Word of Wisdom. Others were small: Acceptance of birth control, smaller temples, consolidated schedule. The Church has also become more welcoming to the outside world. Personally, I’ve liked what I’ve seen. Where do you see the Church in the next 5, 10, 20 years and beyond? Do any of you have personal insights from the GAs? What church leaders do you think are going to make a difference? What books, talks and interviews have helped change the attitudes of church members. How much of “The Church” is cultural rather than “official”?
Scott wrote:Where do you see the Church in the next 5, 10, 20 years and beyond? Do any of you have personal insights from the GAs? What church leaders do you think are going to make a difference? What books, talks and interviews have helped change the attitudes of church members. How much of “The Church” is cultural rather than “official”?
Wow, that’s alot to bite off!!
Of course, I’ll try not to choke on what I say.
😳 I think the church moves too slowly for 5-10 years outlook. Probably not much change. 20 years? Who knows?
I think that what’s happening on this forum will be the wave of change, if it’s going to happen. The growth of the church has gone stale in most third world places, much as it has in Europe and North America for some time. I think I posted this elsewhere, but there was an explosion of growth after the priesthood ban was lifted, ironically not in Africa, right away. Since the Proclamation for the Family, there has been a great slowing in the growth rate (percentage) of the church.
I use that simply to point out that I think the lifting of the priesthood ban was a way of “looking forward” and the proclamation for the family was a way of “looking back”.
I’m not sure if the next big “dislocation”, akin to the first two manifesto’s, is imminent. I see it as obviously a “re-tooling” of the way that both homosexuality and gender are treated, more along the lines of things Ray has said about the role of sex and gender in the creation of “spirit life” in the eternities.
Who will lead this “change”? I’m not in tune with the GA’s enough to know, but I do know it won’t happen till BKP is gone. Very much as HBL and JFS delayed for years the priesthood change.
I can’t point to any talks that have helped change much. I see the best change happening in local wards, branches. My sister recently moved from a ward that had a fantastic and liberal bishop. I went to F&T there for her baby’s blessing and it was actually spiritual on the level of a great AA meeting. Fantastic!!
And maybe this is how it should be.
On GBH’s watch we had the proclamation and the “it’s either all true or it’s a fraud” speech; not exactly moving the ball forward, imho.
The church is all cultural and it’s all official and it’s all true and it’s all false. I don’t see how you could divide it. I used to defend the church and the brethren by saying, “Oh, that’s just cultural”. I see now, it’s all an influence on everything else, very liquid, it rolls up-hill and down. And it’s self-perpetuating which makes it insular which makes it incredibly difficult to change.
Like another poster said “Sometimes you just have to rage against the machine!” (hawkgrrl, I think)
Great question! I’ll have a go at what the church will be like in 50 years. I have the feeling that advancing technology and science will eventually force the church to shift its interpretation of the BoM (DNA, archeology, language, newly found documents). I also think that the same advances in technology could help support certain aspects of its theology (eternal matter, multiple earths, knowledge of light ect…) The LDS church can be the one that attempts to breakdown details of the our afterlife. If the second coming doesn’t occur by then, the church may also loose some of its “latter day” strength. I’m not sure about the relationship with homosexuality within the church, I think the church will eventually follow the will of the country. Also, I wonder about the non-practiced commandments of plural marriage and consecration, will these come back as well? I think the internet and the information age/revolution will be seen as a major shifting point looking back in 20-25 years. I agree that the Church moves slooooooow, 5 years is probably too short to notice a big difference unless you happen to catch one of those dramatic, sweeping changes in that window of time. The Church will be forced to deal with a reinterpretation of itself through the lens of a more realistic picture of our foundation and history. The information is no longer locked away in the Church vaults, and no longer restricted to magazines and books with large printing and shipping costs. It’s all over on the internet, published freely, and freely discussed. People that want to research and talk about this stuff are no longer isolated and cut off from each other.
I’m 40 years old and see lots of my generation peers dealing with this change. I’m telling you, the up and coming adults, late teens and 20-30 year old people, my children … They swim in information like fish in water.
The Church, as an institution, is going to have to deal with what is out there.
I also think the Church will diversify its culture. The desire for growth will bring about a wonderful change in this area. I think over the next 20 years, we will see the Church start to understand the difference between culture and Gospel. The Church will incorporate more local, indigenous culture into the worship practices and church experience — music, dress, etc. We might not be putting the pressure on non-westerners to look like European corporate middle managers in white shirts, dark suits and ties.
I’ll take a stab too. I think in 5 years the church will be forced to deal more with the homosexual issues. Maybe not to the extent many of us would like, but it will have to be addressed again, the country will simply dictate that. I also think that within 10 years the internet will have to be dealt with. I liked what Valoel said. The internet has revolutionized our planet, and while there is a lot of garbage out there, there is also a brilliant mechanism for keeping people honest. Anyone hear of the controversies with the church and wikileaks? Wikileaks is a website devoted to divulging “secrets.” They printed the church handbook of instructions to the church’s dismay. However, they have also helped quell violence in Africa, divulged US military lies, and other noble endeavors. The point is, information is out there for all to see, and people cannot shy away from it anymore. The church will need to deal with this. As has been said I think the church will need to reevaluate its claims and take a look at the strict interpretations it currently has. We are already seeing that shift as the church no longer dictates as much of our lives. A look at food storage recommendations is a great example. It used to be they strictly counseled us to have 1 year’s supply. They no longer do that and allow us to choose how much we feel is appropriate. Also, IMHO the church is trying very hard to be more mainstream Christian. We have worked diligently to dispel the idea that we are not Christian. Quite frankly I don’t understand why, except for the PR benefits. I expect this trend will continue, but I hope not too much. I enjoy what makes us unique.
I think a great example is the CoC church. They had to reinvent themselves after we convinced them that Joseph did in fact endorse polygamy. It was very hard for them and as I understand their membership suffered tremendously. We may have to go through something similar if we relinquish our strict interpretations of the First Vision, historicity of the BoM, etc. The CoC church has a very informative history section on their website in which they admit they don’t really know. It is optional to believe in the historicity of the BoM as so many of them don’t. They are still accepted members. Those of us who have that view in our church are still afraid to speak out in church, and are seen as heretical. I think this will change.
Finally, I would like to confess that I am not an expert in organizational dynamics or anything. I have been greatly humbled here as I’ve realized there are people like Ray and hawkgrrrl who know so much more about organizations and corporations than I do, or ever will (given my vocation).
One of my accidental professional focal areas has ended up being organizational change management, so this topic fascinates me. I personally have seen some pretty seismic shifts at the top level in the Church over the last 20 years, and I expect that the trickle down effect will accelerate over the next 20 years. I think many people will end up attributing some things to a grassroots, upward-moving momentum that actually will be the membership finally understanding and living what will have been taught for a while by that time. I believe in the vineyard pruning model described in Jacob 5, and I think there will be at least two or three examples of major pruning within 50 years from now. I’m not going to elaborate on what I think those things will be, even in a forum like this, but I believe they will occur – and probably affect the staunchly conservative more than the liberal leaning. (Don’t read into that any assumed meaning. It probably doesn’t relate most obviously to what you would assume naturally.)
Random thoughts on the topic, mostly from reading this forum. So, a good place to start is with the recent Pew Research report (released 24 July and that was not a coincidence) which gives some idea of where the church is. Much more Utah-centric and less dynamic than I would have thought from my own observations. And it seems to me that both trends are likely to continue.
StayLDS is interesting to me because it seems to be bucking one of the other trends that I’ve seen in my lifetime: the tendency to get rid of faithful Mormons with slightly (and sometimes not quite that slight) different ideas on the gospel. I think of the academics not that long ago and some personal friends. When people who were born in the church are forced out instead of being somehow accommodated, the church shrinks (obviously) and become even less dynamic.
I expect the church to come to better terms with homosexuality fairly soon. I see two trends here. The first is that it’s easier for gay people to come out, even Mormons. The second is that general authorities are getting slightly younger and at some point they will be in close touch with grandchildren and children who are gay. Think about VP and Mrs Cheney. From where they stand on most issues, you’d expect them to be violently anti-gay, but they have a gay daughter and they know that she does not conform at all to the usual right-wing rhetoric about homosexuals so they do not go along with it.
Otherwise, I see the church becoming more and more like other Protestant churches. I left SLC and the church when I was 18 and came back when I was 40. Big shock! All the wonderful stuff that I loved (but didn’t believe) was now no longer “emphasized”. See that here as well. The really interesting, unique, and peculiar doctrines are sliding away from our collective attention.
There is a big battle in the offing when the existence of the “Internet Mormons” comes to the attention of the “Chapel Mormons.” Big gap there. Could be either an accommodation or the people who believe in a limited site for the Lamanites and that the Book of Mormon is inspired but not necessarily true are going to be hitting the road.
Captain Curmudgeon wrote:Random thoughts on the topic, mostly from reading this forum.
So, a good place to start is with the recent Pew Research report (released 24 July and that was not a coincidence) which gives some idea of where the church is. Much more Utah-centric and less dynamic than I would have thought from my own observations. And it seems to me that both trends are likely to continue.
StayLDS is interesting to me because it seems to be bucking one of the other trends that I’ve seen in my lifetime: the tendency to get rid of faithful Mormons with slightly (and sometimes not quite that slight) different ideas on the gospel. I think of the academics not that long ago and some personal friends. When people who were born in the church are forced out instead of being somehow accommodated, the church shrinks (obviously) and become even less dynamic.
I expect the church to come to better terms with homosexuality fairly Nsoon. I see two trends here. The first is that it’s easier for gay people to come out, even Mormons. The second is that general authorities are getting slightly younger and at some point they will be in close touch with grandchildren and children who are gay. Think about VP and Mrs Cheney. From where they stand on most issues, you’d expect them to be violently anti-gay, but they have a gay daughter and they know that she does not conform at all to the usual right-wing rhetoric about homosexuals so they do not go along with it.
Otherwise, I see the church becoming more and more like other Protestant churches. I left SLC and the church when I was 18 and came back when I was 40. Big shock! All the wonderful stuff that I loved (but didn’t believe) was now no longer “emphasized”. See that here as well. The really interesting, unique, and peculiar doctrines are sliding away from our collective attention.
There is a big battle in the offing when the existence of the “Internet Mormons” comes to the attention of the “Chapel Mormons.” Big gap there. Could be either an accommodation or the people who believe in a limited site for the Lamanites and that the Book of Mormon is inspired but not necessarily true are going to be hitting the road.
brilliant analysis. I loved it and couldn’t agree more!
Nice one Captain, I especially can’t wait for the “Internet Mormons” vs the “Chapel Mormons” showdown . Fwiw, I never look forward to any showdown. I like to work toward elimination of such things. I don’t see unique doctrines being de-emphasized as much as I see the speculative being ignored – and I’m fine with that. If we stop teaching that we can become like the Father and one with the Son, then I will be concerned. If we stop teaching the universality of opportunity to embrace grace / atonement for ALL of God’s children, then I will be concerned.
If we can’t bridge that Protestant chasm, we will be Protestants; if we can, we won’t be.
There is a saying, “Some Mormons want to be like other Christians, other Mormons want to be like Christ”.
There will be a split in the Church, there already is. Part of the Church will embrace the modern Christian Conservative movement. This movement denounces the BOM and polygamy, accepts only the Bible and “Traditional Marriage”. The LDS Church has already formed coalitions with these other Christian groups and a partial “merger” has occurred. Thus, Mormons are becoming more like Conservative Southern Baptists and Evangelicals as a demographic.
Other members of the LDS Church want to become more like Christ, not like other Christians. This path will lead us further away or separate us from our current Christian Coalition Partners. There will be few true Christians in the Latterdays, so few as to render them politically irrelevant.
The Church will absolutely, definitely split into distinctive groups. You can see that this is already happening. One part of the Church will join the broader Christian Coalition of the far right and accept Evangelical doctrine, the other part of the Church will remain separate from the coalition, but able to retain Mormon doctrine and teachings.
Quote:“Some Mormons want to be like other Christians, other Mormons want to be like Christ”.
Fwiw, that statement is fundamentally judgmental and arrogant toward both Mormons and other Christians, and I simply loathe the multiple messages it conveys. I let it stand to make my point about it – and because the rest of the substance of MWallace57’s comment is appropriate for this forum.
(Btw, a comment from a newly registered participant was deleted because it characterized all who question as intelligent and educated and all who don’t struggle as ignorant and uneducated. It was a brutally condescending, arrogant comment toward all believing members and the LDS Church itself – with no redeeming value whatsoever. Those comments are not appropriate for this site.)
I’m not sure there will be a massive split in the LDS Church, even though there certainly is precedent for it. Retention actually is getting better over the last few years, and overall “activity” is much better than it was decades ago. Maybe I’m just a glass half-full kind of guy, but . . .
I don’t expect explosive growth, but I don’t expect dwindling either. I expect it to remain roughly where it is now in the States, to grow slightly in the industrialized countries and to grow more in the third-world countries – with grow there limited to what the FP & Q12 think is manageable. The Church could have grown MUCH faster in some areas than it has, but that potential growth was limited intentionally in order to avoid the inevitable fissures and separation that would have occurred with explosive growth (like in the earliest days of the 1800’s). I understand and am OK with that.
Old-Timer wrote:Quote:
(Btw, a comment from a newly registered participant was deleted because it characterized all who question as intelligent and educated and all who don’t struggle as ignorant and uneducated. It was a brutally condescending, arrogant comment toward all believing members and the LDS Church itself – with no redeeming value whatsoever. Those comments are not appropriate for this site.)Alot of us have thought this along our journey but were just lucky enough not to say it out loud until we got past it. fwiw
swimordie, I understand that completely (and I actually respect it from those who are sincere), but if you had read the comment I am sure you would understand. It simply was not appropriate for this site. Dear Ray, I didn’t mean to convey “multiple messages”. My ancestors were polygamous. My great-grandfather had two wives, my great-grandmother and her sister. He loved both of them dearly. Because they didn’t practice, “traditional marriage” they were constantly persecuted. Having walked across the plains and settling in Utah, they were driven out once more and had to leave the United States and settle in Mexico. They could never return to their home country until after my great-grandfather was dead. He was no criminal. He and his family were the kindest, most Christlike people you could ever meet. Members of my family have served multiple missions – one uncle have served 5 missions and raised 10 children.
This is what I was speaking about when I said, “being like Christ” His posterity has served in Africa, Australia, Bolivia and poverty stricken areas of the deep South. They have gone without food, clean water, suffered food poisoning, hepatitis etc. Yet they are NOT like other Christians because they are the literal descendants of families who practiced plural marriage.
Polygamy was never “in fashion” in the United States. Now some members have joined groups to promote “Traditional Marriage”. These groups detest plural marriage forgetting that Christ was a literal descendant of a family that had practiced plural marriage for thousands of years.
And it does hurt me when members forget this and embrace the “politics de jor” and the trendy new version of the “traditional family” and the theology behind it.
Every single branch and sect that broke away from the early Church over polygamy failed – miserably. Most died out with one generation. The Lord commanded polygamy to “build up a generation that would serve him”. This law applies both anciently and in modern times.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.