- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
There is a lot of talk right now online about the New York Times’ article about the polygamy essay, and I have read complaints that the LDS Church wouldn’t be publishing these essays if we didn’t have access to so much information now. I agree completely with that, in general, but there is something we miss when we focus so narrowly on ourselves – when navel gazing blocks perspective. As a history teacher and student by nature, I think it’s important to realize that the LDS Church actually is being quite progressive **right now** in the writing and publication of these essays. Before anyone dismisses this or complains that it’s a late or forced effort, consider the following very simple questions:
How many Catholics know about everything the Popes did? How much of it is taught actively by the Catholic Church? How many Protestants know about everything the reformers did? How much of it is taught actively in Protestant churches? How many Buddhists know about and teach everything monks have done? How much of it is taught actively by Buddhists?I’m not saying our history doesn’t matter; I’m just saying we actually are being progressive *right now* compared to many other religions and denominations.
I agree Ray. And really, the history itself is not the problem or the issue, IMO. My issue is how the church has intentionally or unintentionally, misled and deceived is members about it’s history for the last 40 years.
It’s the perceived dishonesty and deception that is tearing the church apart right now.
People feel like the church has been dishonest and corrupt.
This is a step in the right direction. But there will be pain and casualties as the church goes about fixing their mistake of the last 40 years.
The church is in a no win situation, and they have only themselves to blame for it.
I agree, cwald – but, again, that exact same thing is true about every other religion and denomination that exists and has lasted for more than a few hundred years. It also is true about many non-religious organizations, from companies to countries. In fact, when it comes to religions, we are fairly clean in this regard in comparison to most others – simply because we still are relatively young. The issue I’m addressing here is that we tend to think we are unique in some way when it comes to these things – and we aren’t. We are simply “natural” in far more ways than we want to believe – and that also is true of almost all people throughout time.
Maybe we are fairly clean in this regard because we have people that hold their community to a higher standard. nibbler wrote:Maybe we are fairly clean in this regard because we have people that hold their community to a higher standard.
Which may be why some are so upset when they feel like church leaders have been suppressing some info as they feel the same leader touts “we cling to the truth”.I enjoy the several perspectives on this site.
Old-Timer wrote:There is a lot of talk right now online about the New York Times’ article about the polygamy essay, and I have read complaints that the LDS Church wouldn’t be publishing these essays if we didn’t have access to so much information now. I agree completely with that, in general, but there is something we miss when we focus so narrowly on ourselves – when navel gazing blocks perspective.
As a history teacher and student by nature, I think it’s important to realize that the LDS Church actually is being quite progressive **right now** in the writing and publication of these essays. Before anyone dismisses this or complains that it’s a late or forced effort, consider the following very simple questions:
How many Catholics know about everything the Popes did? How much of it is taught actively by the Catholic Church? How many Protestants know about everything the reformers did? How much of it is taught actively in Protestant churches? How many Buddhists know about and teach everything monks have done? How much of it is taught actively by Buddhists?I’m not saying our history doesn’t matter; I’m just saying we actually are being progressive *right now* compared to many other religions and denominations.
To my mind, we just missed a great opportunity to be truly progressive. I don’t care that the essays were late or forced, but they justify and excuse what happened, and leave the doctrinal door wide open for a repeat. To whatever extent the Catholics, Protestants and Buddhists are doing the same,
:thumbdown: to them, too.I know people talk about baby steps, and maybe it’ll all work out. For me, the essay was a net loss, and the reason for my first true baby step away.
I understand and share that desire, Ann – but it would take a mindset re-orientation that simply is too much to ask of many people, especially ones my age and older. For those who are the most certain of their knowledge, it’s almost like asking them to change their sexual orientation, since, for many, the basics of how they see and cope with the world are deeply ingrained and critical to their feelings of security and survival. That is true even more so when those people have reasonably close ancestors who were polygamous. This post simply attempts to show that our issues are not unique in any way – and that, contrary to popular Mormon belief, neither are we in most ways. Recognizing and accepting that (and letting go of unrealistic expectations of others, past and present) can bring peace in a way that is powerful and liberating. Letting humans be human is a good thing, even if it often is messy and painful – and even if some of them seem to think they are more than merely human.
Ann wrote- Quote:For me, the essay was a net loss, and the reason for my first true baby step away.
I have deleted the word baby step from describing the polygamy essay, perhaps all of the essays, I’ve demoted them to standing in the crib. It’s necessary, it’s an achievement, it lays the potential for more to come – but a full step it is not.
As to your direct comment, I am seeing the essay be more of a final step for women. Just yesterday I heard of a 86 or 96 year old, lucid women who has “had it” after reading the essay.
Before I read this thread I have been wondering, so many of us wanted the church to address things, they have – however fully or slight it is, but that isn’t the band-aid for this seasons struggle. I just keep seeing scorches like the trenches of World War I. Yes they are closing up, but you can still take aerial photos and see the damage. It will be interesting to see if we can reconcile the branches of pain or if we need to let it go to a different generation.
[img]http://www.culture24.org.uk/asset_arena/6/99/88/488996/v0_master.jpg [/img] Let me be crystal clear: This post is NOT intended to be just another post about polygamy. It’s not even about polygamy, centrally.
PLEASE, everyone, we have plenty of posts about polygamy, so let’s not turn this one into just another polygamy post. The discussion about the polygamy essay simply was what caused me to write this post. This post is intended to do one thing and one thing only – to point out that the LDS Church is not unique in ANY way when it comes to having historical issues and not addressing them proactively for a relatively long time. The collective we likes to think we are unique in so many ways, but we aren’t.
It’s fair to complain and criticize things that we see as bad in our history, past and present, but it’s unfair to frame anything in our history as unique to us. Other religious groups have done and continue to do the exact same things, about issues that are just as serious as anything in our own history – and almost EVERY religious group claims to be uniquely favored by God and “true” in some way to some degree.
This is about historical perspective, not specifically polygamy. I’ve just read enough commentary lately that says or implies we are unique in this or that way that I had to take issue somewhere – and you all got the chance to be my sounding board. Thanks or sorry, whichever it is for each of you.
Old-Timer wrote:This post is intended to do one thing and one thing only – to point out that the LDS Church is not unique in ANY way when it comes to having historical issues and not addressing them proactively for a relatively long time. The collective we likes to think we are unique in so many ways, but we aren’t.
It’s fair to complain and criticize things that we see as bad in our history, past and present, but it’s unfair to frame anything in our history as unique to us. Other religious groups have done and continue to do the exact same things, about issues that are just as serious as anything in our own history – and almost EVERY religious group claims to be uniquely favored by God and “true” in some way to some degree.
Sorry for the knee-jerk response. I guess I don’t have “at the ready” any analagous situations in other faiths. It would be interesting to discuss some without much further reference to polygamy. And I get that they might not be happening as we speak since we’re all on different timelines, but I am interested in getting some perspective.
Ann wrote:Old-Timer wrote:This post is intended to do one thing and one thing only – to point out that the LDS Church is not unique in ANY way when it comes to having historical issues and not addressing them proactively for a relatively long time. The collective we likes to think we are unique in so many ways, but we aren’t.
It’s fair to complain and criticize things that we see as bad in our history, past and present, but it’s unfair to frame anything in our history as unique to us. Other religious groups have done and continue to do the exact same things, about issues that are just as serious as anything in our own history – and almost EVERY religious group claims to be uniquely favored by God and “true” in some way to some degree.
Sorry for the knee-jerk response. I guess I don’t have “at the ready” any analagous situations in other faiths. It would be interesting to discuss some without much further reference to polygamy. And I get that they might not be happening as we speak since we’re all on different timelines, but I am interested in getting some perspective.
I think a good example might be the Crusades, Ann. Much of what we know about them now has come from secular historians. The Catholic Church itself has never really come clean about them (although Pope John Paul II did apologize). Likewise, there are serious allegations that the Catholic church could have done much more to intervene in the Holocaust and failed to do so. I’m not picking on Catholicism, but it is a church with lots of skeletons in the closet. It’s also 10 times older than our church, which speaks to Ray’s point about relative age having to do with how much history there is to criticize int he first place. Our church also came about in a relative age of information – it’s much harder to hide things under those circumstances (although I think we did a pretty good job of it).
Catholicism is an easy target, both due to its age but also its political position for much of its history. There have been popes that make Joseph Smith look squeaky clean by comparison, and its not just the Crusades. There are extremely credible sources that assert inaction from the top during the Holocaust specifically because the people being killed were seen as heathens and so the Nazis were seen as doing God’s work by eliminating them – and the organization benefited financially from it, as well. It is indisputable that numerous top leaders viewed it that way. Buddhism is known as a non-violent religion due mostly to the way it has been embraced by the West, but its history is full of marauding bandit priests who stole, pillaged, raped and killed at will – and that doesn’t even address the founding stories.
Islam obviously has serious issues right now that make Mormon history look spotless, but there was an extended time when it was FAR more advanced and progressive than Christianity – and, in some parts of the world, it still is.
Protestants killed each other (and Catholics) in droves over theological differences in the early years, and some of the worst theological ideas ever perpetuated, imo, came from the Reformation – including hardcore Calvinist predestination. (As an interesting aside, many Protestants who claim Biblical infallibility don’t realize Martin Luther rejected the Epistle of James simply because he didn’t agree with its emphasis on the importance of one’s actions – the whole “faith without works is dead” theme.)
Adultery and abortion were rampant among the clergy for hundreds of years within the Catholic Church, and one of the reasons celibacy was instituted for priests and nuns was to try to stop those actions – and, in many cases, “adultery” meant priests raping new, young nuns.
I could go on and on, but when we look outside our own tradition and see humanity across time, I think “the natural man” verse makes a lot of sense – and we realize that, while our own leaders also are “natural” and subject to error (even terrible error), our history is not extraordinarily bad in any way. In fact, generally speaking, it’s quite good – even with its serious issues. I believe part of that is the time in which it has existed and the attendant awareness of issues that simply were not understood or valued in the past – and I wouldn’t ask to be born into any earlier time in history. I don’t like quite a few things about our history, but, in perspective, as bad as some of it was, the current LDS Church is WAY better right now at dealing with it than other major religions and denominations have been and still are – largely, I believe, because they have had more time to let go and just ignore the past. In a way, they can be adults about their own past, while we still are adolescents – and they can laugh at and scorn our past from the luxury of not knowing or caring about their own.
All true Ray. I guess we should give them credit for starting to come clean on our history — officially. I know from experience in my home life that when I try to repent, often my wife won’t let me! Not that she prevents it, but she doesn’t believe I’ve really changed. This discourages me from changing, or taking that next teenager step.
I guess its similar to beating the church up over releasing the articles when they sanitized our history for so many years. Give them credit for at least changing.
The thing for me, now, is that the atrocities we see in so many churches, makes me question if any of them are “the true church”. If I was God, I’m not sure I would want to put my name on any of them!!!!
Quote:I know from experience in my home life that when I try to repent, often my wife won’t let me! Not that she prevents it, but she doesn’t believe I’ve really changed. This discourages me from changing, or taking that next teenager step.
That’s a really great thought, SD. We have to encourage the change we do see, no matter how small it starts off, so that the door for more change continues to open. The Church is just a work in progress like everything else in this life.This thread offers some really great perspective. So many of us on the fringes found ourselves out here due in some part to historicity issues, so it’s nice to look and see from another angle or two how the Church’s history compares in the larger scheme of things. Not to downplay anyone’s individual negative or positive experiences within the Church, of course.
Old-Timer wrote:I don’t like quite a few things about our history, but, in perspective, as bad as some of it was, the current LDS Church is WAY better right now at dealing with it than other major religions and denominations have been and still are – largely, I believe, because they have had more time to let go and just ignore the past. In a way, they can be adults about their own past, while we still are adolescents – and they can laugh at and scorn our past from the luxury of not knowing or caring about their own.
If we really have the restored gospel, the ennobling, enlivening truth that the world is in desperate need of, then maybe the adolescent church needs to grow up fast. I don’t think it is on a timeline like the others. Maybe we’re supposed to change, and change quickly, or we can’t accomplish our mission. And if we wait too long, until everyone who knew anyone who knew anyone who knew anyone connected with objectionable people and practices is gone or unconcerned with scrutiny, we’ll be too old and depleted to do what we’re supposed to do in the world.
My thoughts as I wonder about my kids’ future in the church….
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.