- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
SamBee wrote:
…I felt called back, a strange thing, but that’s how it is. I’ve reconnected with the BoM, and a lot of the doctrine from believing barely any of it a year ago. I wouldn’t have called myself LDS back then despite being still on the membership rolls…When it comes down to it I’m either Mormon or Protestant (by family background), and right now I tend to find certain LDS doctrines cover the gaps in Protestantism, such as the damnation of those who died without the gospel, original sin etc…At its best, the CoC is an open tolerant forward thinking branch of Mormonism, at its worst
some people in it don’t hold to very much at all.Quote:I’m not going to drive across town to attend some new church where I don’t know anyone just because I happen to like their doctrines more than the church I am already familiar with.
Ah, you see that’s just what a lot of converts do! Me anyway.
The doctrines sort of made sense to me on the surface until I really started to look at them closely but I think what attracts some people as much if not more than the actual doctrines is the members; to me, many of them always seemed so nice, optimistic, and faithful and they gave the impression that they were honestly trying to do good. Wherever I went I generally liked other Church members more than non-Mormons without really knowing why. That’s one reason I would want to stay in spite of the official doctrines not necessarily because of them. I actually think TBMs have the right idea in many cases such as having enough faith to do what they think is right, I just think they go too far sometimes and have put too much faith in some of the wrong things like fallible men and many insignificant or unessential details.
DevilsAdvocate wrote:to me, many of them always seemed so nice, optimistic, and faithful and they gave the impression that they were honestly trying to do good. Wherever I went I generally liked other Church members more than non-Mormons without really knowing why. That’s one reason I would want to stay in spite of the official doctrines not necessarily because of them. I actually think TBMs have the right idea in many cases such as having enough faith to do what they think is right, I just think they go too far sometimes and have put too much faith in some of the wrong things like fallible men and many insignificant or unessential details.
Yes, I think this is generally true to a point. In my experience it feels like more and more of our membership is becoming extreme in their beliefs and more and more fundamentalists – stressing culture, tradition, obedience to authority as the expense of true worship and christian values. this is not the way it’s suppose to be, always is, and certainly different units and areas will vary considerably. I can only speak from my experience, and unfortunately my family, and the units I’ve I have been involved in have just not been a good experience for me — with the exception of the 12 months I lived in Brooklyn New York, and a short period where I attended a unit for newly married couples while attending Utah State University.
Quote:stressing culture, tradition, obedience to authority as the expense of true worship and christian values
I think the tone and content of the CHI training indicates that the top leadership is concerned about that, as well. It’s easy to say some of them do that, also – but I think it’s fairer to say that they preach a tough balance. I find it hard to criticize that “balance approach” – even as I also am concerned about the orientation cwald describes.
For what it’s worth, the whole authority and obedience thing – in this ward anyway – seems less intense than it was. When I joined it was laid on with a trowel, and used to annoy me. I considered that I was a member due to my free agency, and that this was in fact a violation of it. I gave my allegiance freely, not begrudgingly, yet that changed because of certain pressures. The one guy I hear stressing it continually is Boyd K Packer. Have the obedience and authority people realized what sinister overtones that these words have in modern society (politics anyway)? Or that it plays right into the hands of people who call Mormonism a cult?
Again, in defense of the “tough balance” I mentioned, PRes. Packer also has given multiple talks stressing individual revelation and not over-burdening members and families. His closing comments at the CHI training were amazing in that regard. Old-Timer wrote:Again, in defense of the “tough balance” I mentioned, PRes. Packer also has given multiple talks stressing individual revelation and not over-burdening members and families. His closing comments at the CHI training were amazing in that regard.
Yeah. But wouldn’t it be easier if he would be consistent in his message?
I loved his talked in CG last Spring, but….
Nice discussion, sorry I missed it. 
Fortunately or unfortunately, every Community of Christ congregation is going to be its own thing, so you can never tell what you’ll get if you show up. My congregation in Toronto puts on a pretty good, traditional Latter Day Saint service each week — so, it’s probably better prepared than what Tom appears to have encountered in Mesa. I personally think it’s no where near as boring as the LDS services I’ve attended as an adult, but I’m sure it can’t compare one iota in terms of being fun and lively to a Unitarian Universalist service.
Given that they are all different, I’ll descibe my own congregation in downtown Toronto.
Our first hour is Sunday School. I’ve started teaching adult Sunday School (eq. of “Gospel Doctrine”) once a month. My first lesson is here:
http://saintsherald.com/2011/02/02/church-history-sunday-month-1/ Then there’s the main worship meeting, which is a communion or sacrament meeting 1x per month. The main differences from an LDS meeting are: (1) a little shorter, (2) livelier tempo to hymns, (3) one longer talk instead of three, (4) there’s a lighting of a peace candle and a prayer for peace for a country or indigenous people in the world, and (5) there’s a offering and collection (but no tithing settlement at the end of the year).
On the communion Sunday, the prayers are the same except women can be offering them (since women have full priesthood participation) and we retain the original “wine” instead of the substituted word “water” in the second prayer. The wine is unfermented grape juice.
Immediately after the worship meeting, everyone adjourns to the social room for snacks, coffee & tea, and visiting, which lasts about 20 minutes, meaning the whole thing is about 2 hours and 20 minutes, although a lot of people skip the Sunday School hour.
In our congregation, the Book of Mormon is not discarded and usually is drawn from or mentioned every week, but this is not necessarily usual.
The time I visited Community of Christ (so far) I met another LDS fellow, Clay Whipkey, there. I think both of us were really impressed by the Sunday School class. The lesson was about church history, and like no LDS church history lesson. It was a seemingly humble examination of our founding stories, with reference to the recent revelation from President Veazey that talks about examination (if I recall correctly) and search for truth and relevance (I may be way over-editorializing, but this is my recollection). It was only the worship service that seemed a bit frazzled and extemporaneous.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.