- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
The Huffington Post is a reasonably respected source of info about religion in America. Today it published an article describing some of the Church’s controversial historical and doctrinal issues. It is written presumably by a Mormon, but is straightforward in describing both sides of the various issues. Note the hot links to document various statements. A similar article appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune yesterday (3/9/15). http://www.huffingtonpost.com/benjamin-knoll/many-mormons-are-unaware-_b_6195784.html Quote:In my personal anecdotal experience, most of my Mormon friends and family members are, at best, only peripherally aware that these historical essays even exist and very few have actually taken the time to read them or reflect on their implications. While the LDS Church has, to its great credit, made this information available on its official website and has been making great strides recently toward more openness and transparency about its history,
it has not yet been actively publicizing or promoting these developments to its members either in its educational curricula or semiannual discourses by Church leaders,the sources where most Mormons expect the “true” and “approved” version of their history to be taught. Until the LDS Church makes a more aggressive effort on this front, we should expect that most Mormons will continue to remain uninformed and “in the dark” about these important details from their own history. I’ve probably touched on some of the essay topics about five times in conversation or lessons. But I never pick up on anyone having read them.
Ann wrote:Quote:In my personal anecdotal experience, most of my Mormon friends and family members are, at best, only peripherally aware that these historical essays even exist and very few have actually taken the time to read them or reflect on their implications. While the LDS Church has, to its great credit, made this information available on its official website and has been making great strides recently toward more openness and transparency about its history,
it has not yet been actively publicizing or promoting these developments to its members either in its educational curricula or semiannual discourses by Church leaders,the sources where most Mormons expect the “true” and “approved” version of their history to be taught. Until the LDS Church makes a more aggressive effort on this front, we should expect that most Mormons will continue to remain uninformed and “in the dark” about these important details from their own history. I’ve probably touched on some of the essay topics about five times in conversation or lessons. But I never pick up on anyone having read them.
I have had lots of people say they are aware of them, but very few have read them. They say every time, I should really read those to see why people are so mad. But, I’ve never had them come back to me and say they read them.
Likewise, I know few people who are aware of them and even fewer who have read any of them. I will give my SP kudos here in that he has read them and even mentions stuff from them sometimes, and he has encouraged local leaders to become familiar with them. I think that like the article mentions, until they are more than just mentioned in GC and until they are part of the curriculum, things will pretty much remain the so. For instance, some of the reasons postulated for why Blacks did not hold the priesthood were taught from the GC pulpit, there seems to be no reason why disavowing those teachings cannot also be taught from that pulpit. That’s going to take someone brave enough (like Pres. Uchtdorf or Elder Christofferson or perhaps Elder Ballard) to do it, though. As a side note, it has been a while since there has been a new essay. I wonder if they’re done for now? They do seem to have hit on the biggest of the thorny issues, even though there are a few more I’d like to see addressed.
My stake pres communicated to bishops that if someone asked about them to acknowledge that they are out there, but not to discuss more or add opinions. I love my SP and I think he is a bit scared about the consequences. To be fair, the same is true of MANY people in ALL religions and denominations. It’s just easier in those with much longer histories to brush aside all issues as things in the past – and end up completely ignoring things that are more recent and even still happening currently. Ray said: Quote:Ray said: To be fair, the same is true of MANY people in ALL religions and denominations. It’s just easier in those with much longer histories to brush aside all issues as things in the past – and end up completely ignoring things that are more recent and even still happening currently.
I totally agree. The problem, IMHO is these historical, scientific, and doctrinal hurdles that are only going to get worse. In the age of the internet the Church cannot control the information as they have in the past. I believe the easiest and most authentic way is to adjust the teachings of the Q15 to be true for most things, but members must seek divine guidance for how that council should be applied in our own lives. As JS said, “teach them correct principles and let them rule themselves” .
The mantra “follow the prophet, they will never lead you astray” sets an unreasonable expectation. Prophets have consistently made mistakes starting with the OT, NT, BofM, D&C, and PGP, plus 185 years of Church history. E.g. Moses’s vanity kept him out of the promised land, Apostle Thomas doubted, Judas betrayed Christ & committed suicide, the intro to the BofM clearly acknowledges the weaknesses of the flesh in recording a sacred record, JS pointedly recorded in the D&C several times that God chewed him out for major screw ups. An apostle promised the Martin Willey handcart company would not see enough snow to fill a hat before they reached SLC but many died because of the snow and cold. BY clearly rebuked the stupidity of that Apostle in general conference. Likewise BY said polygamy and Blacks could
neverhave priesthood but were overturned in 1978, JSF said man would neverset foot on the moon, Q15 said being gay was a sin bec. God didn’t make them that way. But they have since backed far away from that stand after alienated many members and non-members with their oppositon to Prop 18 in California. IMO infallible Q15 is a false doctrine that has led many people to suffer false teachings of bigotry, dogmatism, even unto needless death. IMO, the infallibility of the prophet is the most pernicious teaching in the Church. Again, IMO, the only way the Church can reduce collateral damage from further damage from reasonable criticism on many, many fronts is to publicly distance themselves from the idea that the prophets will never lead you astray. It won’t be easy, and they will loose some TBM’ers. But they will loose fewer people that way than the would if they try to tamp down every “revelation” that proves wrong. The Wack-A-Mole game will continue ad nauseam if they persist in claiming inerrancy.
Pre- ET Benson, my impression is that Inerrancy was not taught so much. So why not return to a more nuanced stand and be done with it? Bruce R McKonkie did as much as admit as that when he admitted he (and by inference over a century of statements about the Priesthood Ban on Blacks were wrong.
You’re right, imo, dash – but, again, that is not unique to the LDS Church. This is not doctrinal in nature, but I think of the charges that the LDS Church is racist or has a particularly racist past. When looking at the current situation AND the broad historical record, we absolutely have had racism in our heritage and still have elements of it now – but ours actually is somewhat mild compared to that of the rest of Christianity (or, at the very least, in no way uniquely bad) AND numerous denominations still have racially segregated congregations. I have a Protestant friend in the South who says openly that religion in the last great bastion of racial segregation in America – and I understand his point.
My point is that many of the people who are members of those denominations and congregations view their doctrines and practices as infallible every bit as much as (or, in a way, even more than) LDS members. For us, it often rests on living prophets and apostles; for them, it generally rests on dead ones. Of those two, I prefer our version (even though I don’t like it), since ours at least has the capacity to accommodate change in the form of “on-going revelation” (however we might define that term).
Most relevant to this post, however, is the simple fact that all religions and denominations have messy details in their histories – and relatively few members are aware of them, particularly in detail.
Ray, I agree with you that Mormonism’s raciest past is benign in comparison to many other churches. The Southern Baptists broke away from the northern Baptists over the issue of black slavery. And it wasn’t until 1995 did they renounce their racist their roots, apologize for slavery, segregation and white supremacy. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Baptist_Convention In contrast, the LDS never enforced segregated congregations. But it has from time to time responded by offering services for ethnic and language preferences. Attendance to them vs others is strictly voluntary. The individual, not the ward determines that. In my local building, we have 3 wards. Two are English and one is Spanish. The individual, not the Church determines where they will attend. (Same is true in our stake for Young Adults who can choose to go to the singles ward or their local ward.) So for the treatment of Blacks, I agree that the Church has done better than most.
Nevertheless, I remain concerned that for over 100 years Church Presidents taught that Blacks were inferior, cursed and not worthy of the Temple. Many prophets said that principle will not change until at least the Millennium.
But prophetic remains the critical issue in my mind. Prophetic teachings taught black inferiority for many years. Was that God’s will or Prophets bigotry? The same disconnect exists on many other issues stated above. My question is to reconcile how prophets can be called infallible given their track record throughout the ancient scriptures and latter-day history? The mantra “Follow the Prophets. They will never lead you astray” just doesn’t hold.
What I can say is that generally speaking, they do an excellent job of teaching standards and values that are worthy of striving for, they ennoble the spirit, provide abundant opportunity for service to others. Their teaching of Christ and his role starting with the Council in Heaven and continuing through the life after death adds nobility and insight for me. I feel it gives me insights that other Christian churches don’t have. I am personally thankful for the WofW, temple marriage, and plan of salvation.
When a prophet speaks, I listen. But then I decide how I will implement that guidance in my life. That is much different from my days as a TBM believing that “When the prophets speak, the thinking has been done.” I have abandoned the bigoted and distrusting attitudes of my youth. No longer do I expect them to be perfect in every official utterance, it just doesn’t make sense to me.
dash1730 wrote:When a prophet speaks, I listen. But then I decide how I will implement that guidance in my life. That is much different from my days as a TBM believing that “When the prophets speak, the thinking has been done.” I have abandoned the bigoted and distrusting attitudes of my youth. No longer do I expect them to be perfect in every official utterance, it just doesn’t make sense to me.
I am right there with you on this one. I know we have coming up before long the teachings of the prophet ET Benson and his “14 fundamentals of following the prophet.” I am keeping close track of where my High Priest lessons are on because I WILL be speaking up at that one saying I do not agree and restating what you have said above. I also will be refreshing what President Kimball’s son mentions about when this was given and how ETB was (privately) called on the carpet by the other brethren and how Pres. Kimball did not like what was said.Speaking of ETB, wow. I just listened to
http://mormonexpositor.com/65-who-is-ezra-taft-benson-and-what-is-the-john-birch-society/ ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://mormonexpositor.com/65-who-is-ezra-taft-benson-and-what-is-the-john-birch-society/ dash1730 wrote:When a prophet speaks, I listen. But then I decide how I will implement that guidance in my life. That is much different from my days as a TBM believing that “When the prophets speak, the thinking has been done.” I have abandoned the bigoted and distrusting attitudes of my youth. No longer do I expect them to be perfect in every official utterance, it just doesn’t make sense to me.
Just this week I learned (via Terryl Givens) of the controversy surrounding the “When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done” statement. FAIR has a bit on it
http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/publications/when-the-prophet-speaks-is-the-thinking-done ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/publications/when-the-prophet-speaks-is-the-thinking-done I read that post Dark Jedi, and maybe I read it completely wrong? But wasn’t he still kind of saying the same thing, by using some of those quotes? On one occasion in answer to the question by a prominent visitor how he governed his people, the Prophet answered: “I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves.”
Know this, that every soul is free
To choose his life and what he’ll be,
For this eternal truth is given
That God will force no man to heaven.”
I am not going to lie, these things are my biggest problems right now. How do we know when they are speaking from God and when is it man? These quotes are still saying that if we question what the prophet says, we are wrong and they can’t force us into heaven. I desperately want to live with my Heavenly Father again, but maybe my pride will keep me out.
slowlylosingit wrote:I read that post Dark Jedi, and maybe I read it completely wrong? But wasn’t he still kind of saying the same thing, by using some of those quotes?
On one occasion in answer to the question by a prominent visitor how he governed his people, the Prophet answered: “I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves.”
Know this, that every soul is free
To choose his life and what he’ll be,
For this eternal truth is given
That God will force no man to heaven.”
I am not going to lie, these things are my biggest problems right now. How do we know when they are speaking from God and when is it man? These quotes are still saying that if we question what the prophet says, we are wrong and they can’t force us into heaven. I desperately want to live with my Heavenly Father again, but maybe my pride will keep me out.
I can’t say that I interpret either of those quotes, nor the others in GAS’s letter, to be the same as “the thinking has been done.” I don’t think Joseph Smith saw himself as infallible.
I don’t know the answer to your question about how we know. I mostly assume they aren’t speaking prophetically. That doesn’t mean I think they are teaching evil falsehoods or that they’re wrong. They almost always teach biblical gospel principles. I can sustain them in that without reservation. Quite simply, for me, if it is not a core gospel principle I don’t buy it and I don’t worry about it. That’s my middle way for this particular issue.
I hope to get to that place too, where I can just feel good listening to them and not have that twinge of doubt all of the time. I think what I heard in those quotes was probably that twinge. The first one was that the prophet is saying “I teach them correct principles”, almost as if they never teach false principles. The other, I mostly explained my opinion on that in my last post, but if I do not choose this church, that I have chosen my way out of Heaven.
This has been so heavily discussed in my family recently about the family members that have chosen to leave, that they are screwing up their chances at receiving the CK. I guess I am constantly just trying to come to grips and trying to figure out what I actually believe now and wade through all of the garbage that has piled up in my head.
:crazy: Sorry, went off on a tangent I think for this posting
SLI, I don’t know if it’s as much about believing as it is letting go of belief. Believe me, I know how hard it is to change that paradigm of belief when you so wholeheartedly believed everything about the church and taught in church. It becomes part of who you are, and to me that’s the greatest pain of a faith crisis. But in order to grow, in order to find the peace we seek, we have to have that paradigm shift – we have to let go of some of it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.