- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Quote:
I maybe shouldn’t but I started laughing inwardly once when a new member started bearing his testimony of the Church of Mormon and how he believed our bishop was a true prophet. He had what we charitably call learning difficulties and is a bit of a character. Going back a few years right enough…
I would have run up and given him a big hug. Learning difficulties or not, we need more of this.
mom3 wrote:
Quote:I maybe shouldn’t but I started laughing inwardly once when a new member started bearing his testimony of the Church of Mormon and how he believed our bishop was a true prophet. He had what we charitably call learning difficulties and is a bit of a character. Going back a few years right enough…
I would have run up and given him a big hug. Learning difficulties or not, we need more of this.
He wasn’t really the huggable type, trust me! Don’t think he would have approved. He goes to a happy clappy church down the road now.
Whats wrong with happy, clappy? Who said there was anything wrong with it? Your description stuck me as funny. There are times I wonder what it was like to attend the LDS worship services in the 1800’s.
How would it compare to today? Would we recognize it compared to today?
For example, speaking in tongues, etc. I’m getting off topic. Sorry.
I used to go to a happy clappy church myself some years ago. I used the phrase because I don’t know which denomination his new one is; and he was a bit incoherent in telling me. mom3 wrote:
I have been out with Pastor’s from other faiths all morning. Everyone of them kindly asked what church I belonged to. I stuck with LDS. Everyone of them was “What’s the deal with the name thing.” The effort to explain it derails any attempt to build bridges. To me Christ wanted a bit more bridge building. So while we explain the long game of it, they are like “What ever?”
I suppose it depends on what role of Christ you believe in. I suppose that some LDS believe in the Christ who brings not peace but a sword, the triumphant Messiah that will make every knee to bow and every lip to confess that He is Lord (and by extension they will also be made to submit and confess that JS is the Prophet of the restoration). That is the Christ that would want us to proclaim the truth of our testimonies with
boldness. I believe this quote from Mom’s signature line is appropriate here:
Quote:“I am coming to envision a new persona for the Church as humble followers of Jesus Christ….Joseph and his early followers came forth with lots of triumphalist rhetoric, but I think we need a new voice, one of humility, friendship and service. We should teach people to believe in God because it will soften their hearts and make them more willing to serve.” – Richard Bushman
I see it two ways. The social scientist half of me thinks there is no way that church leaders can prevent people from shortening the name of the church when it’s so freaking long. The name “Mormons” has stuck for decades, and it is unlikely that will change. BUT
If this name change is part of an effort to turn our focus more toward the Savior, I am all for it. I have been searching everywhere for Christ and I ironically rarely find Him or feel Him at church. I’m hoping this is a first step toward turning our sights away from arbitrary teachings and focusing more on what the Savior actually taught, and truly striving to be more like Him.
Quote:If this name change is part of an effort to turn our focus more toward the Savior, I am all for it. I have been searching everywhere for Christ and I ironically rarely find Him or feel Him at church. I’m hoping this is a first step toward turning our sights away from arbitrary teachings and focusing more on what the Savior actually taught, and truly striving to be more like Him.
I, and I believe many on this board and others in the church, have the same goal. The reverse psychologist in me thinks “By their fruits ye shall know them” would have been a wiser choice. Make a full court effort to getting us out truly serving in the community. Shift our Sacrament Meetings to Christ centered talks. Don’t make missionary efforts an underlying principle. Last of all don’t sen out a press release.
My job at the shelter I work with is to create the volunteer calendar. Our long name alone doesn’t fit. If I shorten it to “Church of Christ” – I have to add a moniker to it because we already have “Church of Christ Lutheran” – “Church of Christ Local Area” – For us it now reads “Church of Christ – LDS” It’s not bad, but it’s not what the requested name change was. If a picky member see’s it, they will point out the error. If someone who didn’t get the memo see’s it they will need a nice lengthy explanation.
I don’t mind giving the explanation. But to me the fact that it requires explaining makes it seem like a marketing message. Not a change of heart message. It almost anchors the idea that we weren’t focused on Christ. And yes good for us jumping on the bandwagon, but I don’t want us to come across at “The church formerly known as…” That’s fine for celebrities or politicians. For me I want my religion as far away from that as possible.
bdavis3 wrote:
I see it two ways. The social scientist half of me thinks there is no way that church leaders can prevent people from shortening the name of the church when it’s so freaking long. The name “Mormons” has stuck for decades, and it is unlikely that will change.BUT
If this name change is part of an effort to turn our focus more toward the Savior, I am all for it. I have been searching everywhere for Christ and I ironically rarely find Him or feel Him at church. I’m hoping this is a first step toward turning our sights away from arbitrary teachings and focusing more on what the Savior actually taught, and truly striving to be more like Him.
You need to come to our ward. I think we are fairly good at keeping things Christ-centered just now.
SamBee wrote:
bdavis3 wrote:
I see it two ways. The social scientist half of me thinks there is no way that church leaders can prevent people from shortening the name of the church when it’s so freaking long. The name “Mormons” has stuck for decades, and it is unlikely that will change.BUT
If this name change is part of an effort to turn our focus more toward the Savior, I am all for it. I have been searching everywhere for Christ and I ironically rarely find Him or feel Him at church. I’m hoping this is a first step toward turning our sights away from arbitrary teachings and focusing more on what the Savior actually taught, and truly striving to be more like Him.
You need to come to our ward. I think we are fairly good at keeping things Christ-centered just now.
Mine, too. I hoping this is a trend everywhere. I can’t say it’s every talk every week or every testimony but I can say it’s better than it was even five years ago.
And as a stake I think there has been some emphasis on being more Christ centered. Our SC is coming up and in a recent stake council we were asked for talk topic suggestions. After a few suggestions were offered the SP read the area “goals” (they used different semantics) which are not quite published yet, but number 1 of 3 was increasing/deepening conversion to Jesus Christ. The suggestions took a turn for the better from that point and it became pretty clear that the preparedness suggestion (as in prepper) was probably not going to make the cut. I’m happy about that.
So, I agree with BDavis3 – I don’t think we’re going to change the public any time soon (and maybe this is a little taste of the church leaderships’ own medicine as far as change goes) but if this is meant to focus the membership more on Jesus Christ I’m all on board.
I do think the emphasis on the church name was geared for this purpose…internally to the members as well as others…to emphasize Christ in our church. I’m not sure it was delivered the best way to emphasize that…but I think it was at the heart of the prophet’s thoughts. That’s what I felt, anyway.
Our F&T meetings are always introduced with the idea that we must focus on the Savior. When I have given a talk, I’ve been instructed to do this too. SamBee wrote:
Our F&T meetings are always introduced with the idea that we must focus on the Savior. When I have given a talk, I’ve been instructed to do this too.
Which is how it should be. It’s good to hear that.Most of the things said over the pulpit and through the church newsroom are geared inwardly to members…since that is usually the only people on the planet really paying attention to mormons…dang…I mean…
members of the Church. :think: Heber13 wrote:
SamBee wrote:
Our F&T meetings are always introduced with the idea that we must focus on the Savior. When I have given a talk, I’ve been instructed to do this too.
Which is how it should be. It’s good to hear that.Most of the things said over the pulpit and through the church newsroom are geared inwardly to members…since that is usually the only people on the planet really paying attention to mormons…dang…I mean…
members of the Church. :think:
I wish it were so in my ward. As I said previously my ward is not horrible and has improved but we’re still not all the way there and we do not have an announcement like that or counsel given when asked t speak. It might be even better were such announcements made.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.