- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I thought it would be fun to share some of my favorite Bushman segments. He in different places addresses paradox, absolutism, and other elements that have really helped me to shape and give new life to my spirituality. This one comes from John’s Mormon Stories podcast: Richard Bushman part 1 from 17:25 to 20 minutes in.
[Discussing the church’s exclusive claims]
“I would say this, there is a paradox here: to be zealous and striving and eager about anything that you’re involved in, you have to believe in it. You have to believe that it REALLY – IS – Good, that people will benefit from it …you have to really believe that it’s going to make a difference. In order for Mormonism to be an effective organization it has to have that kind of zeal that does come out with language like ‘the only true church’ or ‘this is God’s way’ and so on.But there are also scriptures in Mormonism which as you well know are prominent and easily found that say the spirit of Christ is given to every person, that God reveals to every person in their language what is good for them, what is truth for them, as if Heavenly Father is watching over his children in every little corner of the earth – testifying to them of what is good, leading them along, sending them prophets of a kind. So I think we just have to live with that fact that we’re both universalistic, allowing God’s spirit to reign over the whole earth and bless all people everywhere – and particularistic, that ours is the true and good way.
If you’re uncomfortable with that you’re going to be uncomfortable in Mormonism because that’s just the way we think. We’ve got both poles in our minds at once.” [John: “So you’re acknowledging that that’s paradoxical”]
“It is paradoxical, right. …I [do] find beauty in that. I think ANY scheme of life that is not paradoxical cannot do justice to life. LIFE is paradoxical – and if you think it’s going to be a simple, clear plan that you can impose on the world, and that is IT, you’re doomed to disappointment. Paradoxes are everywhere…” Wonderful quotes. Thanks! Orson thanks! 
You go right ahead and add any others you want to because “paradoxically” Richard Bushman is helping to heal the church by providing one of the better books on our history, not holding stuff back, and because he has framed it within both a faithful and an objective stance (a paradox in itself you must admit), it is possible to come away from Rough Stone Rolling with a renewed faith in Joseph Smith in spite of all the problems (another paradox).
Because of Richard Bushman I am beginning to come to terms with Joseph Smith and with the prophetic office generally. It is VERY clear that they are not perfect and that Heavenly Father isn’t there riding on their shoulders, saying, “Ohh, easy now, that is dangerous, don’t do that, do this instead.” Our critics and sometimes ourselves want a caricature of a prophet who is supposed to know every thing, discern everything and can’t possibly make mistakes. One mistake and we can dismiss them and drop the church. It isn’t that simple and Richard Bushman helps to explain that.
While we are at imperfection, look at the Mark Hoffman fraudulent documents mess (late 1980s early 1990s ?? ). Here was a man skillfully creating historic documents, selling them to knowledgeable buyers including the church, meeting with President Hinkley and Dalin H. Oakes on quite a few occaisons and they only realized he was a fraud when he killed someone. Here is a perfect spot for an anti-Mormon to jump in and shout : “See, they aren’t inspired, if they were really apostles God would have given them a warning”. Well it just doesn’t work that way, revelation whether personal, ward based or institutional seems to come when we ask for it, when we seek for it, and these General Authorities didn’t feel the need to do that seeking for Mark Hoffman.
Anyway, thanks, keep it up.
I personally believe (hope) that the abundant paradox in life, and especially in religion, exist as an instructor. I suppose in the far east they would call it a Buddha placed in our path. I think the process of struggling with paradox does something inside our mind and heart. It matures us. It’s painful but for a purpose, like mental yoga or something. I think it even hints of this in the Genesis creation story — now see that man has become like the gods, knowing good and evil (paradox). I have a sense there is something about it all that is divine, preparing us for what comes next, and next after that, and next after that…
The LDS Church has strong, built-in paradoxes, just waiting to be discovered when it is time for someone to taste it.
I just finished listening to the 5 part podcast last night. I had these downloaded, and just hadn’t got around to it until now – but, wow, what more can you say. Great podcast, IMO. I think that Richard Bushman is/should be and icon for those who are struggling yet want to remain, and need a perspective of how to deal with it all.
I find it VERY VERY interesting that Dr. Bushman, who knows so much of the ugly history, and admits it’s ugly, can sit and talk about those issues without any kind of anger or frustration or bitterness. He is certainly a Fowler stage 5 guy.
What i noticed is EXACTLY what Orson quoted here – and probably because of some of the discussion going on right now around Brown and his frustration with the BoM. For Bushman – he never says it’s true, he never bases his testimony on whether it’s historical or if JS was really a prophet. He always comes back to, “is it good.”
I was also intringed by the whole mystical and magical approach that Bushman takes on the BoM, seer stones etc.
The other thing that peeked my interest, is Bushman makes a point that the only people who are going to accept JS and modern day prophets, are those who “want and like the idea of a modern day prophet.” There is just too much baggage and holes in the history of the church to really prove anything one way or the other.
Yes cwald, that is fundamentally my view of spiritual things — they were never meant to be proven physically. To me “proof” would basically ruin the essence of spirituality. It would effectively eliminate an entire layer of deep personal meaning. I think Bushman did write a great book in RSR, but I also think he stops short. It is like he walks to the edge but will not make the next logical leap. He will not commit himself to pursuing it beyond a certain point. All the messy history is fine as long as he can still make it work within his own desires to believe in Mormonism. I guess that is OK, but you can not fault the person who learns all the same stuff and makes the conclusion it is one big fraud. YOu really can take it either way depending on your perspective. Bill, good to see you again. Cadence wrote:I think Bushman did write a great book in RSR, but I also think he stops short. It is like he walks to the edge but will not make the next logical leap. He will not commit himself to pursuing it beyond a certain point. All the messy history is fine as long as he can still make it work within his own desires to believe in Mormonism. I guess that is OK, but you can not fault the person who learns all the same stuff and makes the conclusion it is one big fraud. YOu really can take it either way depending on your perspective.
Yeah, I think that is what he is saying when he states, “you have to WANT to believe it, and you have to like the idea of mordern day prophets….” It’s almost like he is saying that he want’s to believe it, he likes the idea of having a prophet that speaks with god, so he going to believe it – regardless of the facts – because of the facts, one can construct a conclusion either way.
cwald wrote:Cadence wrote:I think Bushman did write a great book in RSR, but I also think he stops short. It is like he walks to the edge but will not make the next logical leap. He will not commit himself to pursuing it beyond a certain point. All the messy history is fine as long as he can still make it work within his own desires to believe in Mormonism. I guess that is OK, but you can not fault the person who learns all the same stuff and makes the conclusion it is one big fraud. YOu really can take it either way depending on your perspective.
Yeah, I think that is what he is saying when he states, “you have to WANT to believe it, and you have to like the idea of mordern day prophets….” It’s almost like he is saying that he want’s to believe it, he likes the idea of having a prophet that speaks with god, so he going to believe it – regardless of the facts – because of the facts, one can construct a conclusion either way.
Cadence, cwald I agree, As I listened to the podcast I felt the same way.
f4h1
Cadence wrote:I think Bushman did write a great book in RSR, but I also think he stops short. It is like he walks to the edge but will not make the next logical leap. He will not commit himself to pursuing it beyond a certain point. All the messy history is fine as long as he can still make it work within his own desires to believe in Mormonism. I guess that is OK, but you can not fault the person who learns all the same stuff and makes the conclusion it is one big fraud. YOu really can take it either way depending on your perspective.
Yes, I agree Cadence. I think Bushman was trying to be professional, not personal. The role of a historian is to present the facts as they see it, and let the reader/researcher come up with their own conclusions, which for me, reading this was definitely what helped me see paradox, and realize it can certainly be argued both ways intelligently (and idiotically).It comes down to what story I want to make work in my life for me personally, and no one can really convince me I’m wrong.
Yes, a thoughtful person should be able to see how – based on “evidence” – people can with validity take it their own way. However, in a deeper way, or paradoxically — just because it can be identified as a fraud by some criteria, does not make it untrue in a spiritual sense. Brian said once long ago.. “even IF Joseph secretly saw himself as a fraud, he still got SOME things Right!”
This is how I see spirituality among humanity.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.