If it makes you feel better, I will simply assert that there is a large population of LDS who agree with President Packer's statements about evolution (or the lack thereof), and another population of LDS who disagree.
And has the inventor of the wilfully dishonest "Chapel/Internet Mormon" false dichotomy now settled on that as the utterly arbitrary discriminator (all other attempts having dismally failed) or are you just helping him out?
cinepro, on 22 March 2012 - 07:34 PM, said:
Other than Packer's old statement about "Feminists, Gays and Intellectuals being a danger to the Church", I'm not aware of what he's said or done that critics and anti-Mormons would be upset about.
So all the outbursts of rage every time he says sexual sins can be repented of -- yes, even by "Gays" -- are just a figment of my imagination, are they?
And nobody has ever tried to parlay his benign permission for young men to defend themselves when cornered by a sexual predator into advocacy of "Gay" bashing, right?
And Harmony/Serenity/WAZing has never launched threads over at the Sty in which she rages about how utterly disgusting it is that his house has risen in value over the last however many decades he's lived in it, has she?
I get that you have a different view of things than I do, Cinepro. Not being able to see what's right there in front of you seems a little more than a difference of opinion.
Regards,
Pahoran
(1) Honest. (2) Well-informed. (3) Denying that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been a Christian institution without interruption from the beginning of its history.
A critic may choose any two of the above three. Choose wisely.
I notice that at number 5 we have the highly interesting pairing of "James" and "Lily."
Which just happen to be the names of Harry Potter's parents. Aha!
Where's Richard Abanes these days? The possibilities for comic relief seem endless...
Regards,
Pahoran
(1) Honest. (2) Well-informed. (3) Denying that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been a Christian institution without interruption from the beginning of its history.
A critic may choose any two of the above three. Choose wisely.
You got it. I don't object at all to President Packer's specific examples, and I support the principles he taught in the talk. What I have a problem with is how *others* have, with a free hand, imposed their particular UOoT, claiming that theirs is self-evident and carries as much weight as President Packer and others similarly situated. Sometimes with harmful rigidity and Pharisee-ism.
What's really interesting, is that in the meeting where Pres. Monson presented the new handbooks, he told a story about a high councilor who had created his own "unwritten order" by turning the chairs toward the temple during ordinations. In this instance, then Bishop Monson, rejected the action of the Stake representative in a very public way - in front of the congregation! Talk about violating an unwritten order...
Mitius imperanti melius paretur
The content or message of any medium is about as important as the stenciling on the casing of an atomic bomb. ~ Marshall McLuhan, The Medium is the Message
Shameless and unabashed user of an iPod touch at church
Contributor
14,840 posts
Posted 23 March 2012 - 02:26 AM
Bikeemikey, on 22 March 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:
Random Mormon names are often hybrids of two or more family names - I wouldnt expect those to show up in the top ten lists.
(null)
Maybe it's a matter of people in Utah not being any more apt than people in other places to give their kids quirky names.
But gee whiz, don't let me ruin a cherished stereotype for you by suggesting that it's outmoded or mythical.
To whom it may concern: If you feel inclined to do anything for or in behalf of me after I die -- or even while I'm living, for that matter -- that is comparable in intent to Mormon vicarious baptisms or other ordinances for the dead, feel free. I would even regard it as a magnanimous gesture. I would appreciate the thought in any case. Nobody gives you all the facts all at once, leastwise anti-Mormons and hostile critics. If selective focus or emphasis amounts to deceit, they are the worst of offenders. If I detest anything as virulently as anti-Mormons obviously detest Mormonism, feel free to label me as "anti-" the thing I detest. I won't mind in the least. An author who undertakes to criticize publicly another's religious faith and practice has the obligation, in the first instance, to understand it. ... and the anti-Mormon saith unto them: I am no anti-Mormon, for there is none — and thus he whispereth in their ears.
Shameless and unabashed user of an iPod touch at church
Contributor
14,840 posts
Posted 23 March 2012 - 02:35 AM
Pahoran, on 22 March 2012 - 08:18 PM, said:
I notice that at number 5 we have the highly interesting pairing of "James" and "Lily."
Which just happen to be the names of Harry Potter's parents. Aha!
Where's Richard Abanes these days? The possibilities for comic relief seem endless...
Regards,
Pahoran
One site I checked suggested that parents of newborns in Utah are taking their cue from the "Twilight" series. This and your observation indicate that the influence in Utah comes not from Mormon culture, but from Hollywood, which, umm, makes the Beehive State pretty much like the rest of the country in that respect.
But again, don't let me be the killjoy and ruin people's trite stereotypes.
To whom it may concern: If you feel inclined to do anything for or in behalf of me after I die -- or even while I'm living, for that matter -- that is comparable in intent to Mormon vicarious baptisms or other ordinances for the dead, feel free. I would even regard it as a magnanimous gesture. I would appreciate the thought in any case. Nobody gives you all the facts all at once, leastwise anti-Mormons and hostile critics. If selective focus or emphasis amounts to deceit, they are the worst of offenders. If I detest anything as virulently as anti-Mormons obviously detest Mormonism, feel free to label me as "anti-" the thing I detest. I won't mind in the least. An author who undertakes to criticize publicly another's religious faith and practice has the obligation, in the first instance, to understand it. ... and the anti-Mormon saith unto them: I am no anti-Mormon, for there is none — and thus he whispereth in their ears.
Shameless and unabashed user of an iPod touch at church
Contributor
14,840 posts
Posted 23 March 2012 - 02:40 AM
mercyngrace, on 22 March 2012 - 08:32 PM, said:
What's really interesting, is that in the meeting where Pres. Monson presented the new handbooks, he told a story about a high councilor who had created his own "unwritten Uorder" by turning the chairs toward the temple during ordinations. In this instance, then Bishop Monson, rejected the action of the Stake representative in a very public way - in front of the congregation! Talk about violating an unwritten order...
Yes, this has already been quoted in a previous post on this thread. It suggests, maybe, that part of the unwritten order is that we don't add accoutrements to the prescribed ordinances based on personal whim or fancy.
Edited by Scott Lloyd, 23 March 2012 - 02:44 AM.
To whom it may concern: If you feel inclined to do anything for or in behalf of me after I die -- or even while I'm living, for that matter -- that is comparable in intent to Mormon vicarious baptisms or other ordinances for the dead, feel free. I would even regard it as a magnanimous gesture. I would appreciate the thought in any case. Nobody gives you all the facts all at once, leastwise anti-Mormons and hostile critics. If selective focus or emphasis amounts to deceit, they are the worst of offenders. If I detest anything as virulently as anti-Mormons obviously detest Mormonism, feel free to label me as "anti-" the thing I detest. I won't mind in the least. An author who undertakes to criticize publicly another's religious faith and practice has the obligation, in the first instance, to understand it. ... and the anti-Mormon saith unto them: I am no anti-Mormon, for there is none — and thus he whispereth in their ears.
Yes, this has already been quoted in a previous post on this thread. It suggests, maybe, that part of the unwritten order is that we don't add accoutrements to the prescribed ordinances based on personal whim or fancy.
Yeah... that wasn't the part I was referring to
Mitius imperanti melius paretur
The content or message of any medium is about as important as the stenciling on the casing of an atomic bomb. ~ Marshall McLuhan, The Medium is the Message
President Packer's critics love to portray him as some kind of Grand Inquisitor in the noble tradition of Tomás de Torquemada. They are no more capable of understanding the real Boyd K. Packer than they are the church he serves so well. He is a kind, compassionate servant of the Lord who has spent most of his ministry holding wide open the door of repentance, and beckoning all to enter.
Regards,
Pahoran
"I see Religion as creating a language to speak of the divine and sacred. Since I see creating this language as a creative act, ... creating a certain view of heaven and earth, a living 'image' of God and Man and their story, past, present and future." - Calmoriah
I suspect that during the time you were bishop (and perhaps even before or after) you conformed to at least some aspects of the unwritten order of things not because any person told you to but because the Spirit whispered to you that it should be so.
Of course, that is true. But my wife always gets it right anyway.
"I see Religion as creating a language to speak of the divine and sacred. Since I see creating this language as a creative act, ... creating a certain view of heaven and earth, a living 'image' of God and Man and their story, past, present and future." - Calmoriah
One site I checked suggested that parents of newborns in Utah are taking their cue from the "Twilight" series. This and your observation indicate that the influence in Utah comes not from Mormon culture, but from Hollywood, which, umm, makes the Beehive State pretty much like the rest of the country in that respect.
But again, don't let me be the killjoy and ruin people's trite stereotypes.
I saw a sociological study from the early 90s that mentioned two ethnic groups more likely to make up combined and unique names than any other... Guess which ones? Hint:
One community would make up names like: LaQuanda and Danmaurice
The other would make up names like: Dalin Romney or Hinkley Brigham
(Hey- don't blame me it was a bona fide socioligical study)
Please ask me what I believe before telling me what I believe. Hint- start here: http://lds.org/scriptures/
I am sure Darius Gray would be interested in that characterization!
"I see Religion as creating a language to speak of the divine and sacred. Since I see creating this language as a creative act, ... creating a certain view of heaven and earth, a living 'image' of God and Man and their story, past, present and future." - Calmoriah
I am sure Darius Gray would be interested in that characterization!
To be honest I'm not sure of the designation used in the study... But perhaps the use of green jello and funeral potatoes plus our unusual mode of dress (three cammies under a sun dress in mid August) qualifies us as a unique tribe?
Please ask me what I believe before telling me what I believe. Hint- start here: http://lds.org/scriptures/
Shameless and unabashed user of an iPod touch at church
Contributor
14,840 posts
Posted 23 March 2012 - 08:02 PM
mfbukowski, on 23 March 2012 - 06:27 PM, said:
How did we get to be an "ethnic group"????
I am sure Darius Gray would be interested in that characterization!
I've known Darius for years and consider him a personal friend. And I'm old enough to remember when he was a young up-and-coming reporter on KSL-TV Channel 5 in Salt Lake City.
To this day, when I think of Darius, I remember watching the 10 p.m. newscasts as a youth and how, upon hearing, "This is Darius Gray, Channel 5 Eyewitness News," my dad, then in his 60s, would begin reciting lines from this poem learned in his own youth.
I'm not sure what this has to do with ethnicity except to say that some ethnic characteristics may pop up in disparate groups and may have more to do with generational than with ethnic demarcations.
Edited by Scott Lloyd, 23 March 2012 - 08:20 PM.
To whom it may concern: If you feel inclined to do anything for or in behalf of me after I die -- or even while I'm living, for that matter -- that is comparable in intent to Mormon vicarious baptisms or other ordinances for the dead, feel free. I would even regard it as a magnanimous gesture. I would appreciate the thought in any case. Nobody gives you all the facts all at once, leastwise anti-Mormons and hostile critics. If selective focus or emphasis amounts to deceit, they are the worst of offenders. If I detest anything as virulently as anti-Mormons obviously detest Mormonism, feel free to label me as "anti-" the thing I detest. I won't mind in the least. An author who undertakes to criticize publicly another's religious faith and practice has the obligation, in the first instance, to understand it. ... and the anti-Mormon saith unto them: I am no anti-Mormon, for there is none — and thus he whispereth in their ears.
Shameless and unabashed user of an iPod touch at church
Contributor
14,840 posts
Posted 23 March 2012 - 08:06 PM
KevinG, on 23 March 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:
I saw a sociological study from the early 90s that mentioned two ethnic groups more likely to make up combined and unique names than any other... Guess which ones? Hint:
One community would make up names like: LaQuanda and Danmaurice
The other would make up names like: Dalin Romney or Hinkley Brigham
(Hey- don't blame me it was a bona fide socioligical study)
I don't doubt its accuracy but would hasten to point out it was from 20 or so years ago. Today's new parents would have mostly been born in the late '80s or very early '90s. Do you really think they're apt to hold to pioneer-era conventions in the naming of their newborns? I rather doubt it.
And you didn't indicate whether the study covered Mormons in general or if it focused on Mormons in Utah.
Which raises the question: How does one define Mormon ethnicity? Does it have a geographic component? One might think so, observing how some Church members go off on their brothers and sisters in Utah.
Edited by Scott Lloyd, 23 March 2012 - 11:44 PM.
To whom it may concern: If you feel inclined to do anything for or in behalf of me after I die -- or even while I'm living, for that matter -- that is comparable in intent to Mormon vicarious baptisms or other ordinances for the dead, feel free. I would even regard it as a magnanimous gesture. I would appreciate the thought in any case. Nobody gives you all the facts all at once, leastwise anti-Mormons and hostile critics. If selective focus or emphasis amounts to deceit, they are the worst of offenders. If I detest anything as virulently as anti-Mormons obviously detest Mormonism, feel free to label me as "anti-" the thing I detest. I won't mind in the least. An author who undertakes to criticize publicly another's religious faith and practice has the obligation, in the first instance, to understand it. ... and the anti-Mormon saith unto them: I am no anti-Mormon, for there is none — and thus he whispereth in their ears.
I've known Darius for years and consider him a personal friend. And I'm old enough to remember when he was a young up-and-coming reporter on KSL-TV Channel 5 in Salt Lake City.
To this day, when I think of Darius, I remember watching the 10 p.m. newscasts as a youth and how, upon hearing, "This is Darius Gray, Channel 5 Eyewitness News," my dad, then in his 60s, would begin reciting lines from this poem learned in his own youth.
I'm not sure what this has to do with ethnicity except to say that some ethnic characteristics may pop up in disparate groups and may have more to do with generational than with ethnic demarcations.
I am acquainted with Marvin Perkins who works with Bro Gray- and he is a very charismatic man who just glows with the light of Christ.
But it's interesting that even though I grew up in a Polish neighborhood in an East Coast city, now that I am Mormon THAT is my "ethnicity"
"I see Religion as creating a language to speak of the divine and sacred. Since I see creating this language as a creative act, ... creating a certain view of heaven and earth, a living 'image' of God and Man and their story, past, present and future." - Calmoriah
To whom it may concern: If you feel inclined to do anything for or in behalf of me after I die -- or even while I'm living, for that matter -- that is comparable in intent to Mormon vicarious baptisms or other ordinances for the dead, feel free. I would even regard it as a magnanimous gesture. I would appreciate the thought in any case. Nobody gives you all the facts all at once, leastwise anti-Mormons and hostile critics. If selective focus or emphasis amounts to deceit, they are the worst of offenders. If I detest anything as virulently as anti-Mormons obviously detest Mormonism, feel free to label me as "anti-" the thing I detest. I won't mind in the least. An author who undertakes to criticize publicly another's religious faith and practice has the obligation, in the first instance, to understand it. ... and the anti-Mormon saith unto them: I am no anti-Mormon, for there is none — and thus he whispereth in their ears.
"I see Religion as creating a language to speak of the divine and sacred. Since I see creating this language as a creative act, ... creating a certain view of heaven and earth, a living 'image' of God and Man and their story, past, present and future." - Calmoriah
I've been meaning to add a thought to this thread for some time but kept forgetting (an increasingly frequent occurrence :S )
Offering sacrament for latecomers does not set a precedent in terms of carrying out an ordinance a second time for those not in attendance at the primary ritual. Moses instituted a second Passover (the "Little Passover") to allow those who were traveling or ceremonially unclean during the 14th day of Abib to participate in the feast and thus keep the law. (Numbers 9:10)
It always fascinates me to discover that the issues we encounter individually and institutionally are rarely new.
The content or message of any medium is about as important as the stenciling on the casing of an atomic bomb. ~ Marshall McLuhan, The Medium is the Message
One site I checked suggested that parents of newborns in Utah are taking their cue from the "Twilight" series. This and your observation indicate that the influence in Utah comes not from Mormon culture, but from Hollywood, which, umm, makes the Beehive State pretty much like the rest of the country in that respect.
But again, don't let me be the killjoy and ruin people's trite stereotypes.
Which is kind of a shame. I use to love the name Isabella until that stupid Twilight came out.
Shameless and unabashed user of an iPod touch at church
Contributor
14,840 posts
Posted 01 May 2012 - 11:21 AM
mercyngrace, on 01 May 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:
I've been meaning to add a thought to this thread for some time but kept forgetting (an increasingly frequent occurrence :S )
Offering sacrament for latecomers does not set a precedent in terms of carrying out an ordinance a second time for those not in attendance at the primary ritual. Moses instituted a second Passover (the "Little Passover") to allow those who were traveling or ceremonially unclean during the 14th day of Abib to participate in the feast and thus keep the law. (Numbers 9:10)
It seems to me this is more analogous to the Church's practice of holding sacrament services at Boy Scout jamborees and at national parks and other tourist destinations to accommodate travelers -- or providing the sacrament to shut-ins or people at nursing homes and hospitals -- than it is to receiving the sacrament on demand whenever one is disposed to show up, even if the formal meeting has been concluded.
Edited by Scott Lloyd, 01 May 2012 - 11:30 AM.
To whom it may concern: If you feel inclined to do anything for or in behalf of me after I die -- or even while I'm living, for that matter -- that is comparable in intent to Mormon vicarious baptisms or other ordinances for the dead, feel free. I would even regard it as a magnanimous gesture. I would appreciate the thought in any case. Nobody gives you all the facts all at once, leastwise anti-Mormons and hostile critics. If selective focus or emphasis amounts to deceit, they are the worst of offenders. If I detest anything as virulently as anti-Mormons obviously detest Mormonism, feel free to label me as "anti-" the thing I detest. I won't mind in the least. An author who undertakes to criticize publicly another's religious faith and practice has the obligation, in the first instance, to understand it. ... and the anti-Mormon saith unto them: I am no anti-Mormon, for there is none — and thus he whispereth in their ears.