"How Corporatism Has Undermined and Subverted The Church of Jesus Christ"

[Maidservant]

While worth reading and pondering on points, in the end it is his opinion or lens (such as the assumption of the evilness of corporateness as a postulate, and the inherent religious transcendance of road shows (huh? lol)) upon a set of facts that can be read more than one way, whichever way one is inclined to do so. I could also quibble with certain historical reads of his. Was chuckling when he said that a colonial Christian minister would never submit the church to political power. Oh, yes, yes, they would, as in all colonial ministers also wielded political power OF COURSE. They may not have wanted to cede any to the British Crown, but that's not the same thing. But in the end, his sayings like this are also granted to him as his opinion.

While this type of examination is, again, worthwhile, MY opinion at this time is that I would rather have the agents of God having a lot of money (etc) and power; rather than agents of men or devil. And tithing is not MY money, and it never could be, no matter the format of the church.

I was just thinking today how grateful I was born in the time and place I was where I have received the benefit of membership in the church which I see as freeing me from the drama of so many "isms" . . . I can just be who I am as a person and a woman, and I can do my best to do good, and my covenants keep me with God, while still allowing me the full capacity of freedom. If there is any corporatism, faults and all, in the end it all comes down to the service of the lives of humankind, and I am satisfied with that.

Not to mention that if I DID consider tithing to still be my money, I would be glad to have it be in the hands of the investment saavy.

And for every hyperventilation (or honest criticism) one might make about, say, salaries for general authorities and urban development around temple square . . . is balanced, for me, by the Perpetual Education fund and Hygiene Kits. Something to be said for a well-oiled machine, don't knock it all .

[Doctor Steuss]

Sure...

http://www.fox2now.com/news/ktvi-meth-numbers-020410,0,897774.story

You're welcome.

Look at your post. Now look at me. Now look at your post again. Now look at the post that I asked a reference for. Now look at me. Now look at your post again. Now look at the reference.

Thanks, but that news report was that the state of Missouri leads the country in the number of Meth labs. Not that Jackson County has one of the highest meth rates of the country. In fact, it never mentions Jackson County.

I was able to find a thing that Jackson County was considered by some as the "meth capital of the world" prior to their implementation of COMBAT, but I still can't find any county by county stats showing the top counties in the US for highest meth rates.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Reading anything not faith promoting is the "high road to apostacy" according to most LDS folks.

Hog wash. This is pure bull.

[Johan]

Well, it reminds me mostly of Jesus telling someone, who was financially well off, comfortable, had lots of servants to do things for him, who let Jesus know he wanted to follow Jesus. Jesus reply was to tell him to sell or give away everything he owned, and then to follow him. He couldn't do it. Jesus was sad. He said it is harder for a rich man to get into heaven than for a camel to grunt nails.

Maybe the greatest leaders of the church need to find a way to practice that. Maybe every seventh year, give up all they own, take a vow of poverty, go without script or purse, and teach the gospel in the streets and door to door. One thing that would do, would be to put them in contact with average joes once again. And it would certainly accrue merit in heaven for them. It would be a winwin situation. They would gain blessings, and free themselves of attachment to material goods, offices, titles, honors, honorariums, and on the other hand it would provide non-members with the very best examples and teaching that the church could provide. The apostles and other leaders who do this would be setting a wonderful example for newer, younger missionaries.

[Jeff K.]

I think the history is slightly off. The church has always had a financial or corporate side to it, from the times of Joseph Smith, indeed the church has been burned economically by much of the same. One could call Joseph Smith a corporatist if you held to the same standard mentioned in the article. All organizations have their own political ebb and flows which aren't always in sync with what we imagine it should be. Programs (or making sausage if you will) are never easy, nor are they cleanly established, rather there is a general evolution (and sometimes devolution) towards generalized goals. It appears to me the author is dealing more with sour grapes than he is some kind of devestating change in the church. Consider the issue with the Bible being marketed. Now I, as a poor boy in VA far from the halls of Salt Lake, received one for my mission, and it was a cheaper one from Deseret Book, so anecdotally, I don't see the authors position holding true (in my experience), and making the mistake of circular cross referencing, well, does the imperfection of a new type of concordance reflect the truth or falsehood of the church? Or even touch upon testimony? No more than my daughters burned cupcakes reflect less on her being my daughter. I see a great deal of projectiong regaridng personal trials upon the church and the magnification of imperfections in organizational behavior being forced to reflect a truthfulness of the gospel. It doesn't work in my opinion.

[mrmendoza]

How interesting and strange, that a "marketing gimick" to get rid of an excessive number of old BoMs by flooding the earth with them, has created a greater awareness of and appreciation for the marvelous truths and spirituality found within it pages! Prior to that "sales pitch" by our illustrious CEO Ezra Taft Benson, while we did give it a lot of lip service as a tool to help establish the restoration, we didn't spend a lot of time actually reading and studying it! And of course his calling upon the scriptures, streangthed his pitch, by telling us that the whole church was in danger of condemnation, was shear genius! You might even think that he was inspired!

May the Lord continue to bless the Corporation of the Church in all it's endevors!

Mike

[Brade]

I see a great deal of projectiong regaridng personal trials upon the church and the magnification of imperfections in organizational behavior being forced to reflect a truthfulness of the gospel. It doesn't work in my opinion.

I think you might be misreading (or not reading at all?) Smith's work. I've spent the past few days reading his dissertation and Book and, while he does come across as critical of the organization we call "the Mormon Church" (probably because he is critical of it), his claim is not that correlation (or should it be Correlation?), and the sometimes distasteful bits of capitalism-mixed-with-religion reflect on the truthfulness of the gospel. For one thing, he's specifically talking about an organization (e.g. it's structure, spending habits, inter-organizational relationships, advertising, marketing, etc.), and only peripherally the religious beliefs endorsed by the organization. In that view, truthfulness just isn't something he says much about. Secondly, he's stated in many places that he does believe much of Mormonism. He just happens to think, and not unreasonably, in my opinion, that in many ways the Church (whatever the expression 'the Church' means) has fallen from grace.

[why me]

Got a reference handy? A couple of months ago when I found out that my state (Nevada) might have the highest rate, I was trying to find meth stats by county and couldn't find anything (I could only find info by state, and a handful of counties that issued individual reports).

And this is the point. Drugs are destroying america. To go about cleaning up one area would be meaningless when areas are succumbing to the virus at an alarming rate. And what should the lds church do in jackson county? How to clean it up when the county is only a reflection of the country as a whole.

[why me]

Reading anything not faith promoting is the "high road to apostacy" according to most LDS folks.

Not really. For after all a book is only written by human beings with a certain bias. And history is always filled with interpretation. The books critics write are written so that mormons can receive doubt about their faith. And doubt is usually easily obtained since faith and doubt go hand in hand. Once one realizes the human understanding and biasness, one can survive most antimormon books.

[why me]

I tried posting this at LDS.net, to get some reactions, and it lasted all of 20 min... so it was recommended that I try here...

I suppose that it would be nice if we could all meet in the original log cabin with five or ten members and continue to sojourn there. But with growth comes responsibility. I think that if one enters into any office building that houses a major church, one can find people doing this or that. It is natural. The point is: the lds church has many wards, branches and stakes throughout the world. And they must handle things as a business. But then, what major church doesn't? What to do with book of mormons in the storage rooms? Maybe it should just dump them in the recycle bin. Really, I found the article strange and too critical of the operation. Also, it would be great if the blogger would give us some of his insights as to how he would do things differently inside a world wide church.

[Damien the Leper]

What.... A person isn't allowed to simply express their "opinion" about something, that they must write a "THESIS" instead every time they comment on something??? I give my "detailed" views and arguments about things all the time. I'm under no obligation to do so on every subject every single moment of my life simply because you don't like it. I just don't have the TIME right now. Is that not good enough for you? Sorry.

Get over yourself!

Nice try bud. I simply recommend a post reply to such an issue to have more merit and integrity when being critical. If you haven't the time to provide a more reasonable response with substance at a specific time perhaps it would be better to respond later in better detail so as to illustrate your opinion.

Grace and Peace!

[Brade]

I suppose that it would be nice if we could all meet in the original log cabin with five or ten members and continue to sojourn there. But with growth comes responsibility. I think that if one enters into any office building that houses a major church, one can find people doing this or that. It is natural. The point is: the lds church has many wards, branches and stakes throughout the world. And they must handle things as a business. But then, what major church doesn't? What to do with book of mormons in the storage rooms? Maybe it should just dump them in the recycle bin. Really, I found the article strange and too critical of the operation. Also, it would be great if the blogger would give us some of his insights as to how he would do things differently inside a world wide church.

The thing that is unusual about the story is, I think, this. A book was sold to members, the creation of which was already funded by those members. How else could the situation have been handled? They could have given them away. Sure, the Book of Mormon Printing Department (or whatever the department was/is called) would have shown a loss. But then just have the President of the Corporation authorize some more of that donated money to the department to cover the loss and balance the books, and just make a note that the circumstances were unusual, and the money-shuffle was necessary. The question Smith tried to raise was this. Sure, the strategy they used was a great one for a business, but was is the right one for a church? If you're absolutely sure that all the Church leaders' decisions and authorizations are divinely inspired, then you're, of course, going to say that it was the right thing to do. And that's fine. But, If you're not so sure, then you might think that they acted like a business when they ought not to have. And that's fine too, I think. That doesn't necessarily have to mean that you think that the Church's teachings are false.

[Jeff K.]

I think you might be misreading (or not reading at all?) Smith's work. I've spent the past few days reading his dissertation and Book and, while he does come across as critical of the organization we call "the Mormon Church" (probably because he is critical of it), his claim is not that correlation (or should it be Correlation?), and the sometimes distasteful bits of capitalism-mixed-with-religion reflect on the truthfulness of the gospel. For one thing, he's specifically talking about an organization (e.g. it's structure, spending habits, inter-organizational relationships, advertising, marketing, etc.), and only peripherally the religious beliefs endorsed by the organization. In that view, truthfulness just isn't something he says much about. Secondly, he's stated in many places that he does believe much of Mormonism. He just happens to think, and not unreasonably, in my opinion, that in many ways the Church (whatever the expression 'the Church' means) has fallen from grace.

It seems to me a literalist misses a great deal. Or maybe and advocate overlooks much. My point remains that Joseph Smith was as corporatist as those he accuses today. And his capitalism mixed with religion as you like to call it would as easily be a criticism of Joseph Smith. This begs the question of his belief that the church has somehow "changed". When in fact it seems to be following the same template set up by the prophet, in both pragmatic and esoteric terms. He may, (and of course you may join him) in criticizing the church from its inception, but to state that significant organization or corporatist change takes place is misleading simply not reflective of the historical reality. Joseph Smith used those measures that obtained the best results for the gospel and sometimes those results were uneven because of the times, but it would seem the same organizational philosophy exists.

As to belief in aspects of Mormonism, well what can you say... All critics of the church in various cloaks believe in "aspects" of Mormonism. They just don't believe in Mormonism or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. In other words, they don't believe. The reasoning isn't sound, the criticism isn't sound. But you are free to allow your opinion and advocacy overlook history and logic.

[Brade]

He may, (and of course you may join him) in criticizing the church from its inception, but to state that significant organization or corporatist change takes place is misleading simply not reflective of the historical reality.

Yeah, I think we disagree over history. I don't know what else to say about that. Maybe we can start another thread on whether or not the economic character of the contemporary Church is the same in the relevant respects to the economic character of the early Church.

But you are free to allow your opinion and advocacy overlook history and logic.

I don't know that I'm overlooking history. I obviously interpret the historical record differently than you. But, maybe I'm overlooking some critical bit of history that, if I did know of it, I'd be compelled to think just like you. I don't pretend to have all the answers now. I just try to believe what I believe on the basis of the best evidence I have available to me. If you think there are some aspects of the historical record that you can demonstrate to me that I'm obviously overlooking, please share them with me. So, that's my bit on your history comment. As to the logic, If I really am making a logical error, please help me recognize it so I don't go on with it. Let me make my claim a bit clearer (I hope): It can be true that the church has undergone some changes for the worse since Joseph's day, and it can be true that the claims of the gospel are still true and reasonably (and faithfully) believed.

Now, here's what I think's going on. We disagree over what claims make up the gospel. For example, if you believe that an essential part of the gospel is the belief that the Church hasn't undergone some changes for the worse, then if that's true, then it is a contradiction (read: illogical) to believe that it has and to believe that the gospel is true (when the expression 'the gospel is true' is parsed in a way that makes sense). I happen not to think that that's an essential feature of the gospel, and if that's true, then, it seems to me, there's no contradiction. But, again, besides differing over the essential parts of the gospel (which isn't a matter having to do with logic, but semantics), if I've made a logical error, I'd like to be made known of it. Please let me know, Jeff.

[Ahab]

I tried posting this at LDS.net, to get some reactions, and it lasted all of 20 min... so it was recommended that I try here...

How Corporatism Has Undermined and Subverted The Church of Jesus Christ

Thought? Reactions?

The question should be: Has Corporatism Undermined and Subverted The Church of Jesus Christ?

The correct answer is: No.

[why me]

The thing that is unusual about the story is, I think, this. A book was sold to members, the creation of which was already funded by those members. How else could the situation have been handled? They could have given them away. Sure, the Book of Mormon Printing Department (or whatever the department was/is called) would have shown a loss. But then just have the President of the Corporation authorize some more of that donated money to the department to cover the loss and balance the books, and just make a note that the circumstances were unusual, and the money-shuffle was necessary. The question Smith tried to raise was this. Sure, the strategy they used was a great one for a business, but was is the right one for a church? If you're absolutely sure that all the Church leaders' decisions and authorizations are divinely inspired, then you're, of course, going to say that it was the right thing to do. And that's fine. But, If you're not so sure, then you might think that they acted like a business when they ought not to have. And that's fine too, I think. That doesn't necessarily have to mean that you think that the Church's teachings are false.

I don't think that every thing a church leader does is divinely inspired. But I really don't see the big deal about the book of mormon sales. Why waste books and the money involved in printing them? That would be just wasteful of a member's money. One can pinprick every decision that is made in a church office building. But at the end of the day, it is people that make decisions as to how to run a church for better or for worse. And like I said, it would be hard to find a major church office building that is not run like a business. And it would not matter if it were lutheran, methodist, evangelical, baptist etc. Their office buildings are brick and mortal and bills need to be paid, finances need to be checked and at the end of the day, a profit has to be made to keep functioning. That is the law of the land under capitalism.

I have found that when something is giving away for free it can often go unappreciated because it was free. And this is no different for the book of mormons that missionaries give away. Much better to sell the old copies for 2.00 dollars or 3 euros than to give them away or throw them away.

[Brade]

I don't think that every thing a church leader does is divinely inspired. But I really don't see the big deal about the book of mormon sales. Why waste books and the money involved in printing them? That would be just wasteful of a member's money.

I just don't see how it would be wasteful of members' money to give them copies of the Book of Mormon to give to their friends, copies that were made in the first place because they (the members) had already donated the money that was used to make those very copies.

[Ahab]

I just don't see how it would be wasteful of members' money to give them copies of the Book of Mormon to give to their friends, copies that were made in the first place because they (the members) had already donated the money that was used to make those very copies.

It would be wasteful only if the books they gave others to read weren't read by anyone.

And btw, anyone can get a free copy of the Book of Mormon anytime they want one, and with free delivery too, by simply contacting someone in our Missionary program.

[Brade]

It would be wasteful only if the books they gave others to read weren't read by anyone.

Good. That tells us that if the books are read, then it isn't wasteful, and that if it is wasteful, then the books weren't read. But, what if they're given out for free (per my suggestion), and the books aren't read?

[Pahoran]

Thought? Reactions?

Do you want to know what people actually think, or do you just want us to say what you want to hear?

Regards,

Pahoran

[Droopy]

Mr. Smith is all the rage at the GSTP, precisely, as one would guess, because of the combination of audacity and breathtaking intellectual vacuity.

Some members of some choirs will, of course, soak this kind of thing up. Faithful LDS will laugh until admittance to the emergency room may be required to keep their diaphragms from seizing up, and most people, having known at least some faithful, practicing Latter Day Saints, and having observed their manner of life, will ignore it as a classic example of tabloid style polemics against, what is for the author, a terribly annoying whipping boy.

[Ahab]

Good. That tells us that if the books are read, then it isn't wasteful, and that if it is wasteful, then the books weren't read. But, what if they're given out for free (per my suggestion), and the books aren't read?

The same principle applies whether or not the books are free, monetarily.

If the books aren't read, then it is wasteful, and if the books are read by anyone, then it isn't wasteful.

[consiglieri]

Good. That tells us that if the books are read, then it isn't wasteful, and that if it is wasteful, then the books weren't read. But, what if they're given out for free (per my suggestion), and the books aren't read?

Hi, Brade!

I read Smith's book a few months back, though I had to skip parts because it was kind of tough for me to wade through all the different literary approaches he used.

I remember being chagrined when he brought up the circumstances surrounding the 100 Book of Mormon handout program which was in 1985, as I recall.

I had just gotten married, my wife and I lived in a two bedroom apartment, and we bought 100 copies of the Book of Mormon, marked and inscribed each one, and handed them all out.

As ward mission leader, we even had a big giveaway on Christmas eve for those that other members had bought but couldn't place.

In reading the machinations behind the program, I couldn't help but feel a bit used.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Brade]

Good. That tells us that if the books are read, then it isn't wasteful, and that if it is wasteful, then the books weren't read. But, what if they're given out for free (per my suggestion), and the books aren't read?

The same principle applies whether or not the books are free, monetarily.

If the books aren't read, then it is wasteful, and if the books are read by anyone, then it isn't wasteful.

Just to be clear, the principle "if the books aren't read, then it is wasteful" is a different principle than "It would be wasteful only if the books they gave others to read weren't read by anyone" and "if the books are read, then it isn't wasteful". My question asked, in part, what the case is when the books aren't read, and your original principle just didn't have anything to say about that. You're new principle does have something to say about that, however.

Actually, I'd like to know what 'is wasteful' means in this case. Does it mean, for example, that it was wasteful for the Church to have spent money in its creation? Or, does it mean that that Book of Mormon is waste? Both? Or something else?

[Brade]

Hi, Brade!

I read Smith's book a few months back, though I had to skip parts because it was kind of tough for me to wade through all the different literary approaches he used.

I remember being chagrined when he brought up the circumstances surrounding the 100 Book of Mormon handout program...

In reading the machinations behind the program, I couldn't help but feel a bit used.

Of course, we all know that that's because you're apostate.