So Called "Middle Way" Or "New Order" Mormons

[3DOP]

I agree with you canard78, I see the hand of God in all faiths and in all people that I have come in contact with. However, I don't see their God's, and I don't see no God, but I see THE God in their lives (the one that Mormonism preaches and praises). While people of other faiths may be on their best path for them at this time, their best path will only lead to baptism, or it is no path at all. Baptism is the only path that there is, it is the gate by which we must enter. I do indeed consider myself blessed to have found it in this life, and will continue to show others the way.

While I agree with you in part, your perspective may lead to inactivity in preaching the gospel if you do not view Mormonism as THE path, by means of the saving ordinances. Don't leave the work for those on the other side, you are accountable to share the truth that you have as it is the only way to God. While others may have truth, they don't have a proper perspective (and thus understanding) of it. It is our responsibility, it is our discipleship as representatives of Christ, to show them the way.

pogi,

Over twelve years ago I had a good friend who was considering becoming LDS and that is when I began looking into your faith. I have been a convinced Catholic for some time, but I can't help but note a sort of likemindedness between orthodox members of your church and mine. In spite of our differences on specifics, we share some foundational presuppositions. It is because of a belief that you are the one true church, with one true baptism, and one valid priesthood that I continue to interact with members of this board. That was why I probed earlier to try to see if the New Order Mormon retained belief in those attributes. So soon as they think I am alright not being a member of their church, they can ignore me, and they do. On the other hand, you immediately took note of an apparent concern on my part regarding questions about LDS baptisms. Why? Because you have a missionary spirit.

Those who are agnostic about the core doctrines that are being questioned will seldom have a missionary spirit toward me. I asked about what the message would be of the New Order Missionary. But my suspicion is that it would be an end of missions. While I would also rather have neighbors who vote the same as me, the main reason I hope your church never drifts into irrelevant, non-missionary agnosticism as so many others have before you, is because by so drifting, I would see you as drifting further from the Catholic faith. Our desires should be that we may go to church together believing the same things worshiping the same way. As far apart as we seem, I see that we are also much nearer than many might suppose.

I have also alluded on this thread to my opinion that the Catholic Church has softened in precisely the same ways. We have New Order Catholics too. My opinion is that Mormons like you are better Catholics, in a certain sense, than those who would overthrow 2,000 years of belief and practise. Here is why New Order Mormons and Catholics don't care what was taught in the past: They have no concern to defend whether their church was true the day before yesterday. Both of our churches have able apologists who can defend Restoration or Continuity if we hold fast. What is indefensible and fatal to any claims of being God's one true church would be if our churches were founded and flourished when it was run by nutballs who made outlandish claims about how the son of God was born of a virgin, that He rose from the dead, and that He ascended to the right hand of God the Father almighty, and that He will come again in the clouds to judge the living and the dead.

This is what I think our New Order friends fail to appreciate. If our churches are not true, there is too much sacrifice. The fruit of New Order churches is aged pew sitters whose parents once believed, but whose own children quickly realized that it is too time consuming to bother to go to a church, much less to try to heat the buildings and convert their friends. New Order church is sterile.

3DOP

Edited December 20, 2012 by 3DOP

[Scott Lloyd]

Actually, I didn't have your comments specifically in mind. I'm not even sure that I've read them.

Proverbs 28:1.

Substitute the word protest for the word flee.

[volgadon]

I appreciate that Tao feels that way. However, Alma sees it differently: He says, in Alma 32:21, that "faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true." Belief is not in the definition Faith is not belief, it is hope, trust, agreement, and the willingness to act upon something. Now I defined this in a previous post.

I wonder how you are defining hope. Tao's remarks are certainly in keeping with the meaning of hope. Hope means to wait for and to expect something that will happen. For example, the words of my national anthem say, "Our hope has not yet been lost, the hope is two thousand years old, to be a free people in our land." I can provide literally dozens of examples from ancient literature to support this notion of hope as an expectation of something that will occur, even if unseen now. Hope isnot used to indicate something that you wish would be true, but might not be.

[pogi]

But the problem is that we need to be 'teachable'. humility requires us to recognize that we're aren't the center of the universe, but more importantly, that we don't know everything. In order to be receptive to truth, one must be willing to suspend belief in that which we holds us emotionally, albeit briefly. Suspended judgment is an acknowledgement that we don't know. And in suspending that judgment, we are open to the possibility that what we hold dear is not 'true'. That is humility.

The problem is that the only way to test a principle (according to the BOM) is to practice believing in it, beginning by simply desiring to believe in it and letting that desire grow. One cannot know truth without hope, which leads to belief, which leads to knowledge. Suspending belief will ultimately suspend and damn progression. All action is based in belief, one would not act save he believes that he is making the right choice. One should hold onto belief and act in it, up until the point that the test does not work for that principle in which they believe. At which point humility is required to lay down the strong ties to relative truth in place of absolute truth. Christ taught us to "be believing," and to "doubt not, but only believe." "All things are possible to those that believe."

Here is true humility - "blessed are they who humble themselves without being compelled to be humble; or in other words, blessed is he that believeth in the word of God...without being brought to know the word, or even compelled to know, before they will believe." (Alma 32:16)

Edited December 20, 2012 by pogi

[wayfarer]

I wonder how you are defining hope. Tao's remarks are certainly in keeping with the meaning of hope. Hope means to wait for and to expect something that will happen. For example, the words of my national anthem say, "Our hope has not yet been lost, the hope is two thousand years old, to be a free people in our land." I can provide literally dozens of examples from ancient literature to support this notion of hope as an expectation of something that will occur, even if unseen now. Hope isnot used to indicate something that you wish would be true, but might not be.

great point. So let's take the resurrection. I hope for an afterlife. I hope for the resurrection, and to enter the city of zion. I don't know it will happen, it is my hope that it does. As for whether Christ was resurrected in a physical bodily form, I simply don't know, nor is that something for which 'hope' makes a lot of sense. It seems immaterial to me whether the resurrection was physical or spiritual in some way.

Whilst I recognize the intriguing notions of existential materialism as reflected in section 131, I'm not hung up on physical bodies, made up from the atoms of this body, as being an essential part of resurrection. Some of this doesn't make sense to me. Since carbon atoms are extensively reused, I'm pretty sure that my carbon atoms were once part of someone else's body. So, when taken literally, resurrection. to me, doesn't make a lot of sense.

On the other hand, the idea of resurrection that we live in Christ, somehow, makes all sorts of sense. True, LDS focus on the physical aspects, but I don't see these as anything other than speculative. What is normative about resurrection? What will I do differently today because I believe in a resurrection? That's the realm of faith, imo.

As for whether i WANT to have this body, that is completely another matter. I don't. I'm looking for the Daniel Craig or George Clooney version instead.

Edited December 20, 2012 by wayfarer

[wayfarer]

Those who are agnostic about the core doctrines that are being questioned will seldom have a missionary spirit toward me. I asked about what the message would be of the New Order Missionary. But my suspicion is that it would be an end of missions.

I was Ward Mission Leader for two years a couple of years ago, and certainly/completely as a NOM/Middle Way LDS. we had just come off of over 3 years in our ward with zero baptisms, and over 10 years with no converts that stuck. I had the deep privilege in achieving an average of over one baptism per month during my two year tenure, and all of them are still active members to this day.

If I came across you as a believing member of another faith, I would not try to convert you. Instead, I try to share my experience, strength, and hope about how my faith enhances my view of the world. I try to understand the same from you. And you know? If you're happy with your faith, I'm not here to change that. On the other hand, if what I say speaks to you spiritually, then I'm happy to tell you how you can come to the same joy I have had. And, as you find out about some of the sordid aspects of my church history and doctrine, I'm not going to cover up or minimize the impact some of our history has on people. I'm going to be rigorously honest about it. I'm going to demonstrate to you how the spirit communicates through us imperfect humans to lift us to new heights and to find true happiness.

So, at least in my case, there would not be an end to missions, but rather, a different focus. In my experience, that focus has been more successful than the alternatives, but of course, that could simply be luck of the draw.

[volgadon]

great point. So let's take the resurrection. I hope for an afterlife. I hope for the resurrection, and to enter the city of zion. I don't know it will happen, it is my hope that it does.

While I am glad that you have that belief, but that is not hope as understood in the scriptures and so on. With hope, you know it will happen, but you don't know when.

[Scott Lloyd]

I was Ward Mission Leader for two years a couple of years ago, and certainly/completely as a NOM/Middle Way LDS. we had just come off of over 3 years in our ward with zero baptisms, and over 10 years with no converts that stuck. I had the deep privilege in achieving an average of over one baptism per month during my two year tenure, and all of them are still active members to this day.

And, of course, the full-time missionaries assigned to the ward, the bishopric, the ward council and the other ward members had little or nothing to do with it.

[DH]

And, of course, the full-time missionaries assigned to the ward, the bishopric, the ward council and the other ward members had little or nothing to do with it.

You think his ward didn't have full-time missionaries, a bishopric, ward council, and other ward members before wayfarer became ward mission leader? I don't think he's claiming that he's solely responsible for the conversions, but it's just possible that his approach to missionary work is a good one and helped the situation.

Edited December 20, 2012 by DH

[wayfarer]

The problem is that the only way to test a principle (according to the BOM) is to practice believing in it, beginning by simply desiring to believe in it and letting that desire grow. One cannot know truth without hope, which leads to belief, which leads to knowledge. Suspending belief will ultimately suspend and damn progression. All action is based in belief, one would not act save he believes that he is making the right choice. One should hold onto belief and act in it, up until the point that the test does not work for that principle in which they believe. At which point humility is required to lay down the strong ties to relative truth in place of absolute truth. Christ taught us to "be believing," and to "doubt not, but only believe." "All things are possible to those that believe."

Here is true humility - "blessed are they who humble themselves without being compelled to be humble; or in other words, blessed is he that believeth in the word of God...without being brought to know the word, or even compelled to know, before they will believe." (Alma 32:16)

I'm not sure the suspension of belief/disbelief is an impediment to progression as you say. The route to knowledge of truth, particularly from an empirical sense, is not belief, but rather, doubt. Skepticism. This is the scientific method, and while one starts with a thesis, a proposed belief if you will, to hold to that belief is to instill confirmation bias into my quest for truth.

That Joseph Smith held in his hand and translated a papyrus that contained the account of abraham written by his own hand -- is an empirical claim. It is something for which there can be no opinion that matters. The route to discovery that the papyrus contains abaham's writing is by testing the proposition. If I believe it, and 'have faith' in this claim -- meaning that I trust this claim, then I won't actually do the testing necessary to determine whether the papyrus or facsimile actually is what Joseph claims it to be. Belief has nothing to do with this: it is either Abraham's writings, or not, and the facts and evidence overwhelmingly indicate that it is not abraham's writing.

So here we are: Joseph Smith didn't translate the BoA, not at least in any way that can be measured empirically. Yet, the BoA contains inspired writings. It could actually be the words of Abraham, but not written by his own hand on the scrolls extant. I cannot prove that they are or aren't the inspired words of Abraham revealed (not translated) to Joseph. So, I accept the Book of Abraham in faith, because there is no reason to cast it out because of my disbelief in the inspiration of the prophet Joseph Smith.

But there is a lesson here: one more important when I set aside the literalism. Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God -- this is my testimony. It is not an empirical claim, but rather, a normative (I act on it) and valuative (I value and cherish it) claim. Because I no longer have to do the "all or nothing" game, any admission or factoid about Joseph Smith's sordid history, whether he practiced polgamy with 14 year olds and polyandry with other men's wives (he did: ref: LDS familysearch), and lied about it (he did ref: HotC), makes absolutely no difference to me at all. I don't care in the least, because I know, through the example of the Book of Abraham, that if god wants to translate something from a irrelevant document, he can, and if god wants Joseph to be a prophet, he is a prophet, regardless of his alleged behavior. As well, I can accept a guy like Paul Dunn as being a servant of the Lord, motivating me on my mission, even if his stories were entirely bogus. Coming close to home, I can sustain a bishop who was two months ago a neighbor with whom I may have disagreed and did not fully respect. Learning the truth helps me deal with the truth and reality as messy as it really is.

[wayfarer]

While I am glad that you have that belief, but that is not hope as understood in the scriptures and so on. With hope, you know it will happen, but you don't know when.

cfr -- please explore that a bit more and show how that is a scriptural definition of hope.

[pogi]

I was Ward Mission Leader for two years a couple of years ago, and certainly/completely as a NOM/Middle Way LDS. we had just come off of over 3 years in our ward with zero baptisms, and over 10 years with no converts that stuck. I had the deep privilege in achieving an average of over one baptism per month during my two year tenure, and all of them are still active members to this day.

If I came across you as a believing member of another faith, I would not try to convert you. Instead, I try to share my experience, strength, and hope about how my faith enhances my view of the world. I try to understand the same from you. And you know? If you're happy with your faith, I'm not here to change that. On the other hand, if what I say speaks to you spiritually, then I'm happy to tell you how you can come to the same joy I have had. And, as you find out about some of the sordid aspects of my church history and doctrine, I'm not going to cover up or minimize the impact some of our history has on people. I'm going to be rigorously honest about it. I'm going to demonstrate to you how the spirit communicates through us imperfect humans to lift us to new heights and to find true happiness.

So, at least in my case, there would not be an end to missions, but rather, a different focus. In my experience, that focus has been more successful than the alternatives, but of course, that could simply be luck of the draw.

I appreciate your approach and find it refreshing in many ways, but what motivates you to do missionary work if you do not believe that you have something that is real and true? I know that you hope that it is real and true, but why share that hope if you have not tasted of its fruit in some way which allows belief to enter your heart that the word is indeed good. It sounds like you have more than a simple hope, but you believe that the word is good or you wouldn't share it.

[Scott Lloyd]

You think his ward didn't have full-time missionaries, a bishopric, ward council, and other ward members before wayfarer became ward mission leader? I don't think he's claiming that he's solely responsible for the conversions, but it's just possible that his approach to missionary work is a good one and helped the situation.

And it's just possible that there was a more effective bishopric and ward council in place thereafter, and, with the raising of the bar, better-prepared full-time missionaries.

Just sayin' missionary work is in no-wise a one man show, and that's why I'm unpersuaded that his "new-order Mormon" philosophy is what made all the difference.

[wayfarer]

And, of course, the full-time missionaries assigned to the ward, the bishopric, the ward council and the other ward members had little or nothing to do with it.

I, of myself, am nothing, so I had nothing to do with it at all. however, I do credit the spirit that worked through me and was able to motivate everyone involved to adopt an inclusive missionary spirit. We had amazing enthusiasm throughout the ward at the time. it was wonderful.

Our ward mission plan simply started with making friends and listening. I asked members NOT to proscelyte or push, but rather, to simply get to know their neighbors. Then, to invite neighbors over to their homes to feel the spirit that exists therein. If that spirit talked to the neighbor, and if the spirit talked to the member, then, as noted in section 50, an amazing thing happens.

[DH]

And it's just possible that there was a more effective bishopric and ward council in place thereafter, and, with the raising of the bar, better-prepared full-time missionaries.

Just sayin' missionary work is in no-wise a one man show, and that's why I'm unpersuaded that his "new-order Mormon" philosophy is what made all the difference.

You are right that it's not a one-man show, though it is possible that one person can make a big difference. Not saying that is necessarily the case with this situation (since I'm not in that ward), just that it's possible.

The NOM philosophy may not be for everyone, but it does work for many.

Peace.

[wayfarer]

And it's just possible that there was a more effective bishopric and ward council in place thereafter, and, with the raising of the bar, better-prepared full-time missionaries.

The bishop didn't change. Our missionaries, at one point, were both sent home for performing oral sex on a local high school student. It happens. For a while, we got part-time support from the APs after that, but we had to carry a lot of the load.

I cannot tell you how exciting it was. we had our gospel essentials class with 20-30 people in it. each of the investigators was supported by two peer families. Each investigator came to class with their hardest questions, and we explored them openly and honestly. To this day, I don't think I've had a more uplifting calling. And this was during my extreme disaffection with Prop 8.

Just sayin' missionary work is in no-wise a one man show, and that's why I'm unpersuaded that his "new-order Mormon" philosophy is what made all the difference.

To be clear, I wouldn't call this a 'philosophy', but rather, a "way": the Middle Way.

I hope you can see that it wasn't a 'one man' show, but rather, the spirit working through us all as a team. I believe that our opportunities and success were enhanced by my approach, but again, I cannot take credit for anything -- it simply happened. I raised it because someone above expressed that a NOM Missionary cannot be such, and at least in this one anecdote, that isn't true. that's all.

Edited December 20, 2012 by wayfarer

[Scott Lloyd]

I, of myself, am nothing, so I had nothing to do with it at all. however, I do credit the spirit that worked through me and was able to motivate everyone involved to adopt an inclusive missionary spirit. We had amazing enthusiasm throughout the ward at the time. it was wonderful.

Our ward mission plan simply started with making friends and listening. I asked members NOT to proscelyte or push, but rather, to simply get to know their neighbors. Then, to invite neighbors over to their homes to feel the spirit that exists therein. If that spirit talked to the neighbor, and if the spirit talked to the member, then, as noted in section 50, an amazing thing happens.

It sounds like a very commendable and effective approach, one that could be emulated by others, whether or not they harbor a "new-order" mindset.

Edited December 20, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[pogi]

I'm not sure the suspension of belief/disbelief is an impediment to progression as you say. The route to knowledge of truth, particularly from an empirical sense, is not belief, but rather, doubt. Skepticism.

Even if it was true in a empirical sense (which it isn't, as doubt creates bias), it is not true in a spiritual sense. Faith and doubt cannot coexist. Doubt is the opposite of hope and leads to spiritual blindness. I prefer optimistic uncertainty over skepticism.

[wayfarer]

I appreciate your approach and find it refreshing in many ways, but what motivates you to do missionary work if you do not believe that you have something that is real and true? I know that you hope that it is real and true, but why share that hope if you have not tasted of its fruit in some way which allows belief to enter your heart that the word is indeed good. It sounds like you have more than a simple hope, but you believe that the word is good or you wouldn't share it.

pogi, I hold that the gospel of Jesus Christ as reflected in the Book of Mormon is true. This is not an empirical claim -- it is not something that can be falsified, but in my case, it was deeply experienced. That Joseph Smith was a prophet is something that I hold to be normatively and valuatively true as well. That Jesus is the Christ is my personal testimony. I don't have faith in the Book of Mormon as a spiritual witness, or of joseph Smith as a prophet, or that Jesus is the Christ -- I know them to be true -- my faith is dormant in these things. why, then, shouldn't I testify from the tops of the roof that they are true? But I am careful on the language. Were I to say "I know the church is true", while I have no problem saying this for myself, i do not hold that every claim, every part of its history, every doctrine taught, every statement by the leaders is 'true'. For we only know in part, and for the rest we 'prophesy'. And the 'prophecy' part is our faith. It's all there in Alma 32.

[wayfarer]

Even if it was true in a empirical sense (which it isn't, as doubt creates bias), it is not true in a spiritual sense. Faith and doubt cannot coexist. Doubt is the opposite of hope and leads to spiritual blindness. I prefer optimistic uncertainty over skepticism.

As do I, and as does Alma 32. I don't doubt, because I don't believe. regardless of what volgadon said, I see 'hope' as that optimistic uncertainty to which you refer.

[wayfarer]

It's sounds like a very commendable and effective approach, one that could be emulated by others, whether or not they harbor a "new-order" mindset.

Indeed. truth be known, I don't often identify with the term 'new order mormon', because I think a lot of the 'old order' was pretty cool. That said, the NOM community is very loving and supportive, and includes a number of very faithful people. Unfortunately, the term "New Order Mormon" implies that they have some order to their/our madness. there isn't.

I prefer 'faithful Middle Way', but I wouldn't presume to claim 'faithful' in as far as I'm so danged imperfect. 'tis a goal to be sought unto.

Edited December 20, 2012 by wayfarer

[Scott Lloyd]

I hope you can see that it wasn't a 'one man' show, but rather, the spirit working through us all as a team.

I do indeed.

But again, I see no reason why such a thing could not be accomplished without dependence on a "new-order Mormon" mindset.

[Calm]

It's sounds like a very commendable and effective approach, one that could be emulated by others, whether or not they harbor a "new-order" mindset.

Isn't it pretty much what church leaders have suggested in friendshipping people already though? At least that is what I understood them to be saying...something along the lines of get to know your neighbours as friends, not potential members, then if anything happens great, if not still be friends.

****And normally I would go looking for that quote I vaguely remember, but a new med I am taking is totally zoning me out and putting two thoughts together to write down and then proofing it at least three times to make it understandable is all I can manage...if one of my comments ends halfway through, you will know I've given in to it and passed out.

[Scott Lloyd]

Isn't it pretty much what church leaders have suggested in friendshipping people already though? At least that is what I understood them to be saying...something along the lines of get to know your neighbours as friends, not potential members, then if anything happens great, if not still be friends.

****And normally I would go looking for that quote I vaguely remember, but a new med I am taking is totally zoning me out and putting two thoughts together to write down and then proofing it at least three times to make it understandable is all I can manage...if one of my comments ends halfway through, you will know I've given in to it and passed out.

No need to look for a quote. That has been the standard advice to member missionaries at least as far back as the mid-'70s, when I served my mission.

[wayfarer]

Isn't it pretty much what church leaders have suggested in friendshipping people already though? At least that is what I understood them to be saying...something along the lines of get to know your neighbours as friends, not potential members, then if anything happens great, if not still be friends.

Isn't it great that the Church has come to a moderate position on Missionary work? Sounds a lot like the "Middle Way".