Unfortunate Wording In Church Reaction

[jwhitlock]

The pew study from last year showed USA Mormons among the most conservative of Americans - another cultural hurdle is that this is really not the case for a lot of countries outside the USA where the church is strong.

Golly, I guess us USA Mormons who are all so conservative could take a lesson from all those NZ's who are so anti-authorization. I'm glad you've been able to enlighten us about conservative viewpoints being such a cultural hurdle, because obviously nothing good ever comes out of conservative Americans.

[teddyaware]

I remember once sitting in a High Council room with Elder Faust when he dressed down a Stake Relief Society President for pushing for more Stake meetings, to which he responded that "Unneccessary sacrifice is of Satan." In that same vein, unnecessary and pointless political jabs made during Church releases cause unnecessary irritation to people. I would not suggest they are of Satan, but I would suggest that they involve unrighteous dominion.

In about 10 to 20 years (I would guess), if you're still around when the Church is really under the gun for tenaciously upholding the laws of God. there will likely be many more opportunities to criticize the Church for making so called "pointless political jabs" as the forces of the wicked gather to persecute the righteous; for when that prophesied day arrives, the mere act of teaching the gospel will likely be viewed as a crime against humanity. Today is only the beginning of sorrows and of persecutions for the Latter-day Saints. As the attacks of the forces of Satan against the saints become more and more vicious, there will very likely be some church members who will say the Church leaders are being unnecessarily provocative, when in reality all they will be doing is forthrightly preaching the truth in love... "12 And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon all the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw.

13 And it came to pass that I beheld that the great mother of abominations did gather together multitudes upon the face of all the earth, among all the nations of the Gentiles, to fight against the Lamb of God." (1 Nephi 14)

[Stone holm]

Golly, I guess us USA Mormons who are all so conservative could take a lesson from all those NZ's who are so anti-authorization. I'm glad you've been able to enlighten us about conservative viewpoints being such a cultural hurdle, because obviously nothing good ever comes out of conservative Americans.

Injecting American style conservatism into our religion is usually unhelpful internationally. Elder Mark E. Petersen once pointed that out to the Brethren that it was hurting the Church in Europe, so we don't need to berate the NZ's over the issue.

[Calm]

Golly, I guess us USA Mormons who are all so conservative could take a lesson from all those NZ's who are so anti-authorization. I'm glad you've been able to enlighten us about conservative viewpoints being such a cultural hurdle, because obviously nothing good ever comes out of conservative Americans.

Recognizing that there are different cultures within the global church does not automatically imply one culture or another is superior to the rest or to any others in particular.

[Stone holm]

In about 10 to 20 years (I would guess), if you're still around when the Church is really under the gun for tenaciously upholding the laws of God. there will likely be many more opportunities to criticize the Church for making so called "pointless political jabs" as the forces of the wicked gather to persecute the righteous; for when that prophesied day arrives, the mere act of teaching the gospel will likely be viewed as a crime against humanity. Today is only the beginning of sorrows and of persecutions for the Latter-day Saints. As the attacks of the forces of Satan against the saints become more and more vicious, there will very likely be some church members who will say the Church leaders are being unnecessarily provocative, when in reality all they will be doing is forthrightly preaching the truth in love... "12 And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon all the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw.

13 And it came to pass that I beheld that the great mother of abominations did gather together multitudes upon the face of all the earth, among all the nations of the Gentiles, to fight against the Lamb of God." (1 Nephi 14)

There was no love in that political jab, or if there was it was very well disguised. I stated I had no problem with the Church stating its doctrinal objection to SSM, it was the gratuituous political jab that is getting the play.

[Stone holm]

Recognizing that there are different cultures within the global church does not automatically imply one culture or another is superior to the rest or to any others in particular.

You are going to have a hard time convincing some on this thread that American culture is not superior to the rest of the world, we are kind of like the Iranians in that kind of arrogance.

[jwhitlock]

Explain to me what ecclesiastical purpose was possibly served by taking the political jab? None. All it served to do was alienate people from Mormonism, gratuitous insults of that nature are nearly always a public relations and spiritual miscue.

Pffft. Your manufactured explanation about what the church really meant with its statement is so far far reality that there's no real reason to respond to such a skewed perspective.

And for the record, I responded to your inane and inflammatory comment about the statement being "unrighteous dominion". That seems to be consistent with your SOP where everything the church says or does must be compared against the standard of what the world says, and if it doesn't measure up, not only is it wrong, but it is "unrighteous".

What you misrepresent as a "gratuitous insult" is a valid concern expressed by the church that should also be of concern to all faithful members, no matter where they live. It's interesting to see how various church actions such as this bring some of the tares out of the woodwork.

[Johnnie Cake]

There you have it.

Follow the wisdom of the world, or be pushed into insignificance. If anyone doubts the validity of prophecies of the last days, just read above. It's not hard to understand why such polarization occurs when the world moves quickly away from righteous principles. Sad to see that some members of the church are moving with the world, giving into misplaced demands for "equality" that are really nothing more than attempts to find happiness in wickedness.

I guess wickedness is in the eye of the beholder...God certainly has changed His list of what is considered sin from the old testiment to the new testiment to these latter days...if God can change His definition of what is considered sin then certainly mankind can change as well...and Im guessing that if President Monson were to come out tomorrow and announce a major change in church policy with respect to this issue...even you would change your views of what is sin. least you forget...it was only 108 years ago that some men in the church could have multiple wives...yet today doing so would be considered a sin.

Edited June 27, 2013 by Johnnie Cake

[jwhitlock]

Injecting American style conservatism into our religion is usually unhelpful internationally. Elder Mark E. Petersen once pointed that out to the Brethren that it was hurting the Church in Europe, so we don't need to berate the NZ's over the issue.

And as usual, you miss the point. Mikey was condemning conservative attitudes in general, not just their "injection" into religion.

Not to mention that the inferred claim that Americans are the only conservative members of the church in the world is simply untenable.

[teddyaware]

There was no love in that political jab, or if there was it was very well disguised. I stated I had no problem with the Church stating its doctrinal objection to SSM, it was the gratuituous political jab that is getting the play.

Sometimes love isn't all gushy and mushy. Sometimes love is spoken in the words of rebuke. You know, "reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost?"

[Stone holm]

Pffft. Your manufactured explanation about what the church really meant with its statement is so far far reality that there's no real reason to respond to such a skewed perspective.

And for the record, I responded to your inane and inflammatory comment about the statement being "unrighteous dominion". That seems to be consistent with your SOP where everything the church says or does must be compared against the standard of what the world says, and if it doesn't measure up, not only is it wrong, but it is "unrighteous".

What you misrepresent as a "gratuitous insult" is a valid concern expressed by the church that should also be of concern to all faithful members, no matter where they live. It's interesting to see how various church actions such as this bring some of the tares out of the woodwork.

Not sure what you are talking about, but the first couple sentences of the release were a complete unadulterated political jab that had absolutely no ecclesiastical merit and which gratuituously provided the news media with political fodder to say Mormons had doubts about the American political system. Sorry no excuse for that kind of thing.

[jwhitlock]

I guess wickedness is in the eye of the beholder...God certainly has changed His list of what is considered sin from the old testiment to the new testiment to these latter days...if God can change His definition of what is considered sin then certainly mankind can change as well...and Im guessing that if President Monson were to come out tomorrow and announce a major change in church policy with respect to this issue...even you would change your views of what is sin

Except, of course, that you presume to tell God and the church that homosexual activity is not sinful, and should be stricken from that category.

Perhaps you'd like to give us some definitions of "sin" that have been changed by God. If so, I'd ask you to make sure they're comparable to homosexual activity, and not just changes in dietary or other procedural policies.

[Stone holm]

Sometimes love isn't all gushy and mushy. Sometimes love is spoken in the words of rebuke. You know, "reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost?"

That was a very poorly worded rebuke that displayed considerable ignorance about the role of the Courts. If they wanted to rebuke the SCOTUS, they could have done so in a clear fashion without calling into question the American system of governance.

[emarkp]

As to the prayer - in 2002, right after ingot off my mission, a closing prayer in one of the general conference sessions prayed for the "freedom fighters in Iraq". It created a substantial stir and it was considered very rude and belittling to dominate a global church conference with a local USA centric (high charges political) issue. Such a prayer would be highly appropriate at a local USA meeting, but it was considered extremely objectionable in the church wide general conference forum.

Considering the US invasion of Iraq was in March of 2003, that prayer does sound a bit odd.

[jwhitlock]

Recognizing that there are different cultures within the global church does not automatically imply one culture or another is superior to the rest or to any others in particular.

If that's what he was doing, I wouldn't have any problem with that. Stating that "USA Mormon" conservatism is, by its nature, a hurdle with the rest of the church denigrated that culture. It's no wonder that Scott thought he detected an anti-American perspective in his posts.

[jwhitlock]

You are going to have a hard time convincing some on this thread that American culture is not superior to the rest of the world, we are kind of like the Iranians in that kind of arrogance.

More generalizations - and more inaccuracy.

[Stone holm]

Except, of course, that you presume to tell God and the church that homosexual activity is not sinful, and should be stricken from that category.

Perhaps you'd like to give us some definitions of "sin" that have been changed by God. If so, I'd ask you to make sure they're comparable to homosexual activity, and not just changes in dietary or other procedural policies.

I guess wickedness is in the eye of the beholder...God certainly has changed His list of what is considered sin from the old testiment to the new testiment to these latter days...if God can change His definition of what is considered sin then certainly mankind can change as well...and Im guessing that if President Monson were to come out tomorrow and announce a major change in church policy with respect to this issue...even you would change your views of what is sin. least you forget...it was only 108 years ago that some men in the church could have multiple wives...yet today doing so would be considered a sin.

Johnnie Cake. This isn't a question of saying that SSM should be considered anything other than sinful, and I very much doubt that the Church will ever consider it otherwise as it goes against the structural design of our understanding of the purpose of life and the hereafter. Having said that, the first part of the news release was at best in poor taste as it was a political jab. I don't want anyone, however, to mistake my position with regards to whether homosexual behaviour is a sin, it is, and no Mormon should be involved in a SSM. But no Mormon should be trying to legislate our religion either.

Edited June 27, 2013 by Stone holm

[Calm]

If that's what he was doing, I wouldn't have any problem with that. Stating that "USA Mormon" conservatism is, by its nature, a hurdle with the rest of the church denigrated that culture. It's no wonder that Scott thought he detected an anti-American perspective in his posts.

I don't read it that way, I see it as saying it is a hurdle to communication, just as any nonAmerican cultural aspects of a country would be hurdle for American LDS to deal with.

Hopefully he will clarify what he means.

Edited June 27, 2013 by calmoriah

[emarkp]

Well now the news media has zeroed in on the first sentence in the Church response to SCOTUS dismissing the Prop 8 case for lack of standing, and we as Mormons have now self-branded ourselves as a bitter people doubting the efficacy of our system of government. Is anyone else appalled?

Yes, the statement should have been much stronger. It was certainly accurate:

"By ruling that supporters of Proposition 8 lacked standing to bring this case to court, the Supreme Court has highlighted troubling questions about how our democratic and judicial system operates."

What we Californians have learned is that the executive branch can ignore or nullify the actual constitution of the state at their whim. California is not a Republic, it is a tyranny of one party cronyism. The government of CA has clearly failed and it should be dissolved into a federal territory. Sadly the federal government rules by the same principles.

The California referendum system is instrumental in its current financial woes. Basically the people of California have proven that direct democracy of this kind does notmworkmfor them.

Contributes to? Surely. Instrumental? Not hardly. Witness the lies of the ruling class in CA that raised taxes just in time to give massive raises to the corrupt CA unions and government class.

[jwhitlock]

Not sure what you are talking about, but the first couple sentences of the release were a complete unadulterated political jab that had absolutely no ecclesiastical merit and which gratuituously provided the news media with political fodder to say Mormons had doubts about the American political system. Sorry no excuse for that kind of thing.

More misdirection on your part. You did, of course, use the phrase "unrighteous dominion" in your post #98.

Basically, your whole attack on the church statement has been one gratuitous jab after another.

How ironic.

[Stone holm]

More misdirection on your part. You did, of course, use the phrase "unrighteous dominion" in your post #98.

Basically, your whole attack on the church statement has been one gratuitous jab after another.

How ironic.

Nothing gratuituos about it. The first two sentences were pure politics.

[jwhitlock]

I don't read it that way, I see it as saying it is a hurdle to communication, just as any nonAmerican cultural aspects of a country would be hurdle for American LDS to deal with.

Hopefully he will clarify what he means.

It would be fairly hard to say that his statement, which was: "The pew study from last year showed USA Mormons among the most conservative of Americans - another cultural hurdle is that this is really not the case for a lot of countries outside the USA where the church is strong.", pertained only to communication. He indicated it was a cultural hurdle (the equivalent of baggage) that other cultures outside of America don't have.

Maybe he will clarify. However, if that's the case, quite a few of his posts need clarification because they leave certain distinct impressions otherwise.

[Stone holm]

It would be fairly hard to say that his statement, which was: "The pew study from last year showed USA Mormons among the most conservative of Americans - another cultural hurdle is that this is really not the case for a lot of countries outside the USA where the church is strong.", pertained only to communication. He indicated it was a cultural hurdle (the equivalent of baggage) that other cultures outside of America don't have.

Maybe he will clarify. However, if that's the case, quite a few of his posts need clarification because they leave certain distinct impressions otherwise.

Well don't know what he thinks, but it most likely is political baggage that has hampered the Church in Europe. Prior to 1978 it hampered us even more.

[jwhitlock]

Nothing gratuituos about it. The first two sentences were pure politics.

And there you go again with misrepresenting what you're doing. You use enough well poisoning adjectives in your post describing how you see the church's statement that your comments are clearly gratuitous.

Clearly the church raised valid concerns with its statement. Do you disagree with those concerns? Do you say that the SCOTUS decision did not raise troubling concerns about the democratic process? If so, you're wrong.

[jwhitlock]

Well don't know what he thinks, but it most likely is political baggage that has hampered the Church in Europe. Prior to 1978 it hampered us even more.

Well, well, another gratuitous jab on your part with the 1978 comment.

Having lived in Germany before 1978, and knowing what challenges the church faced then, if you think that they were primarily political, you clearly don't have a clue about what those challenges were all about.