Byu Prof Fears Mormon Scholars Are Giving In To Secularism

[JAHS]

And just what might those "proper channels" be?  Can you give me some examples?

 

Intellectuals such as Hugh Nibley participated in open debate on the issue of race and the priesthood in the Spring 1973 issue of Dialogue and probably rendered a service to the Brethren in doing so.  They did not even consider going through "proper channels."  Why would they?

Proper channels would normally be through:

Individual study of current prophets and scriptures along with personal prayer

Home teachers

Bishop and or Stake President

Regional Representative

Seventy

Quorum of Twelve

 

Each of these has access to the one above them. If enough people bring concerns through these channels they eventually get to the Presidency who can confer with God on the subject,

Edited November 29, 2014 by JAHS

[mormonnewb]

Proper channels would normally be through:

Individual study of current prophets and scriptures along with personal prayer

Home teachers

Bishop and or Stake President

Regional Representative

Seventy

Quorum of Twelve

 

Each of these has access to the one above them. If enough people bring concerns through these channels they eventually get to the Presidency who can confer with God on the subject,

 

Weren't we just told in the last GC that this is NOT the way things work.

 

 

"Which way do you face?” President Boyd K. Packer surprised me with this puzzling question while we were traveling together on my very first assignment as a new Seventy. Without an explanation to put the question in context, I was baffled. “A Seventy,” he continued, “does not represent the people to the prophet but the prophet to the people. Never forget which way you face!” It was a powerful lesson. -- Elder Lynn G. Robbins

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/10/which-way-do-you-face?lang=eng

 

As I understand President Packer, the job of a GA is not to bring the people's concerns to the Prophet, but rather to bring to Prophet's edicts to the people.  And presumably that same job is held by each person downward in the chain of command -- to deliver the marching orders of their file leader.  Therefore, the job of my bishop is not to make sure that I'm heard by the SP, but rather to make sure that I hear the SP.

 

By the way, do you see why some of us think that the Brethren might be insulated from the problems of the membership?  By his very words, President Packer was telling Elder Robbins, "I don't want to hear what the members might be murmuring and complaining about.  You tell them what we've decided from on high."

 

So what is your Plan B in following "proper channels" to be heard by Church leaders?

[JAHS]

Weren't we just told in the last GC that this is NOT the way things work.

 

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/10/which-way-do-you-face?lang=eng

 

As I understand President Packer, the job of a GA is not to bring the people's concerns to the Prophet, but rather to bring to Prophet's edicts to the people.  And presumably that same job is held by each person downward in the chain of command -- to deliver the marching orders of their file leader.  Therefore, the job of my bishop is not to make sure that I'm heard by the SP, but rather to make sure that I hear the SP.

 

By the way, do you see why some of us think that the Brethren might be insulated from the problems of the membership?  By his very words, President Packer was telling Elder Robbins, "I don't want to hear what the members might be murmuring and complaining about.  You tell them what we've decided from on high."

 

So what is your Plan B in following "proper channels" to be heard by Church leaders?

I am not talking about murmuring and complaining; I am talking about sincere questions a person might have about a gospel subject.

 

From church Handbook #2:

"Members of the Church are discouraged from making telephone calls or writing letters to General Authorities about doctrinal issues or personal matters. With an ever-increasing Church membership, responding personally to these inquiries presents an almost insurmountable task and would make it difficult for General Authorities to fulfill the duties for which they alone are responsible. The General Authorities love the members of the Church and do not want them to feel that they are without the support and guidance they need. However, all things need to be done with wisdom and order.

The Lord has organized His Church so every member has access to a bishop or branch president and a stake, district, or mission president who serve as spiritual advisers and temporal counselors. By reason of their callings, these local leaders are entitled to the spirit of discernment and inspiration to enable them to counsel members within their jurisdiction.

Members who need spiritual guidance, have weighty personal problems, or have doctrinal questions should make a diligent effort, including earnest prayer and scripture study, to find solutions and answers themselves. Church members are encouraged to seek guidance from the Holy Ghost to help them in their personal lives and in their family and Church responsibilities.

If members still need help, they should counsel first with their bishop. If necessary, he may refer them to the stake president.

In most cases, correspondence from members to General Authorities will be referred back to their local leaders. Stake presidents who need clarification about doctrinal or other Church matters may write in behalf of their members to the First Presidency."

 

This is what I am referring to. President Packer is right in describing which way the Seventy should face, but there can still be some communication in the other direction if needed.

[The Nehor]

Weren't we just told in the last GC that this is NOT the way things work.

 

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/10/which-way-do-you-face?lang=eng

 

So what is your Plan B in following "proper channels" to be heard by Church leaders?

Use the authorized and even encouraged end-run around all middle management and talk directly to the CEO. Prayer, basically. If God considers it important He can pass it down.

[JAHS]

Use the authorized and even encouraged end-run around all middle management and talk directly to the CEO. Prayer, basically. If God considers it important He can pass it down.

Actually that should be Plan A first and then asking leaders about it would be Plan B.

[sunstoned]

BYU has been censored by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) for a repression of academic freedom.  Any BYU professor who is acting in his/her field of expertise and states or writes anything that could be considered contrary or challenging to church is in jeopardy of losing their job.  

 

I can see where there could be problems if someone was trying to tell the brethren how to run the church or out and out disagreed with established doctrine.  But one the other hand academics should be free to pursue research in their fields without fear of repercussions from the church. This means historians should not be disciplined by writing about post manifesto polygamy.  Likewise, if the brethren venture out into the political area, then there should be no reason for them not to expect to run into opinions contrary to their own.  

[sunstoned]

Of course, no one (not even prophets) are going to bat 1,000.  That being said, perhaps we would occasionally luck up unto the right side of history if those dreaded "scholars" and "intellectuals" were consulted (or at least, felt free to speak up without fear of being labeled "apostates").

 

I believe this is starting to change.  The example being the essays that have been posted on lds.org.  

[why me]

Are these views on SECULAR matters?  In fairness, I'll give you #1 and #3, but the others seem to deal with matters of "spirituality," in which we both agree that members should generally follow the lead of the Brethren in that regard.

 

There is usually a connection between the secular and the spiritual. Spiritual advice can be given to survive the secular life. I think that they both go hand in hand. Let me put it this way: there are secular values and there are spiritual values. However, the secular can influence the spiritual and the spiritual can influence the secular. I believe that the church advises its members spiritual to survive the secular life. And I don't see where it has gone wrong.

Edited November 29, 2014 by why me

[sunstoned]

There is usually a connection between the secular and the spiritual. Spiritual advice can be given to survive the secular life. I think that they both go hand in hand. Let me put it this way: there are secular values and there are spiritual values. However, the secular can influence the spiritual and the spiritual can influence the secular. I believe that the church advises its members spiritual to survive the secular life. And I don't see where it has gone wrong.

I generally agree with you, but there is still a line between the secular and the spiritual.  An example is the church’s doctrine with regards to prohibiting its members from participating in same sex marriage. This is within the church’s rights to do so.  However, when the church became involved with Prop 8, it moved into the secular realm.  By campaigning for legislation that would impact many Americans, its actions were no longer limited to its membership.   In this secular area, the brethren should not expect the same deference by the members as they would in spiritual matters.

[mfbukowski]

Fifth: The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or diplomas to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.

Sorry.

 

I love him dearly and sustain him as prophet, but I will not allow President Monson to perform brain surgery on my children.

[Bernard Gui]

A saint does not follow prophets blindly. Far from it.

We do so through freely and consciously making covenants

with God. That is the most important act of agency we will ever make.

[Robert F. Smith]

Proper channels would normally be through:

Individual study of current prophets and scriptures along with personal prayer

Home teachers

Bishop and or Stake President

Regional Representative

Seventy

Quorum of Twelve

 

Each of these has access to the one above them. If enough people bring concerns through these channels they eventually get to the Presidency who can confer with God on the subject,

That is all well and good for mundane concerns which any bishop or home teacher can handle, but not every issue is amenable to that sort of horizontal approach.  I have had occasion to take a matter directly to one of the Brethren best qualified to deal with it, and he didn't send it back to my bishop or tut-tut me.  He wrote a meaningful reply (becoming a lost art) and told me how he planned to deal with it, and what had already been done before I wrote.

 

The Brethren read books, articles, and news reports just like the rest of us.  They also receive confidential briefings on sensitive issues at their own behest.  They certainly don't have time to palaver with every tom, **** and harry who thinks he has something important to say, but, once in awhile, it can be necessary to say something directly.

[Avatar4321]

Why are we discussing spiritual versus secular? Everything is spiritual!

[LinuxGal]

Why are we discussing spiritual versus secular? Everything is spiritual!

 

On the contrary, it is written, we are sown a natural body and we are raised a spiritual body. 1 Cor 15:44.

[carbon dioxide]

A saint does not follow prophets blindly. Far from it.

We do so through freely and consciously making covenants

with God. That is the most important act of agency we will ever make.

If LDS blindly followed prophets, we would be doing our home teaching 100% each month

[JAHS]

Someone posts a disagreement with professor Hancock's claims in the Trib:

 

"Another fine article by Peggy Fletcher Stack ("BYU prof fears Mormon scholars are giving in to secularism," Nov. 27). I have been involved in Mormon Studies for 43 years, and I have to say Professor Ralph Hancock doesn’t understand the scholars he disagrees with. I know many of them, and it is not accurate to claim they "view equality as sameness, freedom as being without limits, and tolerance as more important than established morality, especially in sexual matters."

These are the kinds of false charges that we see so often in the political world these days. If his discussion website aims to foster thoughtful dialogue on the issues facing the church, he needs to set a good example by being accurate in his assessment of those he disagrees with."

 

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/1883412-155/letter-mormon-scholars-arent-doing-what

[Robert F. Smith]

Why are we discussing spiritual versus secular? Everything is spiritual!

Everything is actually both.  We merely pretend that there is a division.

[cinepro]

I know of a BYU professor who directly told me that legalized child abortion is ok because it allows people to exercise their free agency.

This to justify his association with a political cause.

Goodbye Mr. Chips! The looney van has caught up with you.

 

A similar idea is taught in Alma 14:

 

 10 And when Amulek saw the pains of the women and children who were consuming in the fire, he also was pained; and he said unto Alma: How can we witness this awful scene? Therefore let us stretch forth our hands, and exercise the power of God which is in us, and save them from the flames.

 

 11 But Alma said unto him: The Spirit constraineth me that I must not stretch forth mine hand; for behold the Lord receiveth them up unto himself, in glory; and he doth suffer that they may do this thing, or that the people may do this thing unto them, according to the hardness of their hearts, that the judgments which he shall exercise upon them in his wrath may be just; and the blood of the innocent shall stand as a witness against them, yea, and cry mightily against them at the last day.

[LinuxGal]

I know of a BYU professor who directly told me that legalized child abortion is ok because it allows people to exercise their free agency.

This to justify his association with a political cause.

 

You are aware, are you not, that God himself commands the use of an abortificant if there is reason to believe a wife has been unfaithful?

 

Numbers 5:19-21

 

...And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse: But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband: Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell...

[mfbukowski]

You are aware, are you not, that God himself commands the use of an abortificant if there is reason to believe a wife has been unfaithful?

 

Numbers 5:19-21

 

...And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse: But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband: Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell...

CFR.

Where the heck did you get "the use of an abortificant" from that scripture????

[Kenngo1969]

On the contrary, it is written, we are sown a natural body and we are raised a spiritual body. 1 Cor 15:44.

There is further light and knowledge on the subject in the Doctrine and Covenants, wherein we are told, "Wherefore, verily I say unto you that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal" (Doctrine and Covenants 29:34).  Also in the Doctrine and Covenants, we are told, "[T]he spirit and the body are the soul of man" (Doctrine and Covenants 88:15).

[LinuxGal]

CFR.

Where the heck did you get "the use of an abortificant" from that scripture????

 

 

CFR.

Where the heck did you get "the use of an abortificant" from that scripture????

 

According to verse 28, "And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed." 

 

But if she is defiled, of course, failing the condition of verse 28, then she shall not conceive seed, making the bitter water an abortificant. 

[mfbukowski]

According to verse 28, "And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed." 

 

But if she is defiled, of course, failing the condition of verse 28, then she shall not conceive seed, making the bitter water an abortificant. 

You did not quote the full scripture. Honestly I don't really care if it says that or not, but this shows to me that you are making this up out of thin air.

 

17 And the priest shall take holy water in an earthen vessel; and of the dust that is in the floor of the tabernacle the priest shall take, and put it into the water:

18 And the priest shall set the woman before the Lord, and uncover the woman's head, and put the offering of memorial in her hands, which is the jealousy offering: and the priest shall have in his hand the bitter water that causeth the curse:

19 And the priest shall charge her by an oath, and say unto the woman, If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness with another instead of thy husband, be thou free from this bitter water that causeth the curse:

20 But if thou hast gone aside to another instead of thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee beside thine husband:

21 Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The Lord make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the Lord doth make thy thigh to rot, and thy belly to swell;

22 And this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, to make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to rot: And the woman shall say, Amen, amen.

23 And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out with the bitter water:

24 And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water that causeth the curse: and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter.

25 Then the priest shall take the jealousy offering out of the woman's hand, and shall wave the offering before the Lord, and offer it upon the altar:

26 And the priest shall take an handful of the offering, even the memorial thereof, and burn it upon the altar, and afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water.

27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.

28 And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed.

 

There is no evidence that there is anything in the water but dust off the floor.

 

The belief seems to be that the Lord will make the woman miscarry if the child is not the father of the husband; there is no evidence of anything else.

 

For one who insists on evidence, this ain't it.  Perhaps there is something more that a scholar may add, but it sure doesn't look like it to me.

[Avatar4321]

On the contrary, it is written, we are sown a natural body and we are raised a spiritual body. 1 Cor 15:44.

you do realize that secular and natural are not the same words right?

[LinuxGal]

you do realize that secular and natural are not the same words right?

 

I don't care to quibble over the difference between natural and secular, the point of the text is that we are buried with a natural body and raised with a spiritual body, and there's a difference between that, according to Paul.