Are The Essays Backfiring?

[Gray]

Don't want to wade through this thread so I'll just ask: Is there anything here, other than anecdotal information and personal opinion, that gives evidence that the essays are backfiring?

 

No, I don't think there is anything more than that. 

[Jeanne]

You know, I remember taking an adult seminary class...wow..this is where they should learn in dept.  A class that goes through the past and then on to the present essays.  This is so necessary..especially if young kids are learning new things in seminary..an adult class that doesn't have to follow with huge coorelated manuals could be a huge discussion that would provide at least a better understanding  I just want my older friends and family to be "in the know"..I would love to have conversations with my family and friends (REAL conversations) like I have with you guys.  This is where you will reap the most benefit.

[cinepro]

Unless it promises me several dozen virgins in the afterlife I still have concerns.

 

As a single member of the Church, I'm afraid section 132 only has bad news for you, depending on how you define "ministering servant"...

[The Nehor]

As a single member of the Church, I'm afraid section 132 only has bad news for you, depending on how you define "ministering servant"...

I am going with the recent apostolic promise that if there is no one to marry you are off the hook. I mean, let's face it, it would take a woman pretty fair off in the LDS bell curve to fall in love with me. There are probably only one or two out there and who knows if they even live in the same country.

If I get relegated to ministering servant I think I will abdicate and go rule hell. Cain and Lucifer are putzes and should be relatively easy to dethrone.

[stemelbow]

I am going with the recent apostolic promise that if there is no one to marry you are off the hook. I mean, let's face it, it would take a woman pretty fair off in the LDS bell curve to fall in love with me. There are probably only one or two out there and who knows if they even live in the same country.

If I get relegated to ministering servant I think I will abdicate and go rule hell. Cain and Lucifer are putzes and should be relatively easy to dethrone.

Shoot. There are tons of single women who'd fall in love with any dude who is nominally associated with the Church. That's really all it'd take. I know I pat their tears off enough--it almost makes ya wish for a re-institution of polygamy if it weren't such a vile practice. You may have to sacrifice on your expectations, but I can't see ya getting off the hook any time soon with the plethora of single women out there.

[The Nehor]

Shoot. There are tons of single women who'd fall in love with any dude who is nominally associated with the Church. That's really all it'd take. I know I pat their tears off enough--it almost makes ya wish for a re-institution of polygamy if it weren't such a vile practice. You may have to sacrifice on your expectations, but I can't see ya getting off the hook any time soon with the plethora of single women out there.

And most of them have a divorce or two behind them, three or more children being shuttled between two homes, and trust issues large enough to drive an international jet liner through. No thanks on that.

[stemelbow]

And most of them have a divorce or two behind them, three or more children being shuttled between two homes, and trust issues large enough to drive an international jet liner through. No thanks on that.

Alright suit yourself. Those poor children need somebody just like you.

[The Nehor]

Alright suit yourself. Those poor children need somebody just like you.

Specifically they need someone better then me.

[Scott Lloyd]

Shoot. There are tons of single women who'd fall in love with any dude who is nominally associated with the Church. That's really all it'd take. I know I pat their tears off enough--it almost makes ya wish for a re-institution of polygamy if it weren't such a vile practice. You may have to sacrifice on your expectations, but I can't see ya getting off the hook any time soon with the plethora of single women out there.

An LDS woman ought to be more selective than to settle for "any dude who is nominally associated with the Church."

 

And I would never begrudge any man the right to be selective in choosing the mother of his yet-unborn children.

 

(Pardon. Perhaps I have some leftover anger issues that are surfacing from my days of singlehood.)

[Mystery Meat]

An LDS woman ought to be more selective than to settle for "any dude who is nominally associated with the Church."

 

And I would never begrudge any man the right to be selective in choosing the mother of his yet-unborn children.

 

(Pardon. Perhaps I have some leftover anger issues that are surfacing from my days of singlehood.)

 

When in doubt, in Mormon dating, always blame the men. 

[stemelbow]

An LDS woman ought to be more selective than to settle for "any dude who is nominally associated with the Church."

 

And I would never begrudge any man the right to be selective in choosing the mother of his yet-unborn children.

 

(Pardon. Perhaps I have some leftover anger issues that are surfacing from my days of singlehood.)

You are right, I was being overly harsh with The Nehor. I figure he could take it. I too was single from the time I came home from my mission until one month after my 31st birthday. I gave it a good ten years of trying.

[Calm]

An LDS woman ought to be more selective than to settle for "any dude who is nominally associated with the Church."

 

And I would never begrudge any man the right to be selective in choosing the mother of his yet-unborn children.

 

(Pardon. Perhaps I have some leftover anger issues that are surfacing from my days of singlehood.)

I can think of few things that will set up a marriage for failure even if they don't get divorced than marrying for the sake of marriage without regard to the type of individual one is marrying besides some faithful association with the Church.

[Scott Lloyd]

You are right, I was being overly harsh with The Nehor. I figure he could take it. I too was single from the time I came home from my mission until one month after my 31st birthday. I gave it a good ten years of trying.

You were still a youngster compared to where I was.

Edited June 16, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

When in doubt, in Mormon dating, always blame the men.

I assume you are making a joke, but women who refuse to consider getting to know someone before rejecting them based on some ideal or who are too preoccupied with their own lives are responsible for not getting married just as men who live by the same rules (not saying everyone not married or even a significant portion of unmarrieds are this way....just that if there is blame anywhere, these days it applies to both genders). Edited June 16, 2015 by calmoriah

[The Nehor]

You are right, I was being overly harsh with The Nehor. I figure he could take it. I too was single from the time I came home from my mission until one month after my 31st birthday. I gave it a good ten years of trying.

I have already passed your record. We will see when it happens assuming it ever does.

And I can take it. I get it all the time.

Edited June 16, 2015 by The Nehor

[Russell C McGregor]

When in doubt, in Mormon dating, always blame the men.

No, no, no. That's wrong.

It's not just in dating.

[Thinking]

Don't want to wade through this thread so I'll just ask: Is there anything here, other than anecdotal information and personal opinion, that gives evidence that the essays are backfiring?

Opinions are what I asked for in the OP.

[Scott Lloyd]

Opinions are what I asked for in the OP.

So to clarify then, are you asking whether those who participate on this board have had their faith shaken by the essays, or are you asking if board participants believe that such essays-induced shaken faith is widespread in the Church?

 

It seems to me those are two separate premises.

[Thinking]

So to clarify then, are you asking whether those who participate on this board have had their faith shaken by the essays, or are you asking if board participants believe that such essays-induced shaken faith is widespread in the Church?

 

It seems to me those are two separate premises.

You can address one or both questions as you see fit. As I wrote in the OP, I have witnessed some spirited discussion between posters who I consider faithful LDS. That's why I started the topic.

[CV75]

You can address one or both questions as you see fit. As I wrote in the OP, I have witnessed some spirited discussion between posters who I consider faithful LDS. That's why I started the topic.

I live in the "mission field." I have not had my faith shaken by the essays. I have not come across any who have expressed a shaken faith due to them. Outside of the formal quorum and leadership-presented lessons and discussions, the essays have provided a springboard for discussion and faithful questioning with about half a dozen people with whom I have conversed.

 

Among the LDS I know, those few that have expressed a "shaken faith" at one time or another have attributed it to something else going on in their lives (and seem to have resolved or be resolving it), and only one has extinguished faith to the point of requesting name removal.

[mfbukowski]

 

You've never been to the French patisserie down my street and around the corner.

 

Alas, I have not!

 

On the other hand, one could say that a thing IS complete insomuch as is required for the given moment and stage. Just getting a body and being born is a form of completion. The Atonement is complete, Christ's mortal sojourn is complete, a testimony from someone about a given moment can be complete. Perfect, too, inasmuch as in bringing a beginning into fruition.

 

Come to think of it, many things can be perfect and complete while still occurring within mortality. But filling a measure of creation does not imply being all things to all people.

 

I suppose so. But it will always be a subjective determination within rather narrow brackets. My inner grammar Nazi (thanks, Mr. P from 9th grade) still makes me want to nit pick the idea. 

 

And since when was an "objective" definition of perfection ever given?   And how could such a determination be made except subjectively?

 

It seems Mr P was not as familiar with the philosophy of language as he was apparently he was with nit picking grammar.  One can create many many perfectly grammatical sentences which make no sense whatsoever.

 

That doesn't mean you have to follow suit.

[mormonnewb]

I would say that they are a net positive. Yes, you read that correctly. I think that the Chirch did something right. Here is my (normally twisted) reasoning.

The ex-mos largely see the essays as "Ah ha! We told you so all the time!" They dismiss the church's faith-promoting theories and instead hold fast to "several months before her 15th birthday" type admissions. But in truth, nothing short of Christ appearing on Orange is the New Black (in a recurring role no less) would convince the ex-mos that the Church is true. NET NEUTRAL.

Those with firm testimonies seem blissfully unaware of the essays or if they have seen them, are completely comfortable with the church's explanations (and why shouldn't they be?). NET NEUTRAL

For my money, the questioners are the prime audience for these essays. As a perpetual questioner, I've found the essays to be, in the words of my favorite public intellectual Dr. Cornel West, "plausible but not persuasive." But hey, in matters of faith, that's pretty much all one can ask. Furthermore, the essays do take some sting out of the argument that the church is hiding things, which I see as THE major cause of disaffection. The other upside is that members can take solace in the fact that church leaders know "what's up." Perhaps, one of the most persuasive arguments to a member is "Hey, if this doesn't bother a man as smart as Elder Holland/Bednar/Packer/etc., then why are you still wrestling with it?" The only possible downside that I see is the essays serve as "hard evidence" for those who might have otherwise dismissed, say, the translation problems in the BOA as "anti-Mormon lies." That being said, I think the positives outweigh the potential negatives. NET GAIN.

WINNER: Church

I think the Church would be an even bigger winner if it could embrace the POSSIBILITY of a fallible and sometimes flawed JS, in which case, the essays wouldn't be needed in the first place. The Lutherans aren't publishing essays to reveal (and try to explain away) Martin Luther's heavy drinking, fits of anger, and erring doctrines. The Lutherans seem to have accepted that their prophet of the Reformation was a MAN. Perhaps, one day, we could accept that about our beloved prophet.

Edited June 18, 2015 by mormonnewb

[mfbukowski]

I wasn't really referring to the essays, just to the practice of a using perfection as some kind of life goal. It doesn't work well for me personally. It might for someone else. 

But you admitted you would like to do better than you are with charitable giving.  (So would I-)

 

So you must have some idea of what would be a goal to achieve in that regard?  For me, that would be "perfection"- doing the best one wants to do in a particular area.

 

What other definition could there be?

 

Certainly one can do charitable giving to excess- and end up homeless.  So a balance is necessary.  Such a balance in this area surely would constitute "perfection".

 

So isn't working toward a goal the same as working toward "perfection"?

 

I don't want to debate words here, but it seems to me that there is no practical difference between knowing what your goal is in any activity and seeing that as "perfection" of your efforts.

[Meadowchik]

The coolness of seeking perfection is that we never let ourselves get too comfortable and thus never stop learning and growing.

...we keep on knocking and God keeps opening doors to more gloriousness.

Edited June 18, 2015 by Meadowchik

[Robert F. Smith]

....................................................................................   

I think the Church would be an even bigger winner if it could embrace the POSSIBILITY of a fallible and sometimes flawed JS, in which case, the essays wouldn't be needed in the first place.

I think you err on both counts.  First, LDS people I know already consider Joseph to have been fallible, and I know no one who considers him infallible.  Second, the essays have nothing to do with an imaginary notion of fallibility/infallibility, but are instead based on the lack of familiarity of most Mormons with their history and the history of their Scriptural Canon.

 

The Lutherans aren't publishing essays to reveal (and try to explain away) Martin Luther's heavy drinking, fits of anger, and erring doctrines. The Lutherans seem to have accepted that their prophet of the Reformation was a MAN. Perhaps, one day, we could accept that about our beloved prophet.

The various Lutheran bodies have been publishing declarations of error and disavowing the horrific anti-Semitism of Martin Luther:

 

The Lutheran Church of Bavaria issued a statement: "It is imperative for the Lutheran Church, which knows itself to be indebted to the work and tradition of Martin Luther, to take seriously also his anti-Jewish utterances, to acknowledge their theological function, and to reflect on their consequences. It has to distance itself from every [expression of] anti-Judaism in Lutheran theology."  November 24, 1998, also printed in Freiburger Rundbrief, 6/3 (1999):191-197. For statements from other Lutheran bodies, see:

"Q&A: Luther's Anti-Semitism," Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod.

"Declaration of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America to the Jewish Community," Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, April 18, 1994.

"Statement of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada to the Jewish Communities in Canada," Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada, July 12–16, 1995.

 

So too other Protestant Churches:

"Time to Turn," The Evangelical Churches in Austria and the Jews. Declaration of the General Synod of the Evangelical Church A.B. and H.B., October 28, 1998.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies .

 

The same applies to the abject apology of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) for supporting slavery and racism:

"Resolution on Racial Reconciliation on the 150th Anniversary of the Southern Baptist Convention," Atlanta, Georgia, 1995.  http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/899/resolution-on-racial-reconciliation-on-the-150th-anniversary-of-the-southern-baptist-convention .

 

These statements of shame and repentance all came rather late, but better late than never.  Such bodies are to be congratulated for finally coming clean.

Edited June 19, 2015 by Robert F. Smith