Interesting Oped In The Trib - Progressive Mormonism

[Gray]

New Order Mormon theme song - Blue Sunday?

 

Yuk yuk yuk. 

[JAHS]

If the Church's truth claims are true, including its current position and statements on its hierarchical authority, then very few of those things on the list could happen absent revelation.  What does it say about the testimony of these hypothetical members, that they would leave if revelation were to guide the Church in a "progressive" direction?

I just don't think that some of those things will ever happen, even by revelation. It's a fallacious argument IMO.  

 

I guess I'm mostly thinking about those members with various levels of testimony strength who might be led away from the gospel by fast talking charismatic individuals who don't like the way things are going in the church.

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."  (Matt 7: 15)

 

And if it's not the wolves there's still the tares among the wheat that can also do some damage.

 

"But the Lord saith unto them, pluck not up the tares while the blade is yet tender (for verily your faith is weak), lest you destroy the wheat also." (D&C 6:6)

[cinepro]

Are the socalled New Order Mormons considered part of this group?

 

I would say that New Order Mormons are not a part of this group.

 

As described here:

 

New Order Mormons are those who no longer believe some (or much) of the dogma or doctrines of the LDS Church, but who want to maintain membership for cultural, social, or even spiritual reasons. New Order Mormons recognize both good and bad in the Church, and have determined that the Church does not have to be perfect in order to remain useful. New Order Mormons seek the middle way to be Mormon.

 

http://www.newordermormon.org/

 

 

It is my impression that while New Order Mormons would like to see the Church change in many ways, and are welcoming to that change when it does happen, they aren't advocating for it.  They've written off most Church claims (and much Church doctrine) completely, and aren't trying to salvage a traditional "testimony".

[Scott Lloyd]

I would say that New Order Mormons are not a part of this group.

 

As described here:

 

 

 

 

It is my impression that while New Order Mormons would like to see the Church change in many ways, and are welcoming to that change when it does happen, they aren't advocating for it.  They've written off most Church claims (and much Church doctrine) completely, and aren't trying to salvage a traditional "testimony".

So perhaps we can conclude, then, that a new-order Mormon is a "progressive" Mormon who has accepted the reality he cannot hijack the Church and change it to suit his whims.

Edited July 20, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

Agreed.  Substituting the church for God is a mistake, an easy one to make for flawed mortals, but one that can cause us to sell our birthright for a mess of pottage.  That is not a critique of the church(es) but an acknowledgment of the tendency to mistake the vehicle for the destination.

It is an even bigger error for one to suppose that he can sever the Church from God and still be on the right track.

Edited July 20, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Sleeper Cell]

And Community of Christ is growing as more Latter-day Seekers are drawn to the Covenant and the Mission Initiatives. Conversion to Community of Christ is less about progressiveness and more about a broadening and deepening relationship with Christ and His mission.

 

Are you referring to overall church growth or merely to growth in places with large LDS populations?  If the former, could you please provide a reference.  Not a formal CFR, just curious, as it has been my understanding that CofC membership has been consistently falling (especially in the US) for the last 30 years -- and that largely because the CofC has become more “progressive.” 

 

Frankly, I have been surprised that more “progressive LDS” haven’t joined the CofC -- even before they instituted their “latter-day seeker“ program.  After all, if one does not accept the LDS Church’s unique restoration claims, questions the divine authority of its leaders, and is unhappy with LDS teachings, why not join a church with more compatible doctrines?  Especially since the old LDS/RLDS animosities appear to be pretty much a thing of the past.

 

I understand that, for many, social/family pressures can be a factor.  But it is my sense that even few of those who have formally resigned their membership or have been excommunicated for apostasy have joined the CofC.  While I am not advocating that anyone leave the LDS Church, I would suggest that joining the CofC or another church more to one’s liking would seem to be a more constructive alternative than participating in a “mass resignation ceremony” or spending much of one’s time bitterly denouncing the LDS Church.  

 

BTW, the reason I joined the LDS church was also "more about a broadening and deepening relationship with Christ and His mission."

[JAHS]

So we perhaps we can conclude, then, that a new-order Mormon is a "progressive" Mormon who has accepted the reality he cannot hijack the Church and change it to suit his whims.

A new-order Mormon might USE to have been a progressive mormon who has given up on actively trying to cause change.  I think there are also NOMs who never were progressives; they just decide they don't like some doctrines and stop believing in them.

[Sleeper Cell]

If the Church's truth claims are true, including its current position and statements on its hierarchical authority, then very few of those things on the list could happen absent revelation.  What does it say about the testimony of these hypothetical members, that they would leave if revelation were to guide the Church in a "progressive" direction?

For starters, it says that TBMs are not the unthinking “sheeple” that some portray them to be.

[mapman]

I don't like the way that she lumps so many people together. I object especially to (2) that "progressive Mormons" are more likely to reject the church's unique restoration claims. I think that there are two distinct communities that she is conflating. The "Bloggernacle" is inhabited primarily by "progressives" that would like to see certain changes in the church but also believe in the church's claims. Then there's the NOM people who are less likely to believe in the church's claims. For me, there is a big difference between the two communities. I identify with several of the points in the list, but the reality of the fullness of the Gospel and the Restoration is central to my identity as a person, so I feel like that sets me significantly apart from Mormons who don't believe in the church's doctrine.

[KevinG]

Where do Internet Mormons and Chapel Mormons fit into this?  

[Scott Lloyd]

Where do Internet Mormons and Chapel Mormons fit into this?  

"Chapel Mormons" are the straw men that "Progressive Mormons" joust against -- like saying Mormons only do literal interpretations of scripture.

[ERayR]

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/2735147-155/op-ed-what-do-progressive-mormons-want

 

So according to this article progressives are less likely to accept:

(1) obedience to authority above personal inspiration

(2) the LDS Church's unique restoration claims

(3) literal interpretations of scripture

(4) strict traditional observances (i.e. Sabbath observance, modesty, tattoos, Word of Wisdom, etc.)

(5) the unquestioned authority of the leaders of the LDS Church.

 

and Progressives want the Church to:

1. Increase gender equality

2. Apologize for the racist past and mistreatment of LGBT members

3. Accept married gay couples at all levels

4. Permit members to openly question the authority, teachings and decisions of LDS Church leadership

5. Provide financial transparency in the use of tithes

6. Address the mistakes of polygamy and de-canonize Doctrine & Covenants 132

7. Teach the truth and troubling facts of church history (specifically surrounding Joseph Smith)

8. Speak openly of Heavenly Mother

9. Use tithes and offerings more to help the poor and needy and less on capital projects (temples, churches, commercial buildings, etc.)

10. Stop excommunicating people for openly questioning or expressing doubts

 

So while I am very clearly NOT a progressive, I have two questions for the board:

1. Do you consider this article accurate - which points are and which points are not?

2. Do you consider these ideas and ideals to be in keeping with the restored gospel and scripture and if not, what is the source of such ideas and ideals?

 

There are a few that I can agree with, and quite a few that I vehemently disagree with.  So, discuss!

 

My question:  If the progressives were to get all they wanted then whose Church would it be?

[Gray]

A new-order Mormon might USE to have been a progressive mormon who has given up on actively trying to cause change.  I think there are also NOMs who never were progressives; they just decide they don't like some doctrines and stop believing in them.

 

Yes, I think it's possible to be quite conservative and yet a NOM

[TheSkepticChristian]

and Progressives want the Church to:

1. Increase gender equality

2. Apologize for the racist past and mistreatment of LGBT members

3. Accept married gay couples at all levels

4. Permit members to openly question the authority, teachings and decisions of LDS Church leadership

5. Provide financial transparency in the use of tithes

6. Address the mistakes of polygamy and de-canonize Doctrine & Covenants 132

7. Teach the truth and troubling facts of church history (specifically surrounding Joseph Smith)

8. Speak openly of Heavenly Mother

9. Use tithes and offerings more to help the poor and needy and less on capital projects (temples, churches, commercial buildings, etc.)

10. Stop excommunicating people for openly questioning or expressing doubts

 

 

It is not totally accurate. I refuse to call myself a progressive, but I am probably the most progressive in MDDB. 

 

1. The Priesthood position of the church is not sexist. 

2. Agree, for racist comments and speculation. 

3. 2nd amendment and separation of church and state. 

4. no comment

5. Agree 

6. I disagree, what is wrong with Polygamy? Nothing. 

7. It already did 

8. no comment 

9. Agree

10. It depends 

Edited July 20, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[ERayR]

It is not totally accurate. I refuse to call myself a progressive, but I am probably the most progressive in MDDB. 

 

1. The Priesthood position of the church is not sexist. 

2. Agreed

3. 2nd amendment and separation of church and state. 

4. no comment

5. Agree 

6. I disagree, what is wrong with D&C 132? Nothing. 

7. It already did 

8. no comment 

9. Agree

10. It depends 

 

Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back.

[Damien the Leper]

Are you referring to overall church growth or merely to growth in places with large LDS populations?  If the former, could you please provide a reference.  Not a formal CFR, just curious, as it has been my understanding that CofC membership has been consistently falling (especially in the US) for the last 30 years -- and that largely because the CofC has become more “progressive.” 

 

Frankly, I have been surprised that more “progressive LDS” haven’t joined the CofC -- even before they instituted their “latter-day seeker“ program.  After all, if one does not accept the LDS Church’s unique restoration claims, questions the divine authority of its leaders, and is unhappy with LDS teachings, why not join a church with more compatible doctrines?  Especially since the old LDS/RLDS animosities appear to be pretty much a thing of the past.

 

I understand that, for many, social/family pressures can be a factor.  But it is my sense that even few of those who have formally resigned their membership or have been excommunicated for apostasy have joined the CofC.  While I am not advocating that anyone leave the LDS Church, I would suggest that joining the CofC or another church more to one’s liking would seem to be a more constructive alternative than participating in a “mass resignation ceremony” or spending much of one’s time bitterly denouncing the LDS Church.  

 

BTW, the reason I joined the LDS church was also "more about a broadening and deepening relationship with Christ and His mission."

It is localized growth.

[TheSkepticChristian]

Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back.

 

People like you make less feel smart, you hurt me feelings  

Edited July 20, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[Jeanne]

I don't like the way that she lumps so many people together. I object especially to (2) that "progressive Mormons" are more likely to reject the church's unique restoration claims. I think that there are two distinct communities that she is conflating. The "Bloggernacle" is inhabited primarily by "progressives" that would like to see certain changes in the church but also believe in the church's claims. Then there's the NOM people who are less likely to believe in the church's claims. For me, there is a big difference between the two communities. I identify with several of the points in the list, but the reality of the fullness of the Gospel and the Restoration is central to my identity as a person, so I feel like that sets me significantly apart from Mormons who don't believe in the church's doctrine

I perfectly agree about lumping people together.  I left the church but as far away as anti as you can possibly get for one who is no longer a member. 

Edited July 20, 2015 by Jeanne

[ttribe]

People like you make feel smart 

 

If you are going to insult someone's intelligence in the written form, you should probably make sure your sentence is complete...just sayin'.

[Calm]

If you are going to insult someone's intelligence in the written form, you should probably make sure your sentence is complete...just sayin'.

Thank you for saying that so I didn't have to.

[TheSkepticChristian]

If you are going to insult someone's intelligence in the written form, you should probably make sure your sentence is complete...just sayin'.

 

Why look at my grammar, but ignore my arguments?

[Stone holm]

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/2735147-155/op-ed-what-do-progressive-mormons-want

 

So according to this article progressives are less likely to accept:

(1) obedience to authority above personal inspiration

(2) the LDS Church's unique restoration claims

(3) literal interpretations of scripture

(4) strict traditional observances (i.e. Sabbath observance, modesty, tattoos, Word of Wisdom, etc.)

(5) the unquestioned authority of the leaders of the LDS Church.

 

and Progressives want the Church to:

1. Increase gender equality

2. Apologize for the racist past and mistreatment of LGBT members

3. Accept married gay couples at all levels

4. Permit members to openly question the authority, teachings and decisions of LDS Church leadership

5. Provide financial transparency in the use of tithes

6. Address the mistakes of polygamy and de-canonize Doctrine & Covenants 132

7. Teach the truth and troubling facts of church history (specifically surrounding Joseph Smith)

8. Speak openly of Heavenly Mother

9. Use tithes and offerings more to help the poor and needy and less on capital projects (temples, churches, commercial buildings, etc.)

10. Stop excommunicating people for openly questioning or expressing doubts

 

So while I am very clearly NOT a progressive, I have two questions for the board:

1. Do you consider this article accurate - which points are and which points are not?

2. Do you consider these ideas and ideals to be in keeping with the restored gospel and scripture and if not, what is the source of such ideas and ideals?

 

There are a few that I can agree with, and quite a few that I vehemently disagree with.  So, discuss!

[Stone holm]

Well, consider myself a progressive and a Mormon, but there are only a couple of the things on the list that I want the Church to do, namely 7 and 8, but I don't think either have anything to do with being Progressive. I do think Progressives are more resistant to doing what they are told. The Progressive Mormons that I know only resent the right wing politics in Church and the Uber capitalism. A few resent the sexism, but they tend not to be overly vocal about it. The most extreme out here sympathize with the views of those who want discussion of women in the priesthood. I don't know of any who think that the Church should embrace SSM as a Church approved status, but they do oppose the prohibition by legislation of SSM of non members. Those who would have embraced such a stance, have already left the Church out here. This seems like more of a radical description of the Dehlin big tent Mormons than Progressives.

[carbon dioxide]

5. Provide financial transparency in the use of tithes.

 

On the surface this seems sensible and no big deal.  As I think more on it, I believe most of the members really don't care that much.  Most of the people who really do care just want to find something to attack the Church on in how it spends its resources.  So I say keep the current policy as is and not give these people what they want. 

[thesometimesaint]

I'm not a bit troubled by number 7. and for number 8 we can speak about HM all we want(There isn't a much known about her other than she exists, and I would like to know more). We are asked not to pray to her in our public prayers, but what someone does in the privacy of their own home is between them and God. I agree they have nothing to do with being Progressive or not.