Interesting Oped In The Trib - Progressive Mormonism

[smac97]

As an FYI, I saw the article referenced in the OP within an hour or so of it coming up.  I decided to not post anything about it.

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

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 

So, you are not for the 2nd amendment which is in the constitution but you are for separation of church and state, which is not in the constitution? Not sure why you even brought this up. Why am I even commenting? Oh well.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Why look at my grammar, but ignore my arguments?

What argument? It is hard to grasp what you say when your sentience make 0 sense.

[ttribe]

Why look at my grammar, but ignore my arguments?

 

I wasn't interested in either side of the argument you were engaged in.  I was simply suggesting that it's a bad idea to insult someone's intelligence while simultaneously failing to do so using a complete sentence.  There's a certain irony there that undermines anything you were trying to accomplish.

[cinepro]

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.

 

That's probably the most accurate way to put it, from what I've seen. 

[TheSkepticChristian]

So, you are not for the 2nd amendment which is in the constitution but you are for separation of church and state, which is not in the constitution? Not sure why you even brought this up. Why am I even commenting? Oh well.

 

What are you talking about?

[Robert F. Smith]

 Come now, we all know that President Monson has his ' minions' and that they read everything and report the slightest deviance from orthodox thought.

You'll get yours, strappinglad.  We've got your number.  

[Robert F. Smith]

 

Sounds pretty much like the Community of Christ (RLDS) Church -- with the added advantage that they never accepted D&C 132, or made the “mistakes of polygamy” in the first place.  

 

Except that they officially recognized that Joseph Smith Jr had indeed implemented polygyny (which they had always denied).  Is that a progressive or conservative move?

[Robert F. Smith]

I wish we could teach Mormons what they had but they are stuck using the same old sectarian vocabulary which drives people away from the church instead of making them understand it.

 

We have the restored gospel but we still use all the same terminology as the sectarians and want to prove we are just like them.   Go figure.

That is the contradiction in terms for a faith which is the most progressive of all the Christian faiths, and yet camouflages itself like some evangelical sect.  Yet some of  the sectarians are not fooled one bit.  They already recognize that Grandma has the teeth of a wolf, and that she is getting ready to bite.  Others think that the Mormons actually believe they can be saved by grace alone.  They won't realize until too late that the Jabberwock has them in his glorious maw.

[Mars]

That is the contradiction in terms for a faith which is the most progressive of all the Christian faiths, and yet camouflages itself like some evangelical sect.  Yet some of  the sectarians are not fooled one bit.  They already recognize that Grandma has the teeth of a wolf, and that she is getting ready to bite.  Others think that the Mormons actually believe they can be saved by grace alone.  They won't realize until too late that the Jabberwock has them in his glorious maw.

 

i don't understand this parable but i know what a jabberwocky is.

[NEDRA]

New Order Mormon is just a take-off on New Order Amish. Old Order Amish=strict, conservative, rigid. New Order Amish=more flexible, modern. It's an actual term. Has nothing to do with 1980s pop.

[Stone holm]

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.

To be honest, I don't think the Progressives think that much about changing the Church and its doctrines, they just get annoyed with the politics.

[KevinG]

You'll get yours, strappinglad.  We've got your number.  

 

First the NSA then the Danites.  Oh boy are you in trouble!

[Stone holm]

So, you are not for the 2nd amendment which is in the constitution but you are for separation of church and state, which is not in the constitution? Not sure why you even brought this up. Why am I even commenting? Oh well.

Yes the 2nd Amendment is in the Constitution and was the last of the Bill of Rights to be applied to the States via the 14th Amendment. The language of the 2nd Amendment suggests that it really should not have been applied to the States, but SCOTUS reached out and pulled it in. Separation of Church and State is directly derived from the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment, it is the flip-side of the religious clauses coin, the other being the Free Exercise Clause. The Establishment Clause which originally only applied to the Federal Government, Massachusetts didn't do away with their established Church until the 1830's. It is interesting that the Establishment Clause was designed after the Virginia Resolutions which were passed via a collaboration between Jefferson and the Evangelicals since the latter were afraid of being snuffed out by the Anglicans which were the dominant sect. Now the Evangelicals having dominance in the South want to read it out of the Constitution. Where did you get the notion that the Constitution did not provide for Separation of Church and State? Pat Robertson?

[thesometimesaint]

The same people who wrote the US Constitution also wrote the Treaty of Tripoli.

 

SEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli

Article 11 reads:

 

Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen [Muslims]; and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan [Muslim] nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.