The LDS Church, Charlottesville and continuing revelation

[stemelbow]

Let's consider anew the question of what is modern day revelation. 

I read an Op-ed in the desnews earlier that caught my eye.  In it we find:

Quote

They (the Church's two statements, I guess a second was need to clarify what the first did not, on the Charlottesville events) are also shaped by the Latter-day Saints’ essential doctrine of living revelation, which holds that God can and does continually speak in order to bring His children toward an ever clearer understanding of His mind, will and heart.

How do the statements reflect revelation?  Even the Pres. Hinckley statement made more than a decade ago can't really be revelation as much as just plain common sense. 

Apparently racism is far more a problem and uglier than I thought it was within the Church.  Seriously I didn't realize it even though I have raised a son who is black and has, mostly through ignorance or thoughtlessness of many members, been hurt.  But in the second Church statement we read:

Quote

It has been called to our attention that there are some among the various pro-white and white supremacy communities who assert that the Church is neutral toward or in support of their views.

I'd guess the only ones in that community would care what the Church felt about it would be members.  So, it seems, member white supremacists were asserting the Church is neutral or supported them.  That's terrible.  Too bad the Church had to issue a clarification for such members, I suppose. 

my God! how did we get here? 

[Guest]

We are not a Gov't of men, so I wonder why the Church needs to address something that happened in Virginia. Unless it has to do with the Church school there, or if members were involved. PR, departments are so often so bad a "Public Relations" one wonders where they learned their tradecraft. Just like Gov't's we are issuing statements and then waiting for backlash to issue another, or other statements. So, why do we feel the need to have an opinion on everything? 

Edited August 18, 2017 by Bill "Papa" Lee

[thesometimesaint]

33 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Let's consider anew the question of what is modern day revelation. 

I read an Op-ed in the desnews earlier that caught my eye.  In it we find:

How do the statements reflect revelation?  Even the Pres. Hinckley statement made more than a decade ago can't really be revelation as much as just plain common sense. 

Apparently racism is far more a problem and uglier than I thought it was within the Church.  Seriously I didn't realize it even though I have raised a son who is black and has, mostly through ignorance or thoughtlessness of many members, been hurt.  But in the second Church statement we read:

I'd guess the only ones in that community would care what the Church felt about it would be members.  So, it seems, member white supremacists were asserting the Church is neutral or supported them.  That's terrible.  Too bad the Church had to issue a clarification for such members, I suppose. 

my God! how did we get here? 

Common sense isn't very common. Plus I think that  it was revelation. Pity the racists in our midst, and the world didn't listen then.

[stemelbow]

5 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

We are not a Gov't of men, so I wonder why the Church needs to address something that happened in Virginia. Unless it has to do with the Church school there, or if members were involved. PR, departments are so often so bad a "Public Relations" one wonders where they learned their tradecraft. Just like Gov't's we are issuing statements and then waiting for backlash to issue another, or other statements. So, why do we feel the need to have an opinion on everything? 

After the first statement of "we feel sad for what happened.  But we're not racists" I felt the same as you--why is the Church commenting at all.  Now that it has commented twice, in some ways clarifying the previous comment, and adding that some have taken their first statement as neutral or something, I think it is true we must have a bunch of members who are supporting this white supremacy stuff.  I think that's they the Church has commented a couple of times. 

Yes.  I don't really think I care to hear a public sanctioned statement from the Church over anything and everything that happens.  If we get there, then shoot me (with a bb gun--'cause I still have other things to live for).

[stemelbow]

Just now, thesometimesaint said:

Common sense isn't very common. Plus I think that  it was revelation. Pity the racists in our midst, and the world didn't listen then.

So common sense is revelation?  most people seem to be full of revelation then.  If so, then the claim of revelation in the Church feels empty. 

[ksfisher]

40 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Apparently racism is far more a problem and uglier than I thought it was within the Church. 

 

What leads you to believe this?  There will always be a few who hold extreme views, but from my perspective the opposite is true, it's decreasing.  Is it just that the internet and social media amplify the voices of the extremists and make the problem appear larger than it actually is?

[Duncan]

If I had one wish I wish that somebody in General Conference would address this topic of racism and white supremacy, apparently they didn't get the message, and dismantle their arguments but it's like whack a mole, you get one down and another pop us. I have been debating on facebook 4 people in my stake who think that white supremacists and Naziism have a voice, perspective etc. and we need to hear it. Like Elaine Benes on TV's Seinfeld, 

 

[stemelbow]

12 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

What leads you to believe this?  There will always be a few who hold extreme views, but from my perspective the opposite is true, it's decreasing.  Is it just that the internet and social media amplify the voices of the extremists and make the problem appear larger than it actually is?

Ya got me.  I dont' know how to measure it. But that the Church felt the need to respond and suggest some have said the Church is neutral or in support makes me wonder how many it could be.  If it were some tiny few of a couple thousand LDS members doing such I don't know the Church would feel the need to comment.  Then again, as you suggest, a e couple thousand could seem amplified through social media efforts. 

[SteveO]

9 minutes ago, Duncan said:

 I have been debating on facebook 4 people in my stake who think that white supremacists and Naziism have a voice, perspective etc. and we need to hear it.

 

Nobody needs to hear it, and I think we should denounce it in anyway we can.  But I think it's of vital importance that they be allowed to speak and demonstrate--without violence or threats of violence.  You don't get to "punch a nazi" in a free democracy.  Are you sure that's not what members of your stake were trying to say?

[SteveO]

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Ya got me.  I dont' know how to measure it. But that the Church felt the need to respond and suggest some have said the Church is neutral or in support makes me wonder how many it could be.  If it were some tiny few of a couple thousand LDS members doing such I don't know the Church would feel the need to comment.  Then again, as you suggest, a e couple thousand could seem amplified through social media efforts. 

I've tried tuning out the news lately, but from what I understand, this group has been having this demonstration for the past 17 years...they've been largely ignored and rightly so.  In fact the DailyShow a number of years ago covered a KKK rally and devoted an entire segment to ridiculing it and making light of the entire thing.  

I think the church's statement is more for anyone reading the online comments from racist members (a very small number IMO) and thinking there is any basis for their claims

[ksfisher]

3 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Ya got me.  I dont' know how to measure it. But that the Church felt the need to respond and suggest some have said the Church is neutral or in support makes me wonder how many it could be.  If it were some tiny few of a couple thousand LDS members doing such I don't know the Church would feel the need to comment.  Then again, as you suggest, a e couple thousand could seem amplified through social media efforts. 

I hope and think that this is a case of a few stupid people with loud voices.  I feel that the vast majority of church members understand that the gospel and racism are incompatible. 

[Duncan]

28 minutes ago, SteveO said:

Nobody needs to hear it, and I think we should denounce it in anyway we can.  But I think it's of vital importance that they be allowed to speak and demonstrate--without violence or threats of violence.  You don't get to "punch a nazi" in a free democracy.  Are you sure that's not what members of your stake were trying to say?

One is saying violence against the left and antifa and BLM are just as bad as Naziism (yeah right) the others are mostly saying about free speech is subjective, Naziism isn't that bad, it's a perspective, somebody said something about the "white baby challenge". For me, we've seen their demonstrations and heard their speech and we don't want it, seen it, heard it all before, fought a war for 6 years over it and we're done with it. My father was in the Hitler Youth, he joined the Church 55 years ago now and he wants Naziism gone and it sickens him to see these rallies and everything.

Edited August 18, 2017 by Duncan

[thesometimesaint]

41 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

So common sense is revelation?  most people seem to be full of revelation then.  If so, then the claim of revelation in the Church feels empty. 

Not what I said. The two aren't mutually exclusive.  IE: It was a revelation to the Israelite's, they were used to the relative bounty of Egypt,  to not eat pork products. Pigs are a natural competitor to humans for food. In a desert environment with scarce food resources the keeping of pigs becomes problematic. 

[Tacenda]

33 minutes ago, Duncan said:

If I had one wish I wish that somebody in General Conference would address this topic of racism and white supremacy, apparently they didn't get the message, and dismantle their arguments but it's like whack a mole, you get one down and another pop us. I have been debating on facebook 4 people in my stake who think that white supremacists and Naziism have a voice, perspective etc. and we need to hear it. Like Elaine Benes on TV's Seinfeld, 

 

Duncan, my own brother and nephew seem to be the same. In fact I just watched a SNL episode with Tina Fey that I don't dare "Like" or "Share" on FB. If it's okay with the OP, I'll link. But am glad the church is making these statements, but it does seem to be doing so possibly because our past history. Nothing wrong with it. Even Mitt Romney's statement and asking Trump to apologise, I guess we need to speak loudly! I hope more church's join in!

Mitt Romney: "I will dispense for now from discussion of the moral character of the president's Charlottesville statements. Whether he intended to or not, what he communicated caused racists to rejoice, minorities to weep, and the vast heart of America to mourn. His apologists strain to explain that he didn't mean what we heard. But what we heard is now the reality, and unless it is addressed by the president as such, with unprecedented candor and strength, there may commence an unraveling of our national fabric.

The leaders of our branches of military service have spoken immediately and forcefully, repudiating the implications of the president's words. Why? In part because the morale and commitment of our forces--made up and sustained by men and women of all races--could be in the balance. Our allies around the world are stunned and our enemies celebrate; America's ability to help secure a peaceful and prosperous world is diminished. And who would want to come to the aid of a country they perceive as racist if ever the need were to arise, as it did after 9/11?

In homes across the nation, children are asking their parents what this means. Jews, blacks, Hispanics, Muslims are as much a part of America as whites and Protestants. But today they wonder. Where might this lead? To bitterness and tears, or perhaps to anger and violence?

The potential consequences are severe in the extreme. Accordingly, the president must take remedial action in the extreme. He should address the American people, acknowledge that he was wrong, apologize. State forcefully and unequivocally that racists are 100% to blame for the murder and violence in Charlottesville. Testify that there is no conceivable comparison or moral equivalency between the Nazis--who brutally murdered millions of Jews and who hundreds of thousands of Americans gave their lives to defeat--and the counter-protestors who were outraged to see fools parading the Nazi flag, Nazi armband and Nazi salute. And once and for all, he must definitively repudiate the support of David Duke and his ilk and call for every American to banish racists and haters from any and every association.

This is a defining moment for President Trump. But much more than that, it is a moment that will define America in the hearts of our children. They are watching, our soldiers are watching, the world is watching. Mr. President, act now for the good of the country."

www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tina-fey-sheet-caking_us_599675d0e4b0e8cc855cce85?utm_campaign=hp_fb_pages&utm_source=women_fb&utm_medium=facebook&ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000046

 

 

[Duncan]

4 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Duncan, my own brother and nephew seem to be the same. In fact I just watched a SNL episode with Tina Fey that I don't dare "Like" or "Share" on FB. If it's okay with the OP, I'll link. But am glad the church is making these statements, but it does seem to be doing so possibly because our past history. Nothing wrong with it. Even Mitt Romney's statement and asking Trump to apologise, I guess we need to speak loudly! I hope more church's join in!

Mitt Romney: "I will dispense for now from discussion of the moral character of the president's Charlottesville statements. Whether he intended to or not, what he communicated caused racists to rejoice, minorities to weep, and the vast heart of America to mourn. His apologists strain to explain that he didn't mean what we heard. But what we heard is now the reality, and unless it is addressed by the president as such, with unprecedented candor and strength, there may commence an unraveling of our national fabric.

The leaders of our branches of military service have spoken immediately and forcefully, repudiating the implications of the president's words. Why? In part because the morale and commitment of our forces--made up and sustained by men and women of all races--could be in the balance. Our allies around the world are stunned and our enemies celebrate; America's ability to help secure a peaceful and prosperous world is diminished. And who would want to come to the aid of a country they perceive as racist if ever the need were to arise, as it did after 9/11?

In homes across the nation, children are asking their parents what this means. Jews, blacks, Hispanics, Muslims are as much a part of America as whites and Protestants. But today they wonder. Where might this lead? To bitterness and tears, or perhaps to anger and violence?

The potential consequences are severe in the extreme. Accordingly, the president must take remedial action in the extreme. He should address the American people, acknowledge that he was wrong, apologize. State forcefully and unequivocally that racists are 100% to blame for the murder and violence in Charlottesville. Testify that there is no conceivable comparison or moral equivalency between the Nazis--who brutally murdered millions of Jews and who hundreds of thousands of Americans gave their lives to defeat--and the counter-protestors who were outraged to see fools parading the Nazi flag, Nazi armband and Nazi salute. And once and for all, he must definitively repudiate the support of David Duke and his ilk and call for every American to banish racists and haters from any and every association.

This is a defining moment for President Trump. But much more than that, it is a moment that will define America in the hearts of our children. They are watching, our soldiers are watching, the world is watching. Mr. President, act now for the good of the country."

www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tina-fey-sheet-caking_us_599675d0e4b0e8cc855cce85?utm_campaign=hp_fb_pages&utm_source=women_fb&utm_medium=facebook&ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000046

 

 

rep point! nobody in our family think Nazi's or the KKK need to share their freedom of expression. if they try to take our rights to freely express ourselves, I just point out DC 105 that God will fight our battles!

[Amulek]

57 minutes ago, Duncan said:

...somebody said something about the "white baby challenge".

Oh, my. Hopefully it isn't anything like the Saltine cracker challenge...

[Robert F. Smith]

5 hours ago, stemelbow said:

.........................................................the Pres. Hinckley statement made more than a decade ago can't really be revelation as much as just plain common sense. 

That an inspired statement, whether from you or from Pres Hinckley, might be commonsensical is O.K. by me.  Nothing revolutionary or eathshaking need be said to be inspired.

Quote

Apparently racism is far more a problem and uglier than I thought it was within the Church.  Seriously I didn't realize it even though I have raised a son who is black and has, mostly through ignorance or thoughtlessness of many members, been hurt.  But in the second Church statement we read:

I'd guess the only ones in that community would care what the Church felt about it would be members.  So, it seems, member white supremacists were asserting the Church is neutral or supported them.  That's terrible.  Too bad the Church had to issue a clarification for such members, I suppose. 

my God! how did we get here? 

Why do you assume that those within the LDS Church are the only ones who care?  People outside the LDS faith constantly make statements about us and use us as allies or enemies, depending on the needs of the moment.  We do  know that racism is very strong within the fundamentalist polygamous community.  The regular LDS community has never shown more racism per capita than other American groups, such as Presbyterians, Methodists, etc.  Indeed, the sort of racist comments which I used to hear occasionally among Mormons in the 50s and 60s are now just absent and unheard.

Edited August 19, 2017 by Robert F. Smith

[stemelbow]

4 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

That an inspired statement, whether from you or from Pres Hinckley, might be commonsensical is O.K. by me.  Nothing revolutionary or eathshaking need be said to be inspired.

I'd agree.  Just wondering if it's the special kind of revelation that the Church says it has exclusive claim to.  Inspired thoughts are everywhere. 

4 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Why do you assume that those within the LDS Church are the only ones who care?  People outside the LDS faith constantly make statements about us and use as as allies or enemies, depending on the needs of the moment.  We do  know that racism is very strong within the fundamentalist polygamous community.  The regular LDS community has never shown more racism per capita than other American groups, such as Presbyterians, Methodists, etc.  Indeed, the sort of racist comments which I used to hear occasionally among Mormons in the 50s and 60s are now just absent and unheard.

I can't imagine some random atheist out there proclaiming "the LDS Church either supports or is neutral on White Supremacy".  If the statement was made for such a person, I wonder if it'd ever reach him/her. 

[Duncan]

28 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Oh, my. Hopefully it isn't anything like the Saltine cracker challenge...

or the cinammon challenge

[Glenn101]

2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

Ya got me.  I dont' know how to measure it. But that the Church felt the need to respond and suggest some have said the Church is neutral or in support makes me wonder how many it could be.  If it were some tiny few of a couple thousand LDS members doing such I don't know the Church would feel the need to comment.  Then again, as you suggest, a e couple thousand could seem amplified through social media efforts. 

One such person is one too many. Remember Helmuth in another thread? All members need to know the Church's stance. I am glad the leadership of the church made the statement and then later provided additional commentary. Let's not strain about whether it was inspiration, revelation, or secular information. The revelation portion was from an opinion piece in the Deseret News and not an official statement from the Church. The church statement merely said that it had come to their attention. No mention of the gift and power of God. 

Glenn

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, stemelbow said:

................................................ I can't imagine some random atheist out there proclaiming "the LDS Church either supports or is neutral on White Supremacy".  If the statement was made for such a person, I wonder if it'd ever reach him/her.

The LDS faith is constantly accused by non-Mormons of being racist.  Mormons are often in the news, especially when LDS candidates run for office nationally.  I am astonished that you are unaware of the bad press we get.

[strappinglad]

Are there any LDS who are ' prepers" ? Are there any who belong to militias? Are there any who store weapons and ammo? When one associates with groups of this mindset, one is exposed to ideas held by some , if not a majority, of participants. Sadly there comes with the idea of " us against the world " , the hatred of people seen as ' the world ' .

Recent wall to wall media coverage of events has likely done much to recruit more extremists to the cause .We shoot ourselves in the foot with hyperbolic ranting. Many I have heard would be overjoyed to see all the Neo-Nazis and KKK lined up against a wall and shot , not seeing the irony in that position visa vie past history.

In hunting for a famous quote I found this tidbit, actually a tad big: http://quoteinvestigator.com/2015/06/01/defend-say/

Edited August 19, 2017 by strappinglad

[Duncan]

29 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

Are there any LDS who are ' prepers" ? Are there any who belong to militias? Are there any who store weapons and ammo? When one associates with groups of this mindset, one is exposed to ideas held by some , if not a majority, of participants. Sadly there comes with the idea of " us against the world " , the hatred of people seen as ' the world ' .

Recent wall to wall media coverage of events has likely done much to recruit more extremists to the cause .We shoot ourselves in the foot with hyperbolic ranting. Many I have heard would be overjoyed to see all the Neo-Nazis and KKK lined up against a wall and shot , not seeing the irony in that position visa vie past history.

In hunting for a famous quote I found this tidbit, actually a tad big: http://quoteinvestigator.com/2015/06/01/defend-say/

does society need Naziism or white supremacy? why do they need a voice? I'm sure more people don't want them than hate our freedom of expression, God will fight our battles as per 105. 

[sunstoned]

9 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

We are not a Gov't of men, so I wonder why the Church needs to address something that happened in Virginia. Unless it has to do with the Church school there, or if members were involved. PR, departments are so often so bad a "Public Relations" one wonders where they learned their tradecraft. Just like Gov't's we are issuing statements and then waiting for backlash to issue another, or other statements. So, why do we feel the need to have an opinion on everything? 

I think in this case there is at least one prominent alt-right Mormon blogger who quite outspoken in support of what she calls "white culture" and she has a large following.  I think (and this is just a guess) that the church wanted to clarify that it does not endorse this type of thing.

[The Nehor]

8 hours ago, SteveO said:

Nobody needs to hear it, and I think we should denounce it in anyway we can.  But I think it's of vital importance that they be allowed to speak and demonstrate--without violence or threats of violence.  You don't get to "punch a nazi" in a free democracy.  Are you sure that's not what members of your stake were trying to say?

While I agree with you because it is important to preserve freedom I admit there is a part of me that would find it deliciously and hilariously ironic and cathartic to start rounding up Nazis and throwing them into camps.