Popular Post Scott Lloyd Posted March 26, 2018 Popular Post Posted March 26, 2018 Attendant to the inevitable chatter about ethnic consideration in the approaching selection of two new apostles, Dan Peterson has posted this satire on his blog. Like any good satire, it is at once incisive and insightful. A couple of noteworthy snippets: Quote “The ‘apostles,’ as they’re being called, are virtually all backwater Galileans like Yeshua himself,” observed Caiphas of Jerusalem. “He missed a real opportunity with these choices.” “Where’s the diversity?” asked Bar Kosiba, a prominent authority on new religious movements. “Shouldn’t these men, who are supposed to direct international missionary efforts for the Yeshua operation, look like their intended audience? This strikes me as an absolutely epic fail. At the very least, Yeshua’s choices represent a striking lack of imagination on his part.” Quote Others have called attention to what they termed the “inbreeding” between the twelve chosen leaders. ... “I couldn’t be more satisfied,” quipped Marcus Twanius, “if the entire Zebedee family fishing outfit had officially endorsed Yeshua’s claims!” “It seems,” says Bar Kosiba, “that these quite undistinguished men weren’t chosen so much by ‘revelation’ as by ‘relation.’” 7
Popular Post Thinking Posted March 26, 2018 Popular Post Posted March 26, 2018 Critics will be shocked if a non-white apostle is called who is young enough to ascend to be prophet. 5
Robert F. Smith Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 Another snippet Quote Others, notably Professor Dionysius Exiguus, call attention to the lack of theological training among the new leadership of what he derides as “Yeshua Inc.” None of the “apostles,” he points out, seems to have received any formal scribal or legal education. Instead, they appear to have been chosen for their business acumen. With regard specifically to Peter, James, John, and Andrew, however, Dionysius remarks that running a commercial fishing venture is nothing like leading a religious movement. “You can’t fish for men,” he says. “And mending nets scarcely qualifies anybody to mend souls. Anybody expecting depth from this conspicuously shallow group of rustics would be better off searching for it in the Sea of Galilee.” 1
Popular Post smac97 Posted March 26, 2018 Popular Post Posted March 26, 2018 1 hour ago, Thinking said: Critics will be shocked if a non-white apostle is called who is young enough to ascend to be prophet. And/or they will dismiss such a calling as a token. Pandering. In the aggregate, there is no placating the critics of the LDS Church. Thanks, -Smac 5
Jeanne Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 1 hour ago, Thinking said: Critics will be shocked if a non-white apostle is called who is young enough to ascend to be prophet. And/or pleasantly surprised!! 1
cinepro Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 1 hour ago, Thinking said: Critics will be shocked if a non-white apostle is called who is young enough to ascend to be prophet. The world is moving so fast now, I honestly don't think anyone called at this conference would become prophet soon enough to make a difference. Can you imagine what the reaction would have been if, on the day Russell M. Nelson was called, someone predicted the major issues he'd be facing when he became Prophet in 2018 would be the growing acceptance of gay marriage and homosexuality, declining growth, and the fallout from an admitted sexual assaulter who at that moment was serving as President of the Provo MTC? 3
Thinking Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 34 minutes ago, smac97 said: And/or they will dismiss such a calling as a token. If he's young enough to ascend to the presidency, we would not consider it a token.
Duncan Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 I was talking the other day to a friend of mine and we were saying, how much impact does an Apostle have on our lives? We will never most likely meet them, only hear them twice a year and we didn't grow up with their kids or was their law partner or something. I am not saying they are irrelevant but what would they say that would impact my life enough to change stuff? usually people you know and know you have more of an impact on your day to day operations, rather than Elder Jentreigh W. Dubbleme, from Lunchbucket Falls, Utah, who is an Apostle 2
HappyJackWagon Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 34 minutes ago, smac97 said: And/or they will dismiss such a calling as a token. Pandering. In the aggregate, there is no placating the critics of the LDS Church. Thanks, -Smac Maybe, maybe not. It's true that if one loses trust in an individual or an institution it becomes harder to trust the motivations of that person or institution. Assumptions and judgments will be made. Some will be fair. Some won't. Personally, I would feel rather circumspect in declaring any choice of a racially diverse apostle to be an amazing change for the church. While I think it would be good, it certainly wouldn't be some panacea that would cure my trust issues with the church. So while I hope to see some diversity, and I think it's important and would be in the church's best interest to move that direction, I harbor no delusions about what such a choice would mean.
ttribe Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 44 minutes ago, smac97 said: And/or they will dismiss such a calling as a token. Pandering. In the aggregate, there is no placating the critics of the LDS Church. Thanks, -Smac As long as that is the prevailing attitude, then you will always be right. Congratulations. 1
Jeanne Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 Smac...you don't even come close to the way critics thinks sometimes...and seriously..how would you even know..or care? 1
smac97 Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 17 minutes ago, ttribe said: Quote And/or they will dismiss such a calling as a token. Pandering. In the aggregate, there is no placating the critics of the LDS Church. Thanks, -Smac As long as that is the prevailing attitude, then you will always be right. Congratulations. It's not a matter of attitude. And the calling of apostles is not a matter of race-based nose-counting. Thanks, -Smac 1
smac97 Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 22 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: Maybe, maybe not. It's true that if one loses trust in an individual or an institution it becomes harder to trust the motivations of that person or institution. Assumptions and judgments will be made. Some will be fair. Some won't. Sounds like we are pretty much in agreement. "In the aggregate, there is no placating the critics of the LDS Church." 22 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: Personally, I would feel rather circumspect in declaring any choice of a racially diverse apostle to be an amazing change for the church. I think it's just a matter of time. Meanwhile, take a look at the list of General Authorities, as I noted in 2016 (so it'll be a bit out of date): Quote Here's a list of the General Authorities of the Church. Even a five-minute skim shows that a sizable number of them do not fit within the white-guy-born-in-church-and-hailing-from-the-western-U.S. stereotype: Dieter F. Uchtdorf Ulisses Soares Gerrit W. Gong Marcos A. Aidukaitis Jose L. Alonso Ian S. Ardern Yoon Hwan Choi Valeri V. Cordón Claudio R. M. Costa Joaquin E. Costa Massimo De Feo Benjamin De Hoyos Edward Dube Larry J. Echo Hawk Enrique R. Falabella Eduardo Gavarret Carlos A. Godoy Christoffel Golden Walter F. González Patrick Kearon Jörg Klebingat Erich W. Kopischke Peter F. Meurs Hugo Montoya Rafael E. Pino Joseph W. Sitati Michael John U. Teh José A. Teixeira Juan A. Uceda Arnulfo Valenzuela Francisco J. Viñas Chi Hong (Sam) Wong Kazuhiko Yamashita Jorge F. Zeballos Claudio D. Zivic J. Devn Cornish Per G. Malm Hugo E. Martinez Jairo Mazzagardi Adrián Ochoa Gérald Caussé And then we can take a look at the 3rd Quorum (Area Seventy): Detlef H. Adler Frederick O. Akinbo Vladimir N. Astashov Matthieu Bennasar Hans T. Boom Christopher Charles Walter Chatora Alessandro Dini Ciacci M. T. Ben Davis Robert A. Dryden Mervyn C. Giddey Yuriy A. Guschin Clifford T. Herbertson Tom-Atle Herland Aniefiok Udo Inyon Christophe Kawaya John A. Koranteng Serhii A. Kovalov Axel H. Leimer W. Jean-Pierre Lono L. Jean Claude Mabaya Declan O. Madu Tasara Makasi Khumbulani Mdletshe Joaquim J. Moreira Adeyinka A. Ojediran Alan T. Phillips Gennady N. Podvodov Gary S. Price Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza Alexey V. Samaykin Jacques A. Van Reenan Daniel Yirenya-Tawiah And the Fourth: Julio C. Acosta Quilmer A. Agüero Angel H. Alarcon Omar A. Alvarez Carlos F. Arredondo Winsor Balderrama Hubermann Bien-Aimé Fernando E. Calderón Wilson B. Calderón Hernando Camargo Luis J. Camey Nicolás Castañeda Luis C. Chaverri Ulises Chávez Marion B. De Antuñano Ángel A. Duarte E. Xavier Espinoza Jose A. Fernández Candido Fortuna Sam M. Galvez Claude R. Gamiette Taylor G. Godoy Mathias Held Jose L. Isaguirre Pedro X. Larreal Alejandro Lopez José E. Maravilla Felix A. Martinez Alexander T. Mestre Alfredo Miron Adonay S. Obando Jared R. Ocampo Jesus A. Ortiz A. Moroni Pérez José C. Pineda Abraham E. Quero Miguel A. Reyes Rene Romay Luis G. Ruiz Netzahualcoyotl Salinas Jorge A. Saldívar Ernesto R. Toris C. Walter Treviño Ricardo Valladares Jesús Velez Alan R. Walker And the Fifth: Ruben Acosta Blake R. Alder Aley K. Auna Steven R. Bangerter Alan C. Batt Jorge T. Becerra Michael H. Bourne Robert M. Call Gene R. Chidester Brent J. Christensen Douglas L. Dance Marc C. Davis Ralph L. Dewsnup J. Scott Dorius Gary B. Doxey M. Dirk Driscoll J. Kevin Ence Jeffrey D. Erekson Peter F. Evans Bruce E. Ghent Richard K. Hansen Michael R. Jensen Steven O. Laing Bryan R. Larsen Kevin K. Miskin Dale H. Munk Mark L. Pace Steven K. Randall Blake M. Roney R. Scott Runia Eric J. Schmutz Edwin A. Sexton Paul H. Watkins William B. Woahn Kevin J Worthen And the Sixth: René R. Alba Alain L. Allard Dong Michael V. Beheshti Grant C. Bennett R. Randall Bluth Kevin E. Calderwood Matthew L. Carpenter Douglas B. Carter Donald D. Deshler Daniel F. Dunnigan K. Mark Frost Michael A. Gillenwater Leonard D. Greer Todd B. Hansen Raymond S. Heyman Brent J. Hillier David P. Homer Daniel W. Jones Milan F. Kunz Todd S. Larkin Alvin F. Meredith III J. Vaun McArthur Fred A. Parker Thomas T. Priday Brian L. Rawson Robert C. Rhien Gordon H. Smith Michael L. Southward G. Lawrence Spackman William H. Stoddard Stephen E. Thompson Maxsimo C. Torres Carlos Villarreal C. Dale Willis Jr. And the Seventh: P. David Agazzani Benedito S. Antunes Rómulo V. Cabrera José C. F. Campos H. Marcelo Cardus Aroldo B. Cavalcante Antonio F. Faúndez Matias D. Fernandez Ricardo P. Giminéz Maurício G. Gonzaga João Roberto Grahl Francisco D. N. Granja Sergio L. Krasnoselsky Luiz M. Leal Juan J. Levrino Geraldo Lima Eduardo A. Norambuena Raimundo Pacheco De Pinho Carlos E. Perrotti Marco A. Rais Jorge Luis Romeu Alfredo Luis Salas Pedro A. Sanhueza Ciro Schmeil Alin Spannaus Raúl H. Spitale Daniel Texeira Moroni B. Torgan Juan A. Urra Luis G. Zapata And the eighth: Benedito S. Antunes Pedro U. Adduru Taiichi Aoba Dong Chol Beh Victorino A. Babida Richard Baquiran Yoke Sang Freddie Chan Zeno Chow Paul R. Coward Robert J. Dudfield Meliula M. Fata Daniel G. Hamilton Johan Johansson Tae Gul Jung Wisit Khanakham Yutaka Onda Andrew M. O'Riordan Katsuyuki Otahara Ryan V. Pagaduan Abenir V. Pajaro Mark P. Peteru Siu Hong Pon Maximo A. Saavedra Jr. Benjamin Ming Tze Tai David J. Thomson George J. Tobias Steven L. Toronto Aisake K. Tukuafu Raul E. Vicencio Raul S. Villanueva Keith P. Walker Hoi Seng Leonard Woo I am not familiar with all these men. But quite a large number of them do not seem to fit the received-a-calling-due-to-preferential-and-unmerited-treatment-arising-from-being-a-white-guy-born-in-church-and-hailing-from-the-western-U.S. And then there are the numerous temple presidents, mission presidents, and thousands upon thousands of stake presidents, district presidents, bishops and branch presidents who are also in their callings despite not being a-white-guy-born-in-church-and-hailing-from-the-western-U.S. ... Of course the Church spent a good portion of its formative life relying principally on people from Utah and its environs. And yes, people from Utah and its environs are statistically over-represented in the leadership of the Church. But that seems to be changing rather quickly. I strongly believe that the Church wants the stakes of the Church to be administered by locally-grown leaders. This has been happening in various places in the world for some time now. And with time. some of those locally-grown leaders are called into the upper echelons of Church leadership. Again, I think the Church wants this to happen as well. But in the Lord's time, and for the right reasons. Placating faultfinders and dissidents is not, I think, high the Lord's or the Church's list of priorities. How do the critics account for this? In the main . . . they don't. They just ignore the extensive racial and cultural diversity found in the upper echelons of the Church, and instead focus exclusively on the Twelve. And if and when a non-white man is called as an apostle, the goalposts will be shifted. We'll see complaints of the individual being a token. We'll see calls for "proportional representation" in the Twelve. And so on. I believe the Church is what it claims to be. It is blossoming into a worldwide Church. In my lifetime it has grown from 3 million to 15 million members. There is much diversity in the Church, including in the upper echelons, with much more to come. But that diversity will come as a result of revelatory guidance from God, not because self-appointed critics demand quotas based on gender, or race, or national origin. I have a hard time lending credence to race- or gender-based quotas in the secular world, let alone in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. 22 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: While I think it would be good, it certainly wouldn't be some panacea that would cure my trust issues with the church. So while I hope to see some diversity, and I think it's important and would be in the church's best interest to move that direction, I harbor no delusions about what such a choice would mean. I guess we diverge as to who would decide that the Church should "move that direction." It's a principle of faith, I think. Thanks, -Smac 2
Jeanne Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 11 minutes ago, smac97 said: It's not a matter of attitude. And the calling of apostles is not a matter of race-based nose-counting. Thanks, -Smac Then why is it even worth of a Dan Peterson comment..satire or not?
smac97 Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 29 minutes ago, Jeanne said: Quote It's not a matter of attitude. And the calling of apostles is not a matter of race-based nose-counting. Thanks, -Smac Then why is it even worth of a Dan Peterson comment..satire or not? You'd have to ask Dan Peterson. However, his point - made via satire - may be substantively similar to mine (that it is unreasonable to impute contemporary notions of affirmative action, race-based "diversity" quotas on callings to the Quorum of the Twelve). Thanks, -Smac 1
HappyJackWagon Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 5 minutes ago, smac97 said: You'd have to ask Dan Peterson. However, his point - made via satire - may be substantively similar to mine (that it is unreasonable to impute contemporary notions of affirmative action, race-based "diversity" quotas on callings to the Quorum of the Twelve). Thanks, -Smac It does make me wonder if Jesus would have had more diversity had he not been confined to such a small geographical location. If he had members of many races in countries around the world, would all of his apostles been from Galilee? I doubt it. If he had modern communication and travel methods and boasted a "worldwide" membership, would the 12 have been so similar? I doubt it. But it's all speculation. A pretty silly one, really. Just like Peterson's satire. 4
Jeanne Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 16 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: It does make me wonder if Jesus would have had more diversity had he not been confined to such a small geographical location. If he had members of many races in countries around the world, would all of his apostles been from Galilee? I doubt it. If he had modern communication and travel methods and boasted a "worldwide" membership, would the 12 have been so similar? I doubt it. But it's all speculation. A pretty silly one, really. Just like Peterson's satire. When Jesus said..Come Follow Me...would He ever say...except?? Would He say to little children...come to me...except.. What about the men on the cross that day with Him?? Would He say: "Today Thou Shalt Be with me in Paradise..except?? 1
ttribe Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 1 hour ago, smac97 said: It's not a matter of attitude. And the calling of apostles is not a matter of race-based nose-counting. Thanks, -Smac Was the comment to which I originally responded a general reaction to critics, or a specific one on the issue of the calling of Church leadership?
smac97 Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said: Quote You'd have to ask Dan Peterson. However, his point - made via satire - may be substantively similar to mine (that it is unreasonable to impute contemporary notions of affirmative action, race-based "diversity" quotas on callings to the Quorum of the Twelve). Thanks, -Smac It does make me wonder if Jesus would have had more diversity had he not been confined to such a small geographical location. Modern notions of "diversity," you mean? That is to say, race-based "diversity?" Was race-based "diversity" even a thing for organizations to consider 2,000 years ago? In any event, you may have a point. After all, Jesus didn't teleport His followers from Palestine to the New World in 3 Nephi. He instead called "locals" to lead the Church. Which is very much what the Church has been seeking to do for quite a while now. Quote If he had members of many races in countries around the world, would all of his apostles been from Galilee? I doubt it. Mighty speculative. In any event, what about the Twelve Disciples referenced in 3 Nephi? They effectively were the highest administrative/ecclesiastical authorities for the Church in the New World (while still technically subordinate to Peter and the Apostles in Palestine). Is that "diversity" in the early Church? If not, why not? And what about the Church today? The Church moves heaven and earth to have the Church organization in other countries "self-sufficient." That is, the Church usually starts out with "imported" leadership creating branches, with the objective of local membership growing until wards and stakes can be formed and run by the local membership, until local missionaries can be called instead of importing them from other cultures (and all the inefficiencies that are inherent in having these imported missionaries learn the language, the culture, etc.). I have a friend who was one of the first four missionaries in Malawi, and he recently recounted these efforts over dinner. Interesting stuff. The Church is not interested in "diversity" in terms of placating political considerations or critics. The Church is interested in "diversity" because the Church will truly grow and strengthen when members in places like Malawi begin to be able to administer the Restored Gospel. Quote If he had modern communication and travel methods and boasted a "worldwide" membership, would the 12 have been so similar? I doubt it. But it's all speculation. A pretty silly one, really. Just like Peterson's satire. Except Peterson's satire is supposed to be silly. Imputing politicized notions of race-based nose-counting "diversity" retroactively to Palestine 2,000 years ago does indeed seem rather silly. And also unnecessary, given that we don't need to speculate. Look at 3 Nephi. Locals were called to lead the Church. Not unlike what the Church tries to do now. Thanks, -Smac Edited March 26, 2018 by smac97 1
HappyJackWagon Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 3 minutes ago, smac97 said: Modern notions of "diversity," you mean? That is to say, race-based "diversity?" Was race-based diversity even a thing 2,000 years ago? In any event, you may have a point. After all, Jesus didn't teleport His followers from Palestine to the New World in 3 Nephi. He instead called "locals" to lead the Church. Which is very much what the Church has been seeking to do for quite a while now. Mighty speculative. In any event, what about the Twelve Disciples referenced in 3 Nephi? They effectively were the highest administrative/ecclesiastical authorities for the Church in the New World (while still technically subordinate to Peter and the Apostles in Palestine). And what about the Church today? The Church moves heaven and earth to have the Church organization in other countries "self-sufficient." That is, the Church usually starts out with "imported" leadership creating branches, with the objective of local membership growing until wards and stakes can be formed and run by the local membership, until local missionaries can be called instead of importing them from other cultures (and all the inefficiencies that are inherent in having these imported missionaries learn the language, the culture, etc.). I have a friend who was one of the first four missionaries in Malawi, and he recently recounted these efforts over dinner. Interesting stuff. The Church is not interested in "diversity" in terms of placating political considerations or critics. The Church is interested in "diversity" because the Church will truly grow and strengthen when members in places like Malawi begin to be able to administer the Restored Gospel. Except Peterson's satire is supposed to be silly. Imputing politicized notions of race-based nose-counting "diversity" retroactively to Palestine 2,000 years ago does indeed seem rather silly. And also unnecessary, given that we don't need to speculate. Look at 3 Nephi. Locals were called to lead the Church. Not unlike what the Church tries to do now. Thanks, -Smac Jesus would have been more inclusive as a natural extension of his gospel, not political correctness. But just because something is politically correct in todays world, doesn't mean it's wrong. 1
smac97 Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 3 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: Jesus would have been more inclusive as a natural extension of his gospel, not political correctness. I quite agree. That's my point. The calls for race-based quotas in the Quorum of the Twelve are political correctness, not a natural extension of the Restored Gospel. 3 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: But just because something is politically correct in todays world, doesn't mean it's wrong. I disagree, at least as to this issue. The calls for race-based nose-counting of the Quorum of the Twelve is "wrong." It is a call for the Church to proceed based on "poltical correctness" instead of revelation. Thanks, -Smac 3
cinepro Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: Jesus would have been more inclusive as a natural extension of his gospel, not political correctness. But just because something is politically correct in todays world, doesn't mean it's wrong. The satire would be more appropriately likened to the calling of the original 12 Apostles (which, it should be remembered, was not done by Joseph Smith!). No one that I've heard ever complains about them being 12 white guys, because if you look at the size, location, and composition of membership at the time, it would have been almost impossible not to call 12 white guys. Edited March 26, 2018 by cinepro 3
rongo Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 I'm going to hedge my bets (just for fun), and predict that the two new apostles will be Bishop Causse and Elder Kim Clark. There have been a disproportionate number called over the last several decades out of the pool of presiding bishopric members, and LDS university presidents. Causse would also check the "non-U.S." box, although he's too white to placate the diversity people. 1
hope_for_things Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Attendant to the inevitable chatter about ethnic consideration in the approaching selection of two new apostles, Dan Peterson has posted this satire on his blog. Like any good satire, it is at once incisive and insightful. A couple of noteworthy snippets: This is interesting timing with some of the thoughts I've been having recently. I was talking to a friend and we were discussing what would happen if one of the current Apostles in the church defected from the church over concerns about church leadership/scandal/history or something along those lines. And if that said apostle participated in interviews explaining their reasoning for the defection, I wonder how many orthodox members would even listen to what they had to say. My friend was arguing that members would of course at least listen to the defecting apostle, but I was arguing against. I know too many people that refuse to even entertain that current leaders are fallible in practice, or consider that their current positions may be flawed in any way. I think if an apostle did defect that the majority of orthodox members wouldn't give their arguments even 5 minutes of their time, they would just immediately assume the defecting apostle and any evidence that they presented for defection is flawed and evil. They wouldn't even be willing to give that person, even it was someone they admired greatly before defection, the time of day to listen to their reasons, because they would be acting out of fear rather than thinking rationally. It seems like Peterson's post is just another in a long line of, defend the status quo, rather than consider that the church has a diversity problem and that it might be rooted in prejudice and bias. The default position by most orthodox members that I know is to assuming that the current layout of the leadership is God's divine will without any critical analysis of the situation. 1
Duncan Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 31 minutes ago, rongo said: I'm going to hedge my bets (just for fun), and predict that the two new apostles will be Bishop Causse and Elder Kim Clark. There have been a disproportionate number called over the last several decades out of the pool of presiding bishopric members, and LDS university presidents. Causse would also check the "non-U.S." box, although he's too white to placate the diversity people. Were I betting man, my money would be on Kazuhiko Yamashita or Larry J. EchoHawk and LeGrand R. Curtis Jr. or that Jorg Klebingat or something. TBH I have more people in mind I hope to God above it isn't!!!! 1
Recommended Posts