America, Our Church, and the Future

[_moksha]

I would like to offer you Celestial Readers a very thought provoking thread called America, Our Church, and the Future...

http://www.beliefnet.com/boards/message_list.asp?boardID=330&discussionID=553690

[_moksha]

From the initial post by Acorin
2/10/2007 10:17 AM 1 out of 52

A January article in the Economist on our Church got me to thinking about another topic I wanted to discuss with you all. The title of the article was “A Modern Prophet Goes Global” and it was in the January 4th issue.

It starts out like this, “Like any religious community, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (better known as the Mormons) will always cherish the locations connected with its foundation story. Not only the places in New York state where its prophet, Joseph Smith, said he received a vision of God (in 1820) and then a new set of scriptures, or the faith’s spectacular headquarters in Utah, the state where Mormon pioneers found refuge. Also dear to Mormon hearts are parts of northern and central England where, soon after Smith had his visions, the faith won many converts.”

“In those early days, people in Britain who accepted Mormon teaching were told to sail west and join the growing band of ‘saints’ who were preparing for the second coming of Jesus, an event which was expected to happen soon, and in the new promised land, the United States.”

“But now, after a century of spectacular growth, the Mormon movement is flowing in the other direction: while it continues to be centrally directed from its headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah, the faith has gained a foothold in virtually every country in the world – and the American share of church membership has fallen. In the north-west of England, for example, the Mormons want their converts to stay put and use their spanking new meeting-house and temple; and their keen young missionaries are as likely to be British or Danish (even, in one case, from Greenland) as American. And there is hardly anywhere where the proselytizers do not reach.”

The Economist is one of my favorite publications because while it has a clear perspective – in favor of market economics and globalization – it also reports that perspective free from all the baggage that seems to attend most American publications. So, I paid attention to this short article, which crystallized a number of thoughts that have been running around in my head on the future of our church. Will we as a people will be strong enough to become a truly world movement and continue to grow and develop or remain essentially an American movement with members who happen to live in other places.

The article poses this question directly, “And the question of whether the Mormon faith really is a global religion – or an American one with many foreign adherents – still stirs arguments.” There is no question but that just as Islam cherishes the specific locations key to the story of their prophet-founder, so we do the same. But our faith also sometimes seems inextricably linked to America, for good or ill.

From First Nephi on through the Book of Mormon we read, “And inasmuch as ye shall keep my commandments, ye shall prosper, and shall be led to a land of promise; yea, even a land which I have prepared for you; yea, a land which is choice above all other lands.” We are told that if we serve God, we will prosper, and since we are now richer (as a group) than we have ever been, we think it must mean we are “serving God” since we haven’t yet been swept off the land. But what does the scripture mean “land choice above all other lands”?

The D&C goes even further, explaining that the Lord Himself raised up the Constitution of the United States (Section 101:80) “And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood.” This is a big deal, what to you all is inspired about the Constitution? For me, it is the Bill of Rights and the system of checks and balances and separation of powers (that seem to erode by the day in our current environment).

One thing that’s got me thinking about this is the direction America itself is headed. I am a trained historian and have spent roughly 10 years in public policy at the federal level, so I have a bit of a basis for my opinions. Looking around the world right now, I would say that there is at least a 50/50 chance that when the future history of this country is written, historians will mark the PERMANENT decline of the United States from the presidency of George W. Bush. There are a lot of reasons for this, not all of them directly attributable to the President’s policies, but the bottom line is that while we have squandered treasure and lives on an illegal and unnecessary war in Iraq; we have ceded the initiative to our competitors in China and India. Rather than build our science, education, IT, and transportation infrastructure, we build new weapons systems and provide tax cuts to the super wealthy. Meanwhile China and India hold the keys to the national treasury through our unprecedented deficit spending, while they themselves take the profit from our manufacturing and increasingly from service and innovation jobs that they are better able to compete for thanks to our complacency.

What do I mean by a permanent decline? Eventually, those countries that benefit from the continued success and expansion of the American economy will find that they can be as or more successful taking their business elsewhere. Then the dollar will crash, our buying power will collapse and standard of living and quality of life will decline. In another example, if the theocrats continue to have their way on stem cell research, new cures for debilitating and painful diseases may become available for others around the world (or the rich of this country who can afford to travel overseas for treatment), while most Americans are stuck here to waste away and die. If countries could take their business elsewhere, many of them would given how much of a destructive force America is viewed as in the world.

Another interesting article I would recommend is one by former UC San Diego History Professor Chalmers Johnson, available here: http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/0 ... ocracy.php. In this article on empire vs. democracy he poses the question of whether the United States will end up like Britain, who when faced with a decision between its empire or its democracy, chose the latter, or whether we will go the way of Rome, choosing Empire over our republican values.

I believe one of the reasons that God called Joseph Smith was to raise up a prophetic people that could challenge the future and make it better. So, in my view, part of what we need to do to make that happen is to look clear-eyed past the rhetoric and the feel-good patriotism and look to the future. If we are in fact the Church we believe we are, stewards of the restored gospel, then even when America is no more (or at least a shell of its former self), the Church will continue to grow and thrive.

However, if we cannot in a real sense grow up and leave our nursery (America) then I fear that we may dwindle and fade as America seems bound and determined itself to do.

Can our fate be de-linked from America’s? Should it be?

Towards the end of the article, the Economist piece puts forward some thoughts that I find quite hopeful. “Why do Mormons attract followers while many other religions decline? Is it the aura of American prosperity, health and sobriety, which seems so appealing in an African village or a Mexican slum? Mr. Davies (a professor at Britain’s Durham University) thinks the most compelling feature of Mormon teaching is its confidence that death has been conquered: believers look forward with certainty to eternal life (with their spouses). For Margaret Barker, a Methodist scholar, part of the faith’s power lies in its insistence that prophecy and divine revelation did not just happen once, a long time ago: the flow of messages from God is still in progress.” If we can focus on the Gospel, and not the Church, then I think we stand a good chance of surviving America.

[_harmony]

One thing that’s got me thinking about this is the direction America itself is headed. I am a trained historian and have spent roughly 10 years in public policy at the federal level, so I have a bit of a basis for my opinions. Looking around the world right now, I would say that there is at least a 50/50 chance that when the future history of this country is written, historians will mark the PERMANENT decline of the United States from the presidency of George W. Bush. There are a lot of reasons for this, not all of them directly attributable to the President’s policies, but the bottom line is that while we have squandered treasure and lives on an illegal and unnecessary war in Iraq; we have ceded the initiative to our competitors in China and India. Rather than build our science, education, IT, and transportation infrastructure, we build new weapons systems and provide tax cuts to the super wealthy. Meanwhile China and India hold the keys to the national treasury through our unprecedented deficit spending, while they themselves take the profit from our manufacturing and increasingly from service and innovation jobs that they are better able to compete for thanks to our complacency.

I agree with this completely. I shudder to think of what messes my generation (and W's) are leaving for our children. The list is long and varied. The only aspect that overarches everything on the list is that the Baby Boomers either created the mess or exacerbated it. We have solved nothing. We have more often than not, made it worse. We focus on the superficial, and ignore those who would actually address the issues of our day.

I believe one of the reasons that God called Joseph Smith was to raise up a prophetic people that could challenge the future and make it better. So, in my view, part of what we need to do to make that happen is to look clear-eyed past the rhetoric and the feel-good patriotism and look to the future. If we are in fact the Church we believe we are, stewards of the restored gospel, then even when America is no more (or at least a shell of its former self), the Church will continue to grow and thrive.

However, if we cannot in a real sense grow up and leave our nursery (America) then I fear that we may dwindle and fade as America seems bound and determined itself to do.

We have no clear thinking forward thinking leaders. They're all too old. Until we change the way our leaders are called, we will never be more than a provincial wannabe megachurch with a cantankerous gerocracy at the helm.

For Margaret Barker, a Methodist scholar, part of the faith’s power lies in its insistence that prophecy and divine revelation did not just happen once, a long time ago: the flow of messages from God is still in progress.” If we can focus on the Gospel, and not the Church, then I think we stand a good chance of surviving America.

And now we get inspiration like: earrings, tattoos, and obedience. Bah. We have no revelations, and in their place, we have policy.

[_bcspace]

One thing that’s got me thinking about this is the direction America itself is headed. I am a trained historian and have spent roughly 10 years in public policy at the federal level, so I have a bit of a basis for my opinions. Looking around the world right now, I would say that there is at least a 50/50 chance that when the future history of this country is written, historians will mark the PERMANENT decline of the United States from the presidency of George W. Bush. There are a lot of reasons for this, not all of them directly attributable to the President’s policies, but the bottom line is that while we have squandered treasure and lives on an illegal and unnecessary war in Iraq;

This statement marks this person as not trained. The legality of the war is unquestioned in knowing circles.

we have ceded the initiative to our competitors in China and India. Rather than build our science, education, IT, and transportation infrastructure, we build new weapons systems

Most of our ingenuity and inventions etc. have come from the private sector even when taking the military and space programs into account. The US government has played a relatively small role.

and provide tax cuts to the super wealthy.

My income level qualifies me for welfare yet I have benefited from the tax cuts to the tune of $5000 per year. The poor, it should be remembered, pay no taxes and create no jobs.

Meanwhile China and India hold the keys to the national treasury through our unprecedented deficit spending, while they themselves take the profit from our manufacturing and increasingly from service and innovation jobs that they are better able to compete for thanks to our complacency.

Yes, our complaceny is the problem. It is not a governmental issue but a moral issue. Individuals are more interested in entertainment and social status (such as wearing earrings and tatoos....lol) than improving themselves in any real way.

[_Coggins7]

Quote:
One thing that’s got me thinking about this is the direction America itself is headed. I am a trained historian and have spent roughly 10 years in public policy at the federal level, so I have a bit of a basis for my opinions. Looking around the world right now, I would say that there is at least a 50/50 chance that when the future history of this country is written, historians will mark the PERMANENT decline of the United States from the presidency of George W. Bush. There are a lot of reasons for this, not all of them directly attributable to the President’s policies, but the bottom line is that while we have squandered treasure and lives on an illegal and unnecessary war in Iraq;

The indivudual who wrote this passage isn't doing history, but ideology, and his own. Leftist historians would look at the decline of America and its civilzation in very different ways. Most conservative or Libertarian intellectuals would date it rom the Roosevelt era and the rise of New Deal nanny state socialism, and especially the situaltion since the late sixties. George Bush, a modest conservative at best who has shorn up both the welfare state and vastly expanded the size and scope of the federal government, is more than the Left could have hoped for under Clinton in the 90s.

The question of the Iraq war's legality is has been settled for quite sometime, and is not arguable. The question of its necessity is quite debatable, and there are and have been substantive arguments made for it by some of the best minds in modern political philosophy.

we have ceded the initiative to our competitors in China and India. Rather than build our science, education, IT, and transportation infrastructure, we build new weapons systems

This sounds like MoveOn.org can't or like somethig from a VVAW pamplet from 1970. The astounding ignorance of both history and modern geopolitics on display here is utterly mind stopping. Its as if, well, 9/11 never happened. Its as if global, Islamic Jihadism doesn't exist. One pill makes you larger and one pill makes you small...

Most of our ingenuity and inventions etc. have come from the private sector even when taking the military and space programs into account. The US government has played a relatively small role.

This is exactly correct. Many of the woes of NASA, including the obsolescence of its space shuttle fleet (1970s designs), is directly traceable to the fact that there's no profit motive in the system or entruprenurial spirit in any of its programs. When that agency is finially privativzed, or at least opened to private investment, watch space exploration take off.

and provide tax cuts to the super wealthy.

This is too easy. The top 1% of income tax payers pay 36.89% of all taxes paid.
The top 5% pay 57%. The top 10% pay almost 70%, and to cut to the chase, the top 50% pay 96% of all income taxes paid. The rich are getting soaked like never before, as a percentage of all income taxes extracted from the private sector by the state. The situation was little different under Ronald Reagan. The rich paid a vastly disproportioate share of income taxes at that time as well. Indeed, the modern figures are only somewhat higher than those in the 80s.

In any event. why would we want to so heavily tax the productive sectors of society; that is, the job producing sectors?
Since when is ideological class envyism serious history?

Meanwhile China and India hold the keys to the national treasury through our unprecedented deficit spending, while they themselves take the profit from our manufacturing and increasingly from service and innovation jobs that they are better able to compete for thanks to our complacency.

Deficit spending is a huge problem, and has been since the Keynsian era of the sixties and seventies. However, manufacturing, despite what you hear from the mainstream pop media, is still quite healthy in America. The fundamental problem with all the spending that goes on in Washinton, however, isn't the deficit per se, but the size, invasiveness, and scope of government itself. Each penny spent by the Federal govenment represents one less penny's worth of economic freedom in the private sector and among individual citizens, who would doubtless be spending that penny on things other than much of what has priortiy among the political class.

Loran

[_moksha]

Coggins: This sounds like MoveOn.org can't or like somethig from a VVAW pamplet from 1970. The astounding ignorance of both history and modern geopolitics on display here is utterly mind stopping. Its as if, well, 9/11 never happened. Its as if global, Islamic Jihadism doesn't exist. One pill makes you larger and one pill makes you small...

Coggins, the link is above. This is recent and on the Mormon Issues forum. The author is an educated State Department official who is LDS.

[_StructureCop]

This is recent and on the Mormon Issues forum. The author is an educated State Department official who is LDS.

"Educated" is not equivalent to "intelligent."

[_moksha]

This is recent and on the Mormon Issues forum. The author is an educated State Department official who is LDS.

"Educated" is not equivalent to "intelligent."

Good point, however he has always struck me as being intelligent as well.