DiscussMormonism.com

It needs teachers capable of conducting that type of lesson.

Bazooka wrote:It needs teachers capable of conducting that type of lesson.

That is true.

Regards,
MG

mentalgymnast wrote:
I don't think who is prophet will play much into the changes that will occur because of the other factors being discussed in regards to "critical mass". Whoever is prophet is going to be hard pressed not to roll with the punches. What's he going to do...excommunicate and/or discipline thousands or more?

Regards,
MG

How many people have stood up to yell "I am Spartacus!" to the church? Virtually no one. You talk as if people like the Givens' are leading a revolution. There is no revolution. The Givens' aren't calling for a revolution. Dehlin isn't. And even if they did, what difference would it make? They'd be ex'd immediately and that would be that. I bet 90% of the ward I'm in hasn't even heard of John Dehlin or the Givens.' John Dehlin has been under so much scrutiny in his home stake that his reputation has been tarnished there. I don't know the Givens' home stake, but their influence is severely limited in the big picture. The rubber meets the road in the church at the local level. On the local level, it's "chapel Mormons" as far as the eye can see. The few who are not chapel Mormons either keep their mouths shut or are on the radar as an apostate. Either way, they have little to no influence.

Here you are saying that the prophet will be forced to roll with the punches because he will be powerless against thousands upon thousands of church members. Go say this openly in church and let me know how that goes over. Get up in testimony meeting and say, "Brothers and Sisters, change is coming. The prophet will be powerless in the face of a critical mass of changing paradigms and assumptions about the church. What can the church do? Excommunicate all of us?" You'd get ex'd so fast your head would spin.

mentalgymnast wrote:

Bazooka wrote:It needs teachers capable of conducting that type of lesson.

That is true.

Regards,
MG

When my beliefs first started going screwy (from the church's perspective) I was a teacher in the Elder's Quorum. Having been an EQP on more than one occasion myself, as a courtesy I let the EQP know that I was glad to continue to teach the quorum, but that I would no longer be able to bear testimony of the restored gospel. The result? A few months passed, then the stake president forced him to release me because my testimony wasn't strong enough. Truthfully, I was surprised it took a few months for it to happen. I expected to be released immediately. The EQP was clear when he released me that he was being forced to do it by the SP. This was without one complaint (as far as I am aware) by anyone about any lesson I ever taught. This was about 4 years ago.

Tim the Enchanter wrote:You talk as if people like the Givens' are leading a revolution. There is no revolution. The Givens' aren't calling for a revolution.

Whatever you want to call it, Deseret Book is joining in. Would it not be expected that if Givens' book(s) are being sold to the rank and file members of the church with DB imprinted on the cover that there is going to be a gradual shift in paradigms and assumptions? And at the same time people are going to become familiar with the issues and the problems as they're reading the book(s). The Crucible of Doubt was brought up peripherally in my HP group a couple of Sundays ago. Truth be told...I'm the one that brought it up.

Regards,
MG

mentalgymnast wrote:Anything that happens will start happening at the ward/branch level...in classes and quorums.

This is where I disagree. The church is extremely hierarchal and everyone in the hierarchy above you is supposed to be treated as if they speak for God. Given this set up, change has to happen at the top. Few local leaders will have the courage to do anything contrary to what the brethren want done. What is happening at the local level is supposed to reflect the standards/teachings of the leaders. The only example I can think of where things worked in reverse is when temple attendance got so bad (as I understand it, I was young at the time) the church surveyed the members about the endowment and ultimately made drastic changes to it to help the members be more comfortable with it. Otherwise, the members are expected to follow the lead and the counsel of the brethren, not do their own thing.

mentalgymnast wrote:Whatever you want to call it, Deseret Book is joining in. Would it not be expected that if Givens' book(s) are being sold to the rank and file members of the church with DB imprinted on the cover that there is going to be a gradual shift in paradigms and assumptions? And at the same time people are going to become familiar with the issues and the problems as they're reading the book(s). The Crucible of Doubt was brought up peripherally in my HP group a couple of Sundays ago. Truth be told...I'm the one that brought it up.

Regards,
MG

You want to hear a funny story? A few weeks ago was stake conference. I went to help my wife with the kids for the 2 hours. Afterwards, I stuck around to help pick up chairs. The stake president, who is well aware of where I stand because we've discussed it on more than one occasion, approached me and the following paraphrased conversation ensued:

SP: Tim, I'd like to meet with you.

Me: What about?

SP: Just to chat and see where you are at.

Me: I'm in exactly the same place I was last time we spoke.

SP: I wanted to talk to you about a book. Have you heard of Terryl Givens? [I'm assuming he was referring to Crucible of Doubt.]

Me: Yes, I have. I’ve read a lot of his work. Honestly, it doesn’t make sense to me. And it is nothing like the gospel you hear in church.

SP: Maybe it isn’t, so what?

Me: Are his ideas spoken in General Conference? Why should I follow his approach if it is not embraced by the church?

SP: Everyone is just pretending and doing our best to follow the gospel.

Me: Why should I follow the prophet then? Is the prophet just pretending like everyone else? If so, why follow him?

SP: No, the prophet is not pretending. [pause] Are you saying Terrly Givens contradicts the prophet?

Me: Have you read his work?

SP: No.

Me: Well, why don’t you read it? If it makes sense to you, explain it to me. Because what I’ve read makes no sense to me.

Tim, sounds like he wasn't enquiring where you were at, more like trying to find out where he thought he was at!

Tim the Enchanter wrote:...Terryl Givens...Crucible of Doubt.]

Me: ...I’ve read a lot of his work...it doesn’t make sense to me. And it is nothing like the gospel you hear in church.

For the sake of those that may not have read Crucible of Doubt it might be helpful if you could create a list of things that the Givens are teaching/sharing in their book that don't make sense to you. I'm reading the book, Kindle version, right now and honestly haven't run across anything significant that doesn't "make sense".

Interested in seeing your list. Page numbers and/or chapters might be helpful. There are a lot of people out there reading this book. If it really doesn't make sense or is "nothing like the gospel you hear in church", that ought to be brought into the light of day.

Regards,
MG

mentalgymnast wrote:

Lloyd Dobler wrote:
MG, you talk as if Miller and Terryl and Fionna and well.....who else is there?.......you talk as if they are leading this army of thousands who are applying this immense pressure on the Church.

Anything that happens will start happening at the ward/branch level...in classes and quorums.

Lloyd Dobler wrote:...ordain women got some great stuff done.

I don't think they took the right approach. But that's another thread. Basically, they didn't get much done because most women in the church are within a doctrinal bubble of "priesthood is for men". You can't just burst that bubble by showing up at a priesthood meeting or wearing different colors to church. That won't change the "doctrine".

Lloyd Dobler wrote:

However, you must remember that for all the changes OW caused upon the church, non of those changes impact the programs and policies at the ward level.......by a long shot.

Not surprising.

Lloyd Dobler wrote:Non of those changes impact the teachers and miamaids who continue to be indoctrinated in the same iron rod way all the way through marriage.

But the teaching methods/format have changed somewhat as I've already mentioned. As this model takes hold you may see less scripted classes turning into actual discussions about this and that. If kids start asking questions rather than simply responding to scripted questions that have scripted answers...that is KEY. This change in lesson approach/format has been very recent. It needs time to incubate/mutate into something more.

Regards,
MG

Ordain Women didn't get much done? Sure MG, you're not owned by the church, you not believing in openly challenging the church or the brethren just happens to be another one in a million coincidental idea you and your new Mormon philosophy buddies share with TBMs. Because as we know, not challenging the church is how real change gets done right? Like with polygamy and the racist ban from priesthood and the temple.

During the time of OW short run the following changes happened:

A woman prayed in conference since god knows when
the church had to open up the priesthood session via tv access to everyone for the first time ever
The women leadership now sits closer to the real leadership
The women conference is now officially part of Conference
Whatever else I am forgetting.

I suppose you expect us to believe these changes are all just a coincidence right? Why don't you do us all a big favor then and regale us with the behind the scenes action where Fiona and Neylan got it all done with secret meetings with the Brethren. When you are this obtuse it makes you look like a full on apologist man. So OW is the catalyst for REAL change that you can see and that is not going away and you want points on the scoreboard because Fiona says women already have the priesthood? Sorry, but until a women actually gets the priesthood or holds a priesthood office or shows you one of their own line of authority cards, well, your talk is cheap.

I bet you think that because things like the singles program originating in SoCal at the stake level or Primary being adopted by the church from a female member trying to give kids something to do or the welfare program....I mean is that the track record you are hanging your hat on for this grass roots new Mormon philosophy revolution you say is coming? What exactly about the history of the church makes you think that the changes you want to see will start at the ward level? You seem to think that this change is going to come about because of the ideas themselves. That is naïve. That is about as naïve as thinking that the brethren decided to let a woman pray in conference because it was the right thing to do and not because of the indefensible public relations embarrassment it would have become.

MG, the church will adopt this new Mormon philosophy you talk about when they will make more money off their members with that approach than with the current approach. When do you think that will be? That is the question you should be asking. The church is not about the members. The church is about the church and the brethren only use the members to benefit the church. If church leadership were really interested in this new Mormon philosophy for the sake of the members and being more open and honest and egalitarian, then they would have adopted it a long time ago. You don't think this stuff you and Miller talk about is something new do you? I'm sure Maxine Hanks is fascinated hearing all of these ideas that she has never heard of before. You have seen first hand how the church rolls. Look how they have doubled down on the missionary age. My ward wants my son to go to missionary preparation and he is 16! Hell, the only reason they made that age change was so they could keep control over the boys and get them on their missions instead of allowing them the space to live and think for themselves. The church could not even continue allowing a kid a freaking year on his own. What about that in any way is reflected in your new Mormon philosophy? Do you think they are going to tell him about rocks and a hat and fanny and how the temple came from masonry crap and how women already hold the priesthood and about how the church is actually just the hold of keys and that all other religious traditions are equal and about how it's ok to really doubt and question your testimony.... Of course they would!!!!!! They would if they gave a crap about the individual person and respected their own personal faith journey more than they cared about turning that person into a say yes to every calling, tithe paying tbm who will be sure to donate their own kids to the church.

by the way, when you break this post up into a million pieces, please at least provide responses of substance and not pithy one liners.