Kish critiques John Dehlin

[Kishkumen]

Understood. To clarify my point of view:

1) Pronouncements of the lineage of Cain, who in Christianity is second only to Lucifer, upon black people is definitely “an evil” that arguably can only be fixed by admitting the fraud of a major - the first for sure, if not the primary - purpose of the blessings in the first place.

I wholeheartedly agree that assigning Black people to the lineage of Cain or Ham was an evil that must be addressed. I do not agree that recognizing, acknowledging, and addressing that evil is tantamount to admitting a fraud. Because oracles require some kind of human agency, they are prone to a degree of human error. I don’t see what is fatally compromising about recognizing and repairing this evil.

After all, a patriarch really assigns people to a tribe of Israel. No person who belongs in the Church should be assigned a lineage outside of Israel because “gathering Israel” is the purpose of missionary work. The whole notion of assigning a member to Cain or Ham is frankly stupid on top of racist and evil.

2) Many many blessings contain implicit punishments for failure to deliver on certain performances that serve the church. I believe this is also an institutional evil that can only be repaired by acknowledging the motivations imposed on Patriarchs. I wager there are zero Patriarchal Blessings that contain language encouraging the recipient to follow their heart even if it means leaving the church or pursuing another spiritual path.

I just don’t see how organizations are expected to undermine their organizational integrity and prospects in fundamental ways. To choose to belong to an organization or community is about making certain compromises in order to gain certain benefits. Children, as is the way of things, have some of the most basic decisions made for them.

I waited until I was on the verge of going on my mission before I got my patriarchal blessing. That might be the way to go—PB before or even right after the mission.

Another thing I would like to see is better education about the nature of these blessings. In my view they are more the active product of the patriarch, and while they can be helpful, they should never be seen as a straightjacket that a person must necessarily choose to live out. It is sad that Mormonism was founded by a guy who felt no compunction about being assertive in his spiritual life, yet today’s LDS are pressed to be very passive in theirs.

[Dr Moore]

I wholeheartedly agree that assigning Black people to the lineage of Cain or Ham was an evil that must be addressed. I do not agree that recognizing, acknowledging, and addressing that evil is tantamount to admitting a fraud. Because oracles require some kind of human agency, they are prone to a degree of human error. I don’t see what is fatally compromising about recognizing and repairing this evil.

Well, agree to disagree on this. It is the same as with various church leaders continuing to call any and all Latinos "Lamanites," whereas others are more circumspect since the Book of Mormon's introduction page was adjusted from "they are the principal ancestors" to "they are among the ancestors." It is unrepentant equivocation. On certain matters, I consider that no different from fraud.

Incorrect statements about cultural heritage are not only wrong, but are also evil and shameful when done in context of promoting a religion. It's one thing to tell people, "you are a child of God." Fine: impossible to prove or disprove. But to redefine cultural heritage in error, while claiming to be inspired, well I think there should be no equivocation about what happened once the error is clear. It was not inspired; to have claimed so was fraudulent; to not repent for it is also fraudulent.

[Kishkumen]

Well, agree to disagree on this. It is the same as with various church leaders continuing to call any and all Latinos "Lamanites," whereas others are more circumspect since the Book of Mormon's introduction page was adjusted from "they are the principal ancestors" to "they are among the ancestors." It is unrepentant equivocation. On certain matters, I consider that no different from fraud.

Just so I can get your meaning clearly, unrepentant equivocation is fraud. Is that a fair reading? So, where is the line between fraud and non-fraud? In other words, is mythology fraud because it is not historical? Or is finding out that something is not historical and then maintaining it anyway is the fraud?

Incorrect statements about cultural heritage are not only wrong, but are also evil and shameful when done in context of promoting a religion. It's one thing to tell people, "you are a child of God." Fine: impossible to prove or disprove. But to redefine cultural heritage in error, while claiming to be inspired, well I think there should be no equivocation about what happened once the error is clear. It was not inspired; to have claimed so was fraudulent; to not repent for it is also fraudulent.

I think we are closer to each other on this than we think. There is a big difference between me saying that I am the reincarnation of Julius Caesar and me saying that someone else in the reincarnation of Adolf Hitler. The latter just should not be done. Unfortunately, it was very common in the past to concoct for one's self and others and ascribe to others a mythological ancestry that tells a story to help people identify themselves in relation to others.

Now that we know better, we should not engage in ascribing identities to others. If there had been more reflection in the past, ideally no person would have been identified as something less than aspirational in a positive sense. Unfortunately, that is not how things happened. We also are forced to continue grappling with the myths about ourselves and others that may not be as blatant but nevertheless have a real-world impact. Who is a Palestinian? What does it mean to be a Palestinian versus an Israeli? Wait, aren't all people in Israel Israelis? Yes? No? Why not? Is that just?

What makes me puzzled is the continuing positive ownership of Lamanite identity by some Native American LDS people. Some are really unhappy to see the LDS Church back away from these mythological ethnic claims.

[Rivendale]

The Church cannot ultimately control how these blessings are used by the individuals who receive them.

Then they should quit giving them.

[Kishkumen]

Then they should quit giving them.

Why?

[Rivendale]

Then they should quit giving them.

Why?

I don't know. Maybe because myth creates absurdities. Maybe because people get hurt because of these. Would you allow me to give you a blessing? Would you allow me to tell you how to behave around people? And don't transpose that to some historical cultural blip. To borrow from Doc cam...dum

[Moksha]

I just don’t see how organizations are expected to undermine their organizational integrity and prospects in fundamental ways. To choose to belong to an organization or community is about making certain compromises in order to gain certain benefits. Children, as is the way of things, have some of the most basic decisions made for them.

The citizens of the Golden City of Omelas knew that the child must remain trapped and miserable in the basement room for their peace, prosperity, and blessings to continue. They agreed to this bargain. Those whose conscience would not allow this bargain had the option of walking away from Omelas.

[Kishkumen]

The citizens of the Golden City of Omelas knew that the child must remain trapped and miserable in the basement room for their peace, prosperity, and blessings to continue. They agreed to this bargain. Those whose conscience would not allow this bargain had the option of walking away from Omelas.

You are a creative dynamo, Moksha.

[Kishkumen]

I don't know. Maybe because myth creates absurdities. Maybe because people get hurt because of these. Would you allow me to give you a blessing? Would you allow me to tell you how to behave around people? And don't transpose that to some historical cultural blip. To borrow from Doc cam...dum

Myths are unavoidable. It takes a lot of hard work and concerted effort to avoid mythologizing. I mean, you seem to believe in the myth of rational human beings whom mythology corrupts by its irrational influence. That's obviously a myth, since human beings are not, by nature, rational creatures but instead generally irrational creatures capable of exercising reason if they try real hard.

[Moksha]

You are a creative dynamo, Moksha.

Just a fan of Ursula Le Guin.