Problems with Micromanagement in the Church

[_Roger Morrison]

It wasn't read in my ward. Maybe because we didn't need it. Maybe some other wards did.

This is a good example, though, of how the apostacies happen. One little thing at a time. One little step off the path, and then another, then another.

This only has any meaning at all if you conflate the particular structure of an LDS meeting with the Gospel. The LDS church isn't the Gospel, or so you ought to claim. The LDS "Plan of Sacrament Meeting" is not the "Plan of Salvation". Whether one sings their testimony, or just tells their travelog and cries, is not Gospel Truth. Whether some families get together to have a potluck dinner after church on Fast Sunday or not is not the same as the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

That you feel that straying from the particular form that LDS meetings hold to is tantamount to beginning apostasy, tells me a lot about what's important to you. What's important to you, as far as one's faithfulness to God, is apparently how strictly one conforms with LDS traditions and culture.

Seth, you're just toooo perceptive and astute. I hope you won't object too strongly if i attach a label to what you describe by your Authoritarian picture in your first paragraph?? Pasted below seems apt when one considers the leadership style and institution objective, while not going to the 'extreme solution' of enforcement...

fascism (Taken from Britanica)

Philosophy of governing that stresses the primacy and glory of the institution, unquestioning obedience to its leader, subordination of the individual will to the institution's authority, and harsh suppression of dissent.

(I could stop here, and my point would be made, but I'll let it run. RM)

Authoritarian virtues are celebrated, while liberal and democratic values are disparaged. Fascism arose during the 1920s and '30s partly out of fear of the rising power of the working classes; it differed from contemporary communism (as practiced under Joseph Stalin) by its protection of business and landowning elites and its preservation of class systems. The leaders of the fascist governments of Italy (1922–43), Germany (1933–45), and Spain (1939–75)—Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, and Francisco Franco—were portrayed to their publics as embodiments of the strength and resolve necessary to rescue their nations from political and economic chaos. Japanese fascists (1936–45) fostered belief in the uniqueness of the Japanese spirit and taught subordination to the state and personal sacrifice. See also totalitarianism; neofascism.

Some will consider such a comparison extreme and inappropriate simply because of the infamous names of those who ruled by such fiat. However, the principles, by whomever applied, serve the same purpose: suppression of constituents and top-down edict-rule of the mass.

Whether the "letter" that Scratch refs is authentic or not, it most certainly is "believeable"... Warm regards, Roger

[_Pokatator]

Roger,

Whether the letter is real may or may not be true but Charity's response to it was real.

[_charity]

So, apostasy can be as simple as one McDonalds serving pink sauce instead of ketchup.

You should see the really apostate McDonald's in Korea. You would not beleive what they have to the special sauce on those two beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles on a sesame seed bun.

[_charity]

It wasn't read in my ward. Maybe because we didn't need it. Maybe some other wards did.

This is a good example, though, of how the apostacies happen. One little thing at a time. One little step off the path, and then another, then another.

This only has any meaning at all if you conflate the particular structure of an LDS meeting with the Gospel. The LDS church isn't the Gospel, or so you ought to claim. The LDS "Plan of Sacrament Meeting" is not the "Plan of Salvation". Whether one sings their testimony, or just tells their travelog and cries, is not Gospel Truth. Whether some families get together to have a potluck dinner after church on Fast Sunday or not is not the same as the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

That you feel that straying from the particular form that LDS meetings hold to is tantamount to beginning apostasy, tells me a lot about what's important to you. What's important to you, as far as one's faithfulness to God, is apparently how strictly one conforms with LDS traditions and culture.

This is ridiculous. I sometimes wonder if there is anyone here who thinks above concrete operational thought. Let's talk in the abstract, and raise this discussion a little from the kindergarten level.

The form of an LDS meeting is only important in this discussion as a type, parallel. But since that is what all you people seem to want to discuss, let's discuss plans of meetings.

When Jesus was with the apostles, what type of Church meeting did they have? We don't know what they did exactly when the law governing the sacrifices had been fulfilled. Do you think they had ornate cathedrals, priests in ornate vestiments, the stations of the cross, kneeling and crossing oneself before they sat down in the pews, Latin liturgy, etc.?

So how did the Catholic church get its particular form of a meeting? Did they one day go from a simple sacrament with broken bread and a homely cup of wine to wafers and silver cups? From speaking plain and simple Gospel truths, to a formalized text and responses, presidential prayers and inauldible prayers?

Little by little.

How did the one Church with Jesus at its head become Greek Orthodox, Catholic, Reformation, etc. with over 1,000 denominations?

Little by little.

And what I intended with my post to show that is how apostacy happens. Nothing seems that big a deal at first. Without a steadying hand of a prophet receiving revelation, they wandered off the path--culturally and doctrinally.

Edited to add: What do you think Paul was trying to do with his letters? Keep everyone on the same page, keep the doctrine pure, stop the straying.

[_Some Schmo]

How did the one Church with Jesus at its head become Greek Orthodox, Catholic, Reformation, etc. with over 1,000 denominations?

Little by little.

And what I intended with my post to show that is how apostacy happens. Nothing seems that big a deal at first. Without a steadying hand of a prophet receiving revelation, they wandered off the path--culturally and doctrinally.

Edited to add: What do you think Paul was trying to do with his letters? Keep everyone on the same page, keep the doctrine pure, stop the straying.

That's right. God made us all different to test us to see if we could all be the same. Makes sense to me! *rolls eyes*

The real reason there are so many different religions is much simpler than that: an open market. Attract members = more cash. Who wouldn't want to get in on that action?

[_asbestosman]

Do you think they had ornate cathedrals, priests in ornate vestiments, the stations of the cross, kneeling and crossing oneself before they sat down in the pews, Latin liturgy, etc.?

Do you think they had big, beautiful temples, special temple clothing, separate ordinance rooms, altars, sacred words and promises, etc.?


The key to apostasy, I think, is making the changes yourself instead of making changes authorized by God through the proper priesthood channels.

[_Roger Morrison]

This is ridiculous. I sometimes wonder if there is anyone here who thinks above concrete operational thought. Let's talk in the abstract, and raise this discussion a little from the kindergarten level.

Good point Charity. Where to from here? Did you read my post at the end of page one? Where to from there? Warm regards, Roger

[_beastie]

This is ridiculous. I sometimes wonder if there is anyone here who thinks above concrete operational thought. Let's talk in the abstract, and raise this discussion a little from the kindergarten level.

The form of an LDS meeting is only important in this discussion as a type, parallel. But since that is what all you people seem to want to discuss, let's discuss plans of meetings.

When Jesus was with the apostles, what type of Church meeting did they have? We don't know what they did exactly when the law governing the sacrifices had been fulfilled. Do you think they had ornate cathedrals, priests in ornate vestiments, the stations of the cross, kneeling and crossing oneself before they sat down in the pews, Latin liturgy, etc.?

So how did the Catholic church get its particular form of a meeting? Did they one day go from a simple sacrament with broken bread and a homely cup of wine to wafers and silver cups? From speaking plain and simple Gospel truths, to a formalized text and responses, presidential prayers and inauldible prayers?

Little by little.

How did the one Church with Jesus at its head become Greek Orthodox, Catholic, Reformation, etc. with over 1,000 denominations?

Little by little.

And what I intended with my post to show that is how apostacy happens. Nothing seems that big a deal at first. Without a steadying hand of a prophet receiving revelation, they wandered off the path--culturally and doctrinally.

Edited to add: What do you think Paul was trying to do with his letters? Keep everyone on the same page, keep the doctrine pure, stop the straying.

The amusing thing about this is Charity thinks we didn't already know this was her reasoning.

[_the road to hana]

Yeah. Having a break-fast leads to apostasy, but erroneous teachings from the prophet regarding issues such as the nature of God won't.

Heaven forbid anyone should join in breaking their fast together. Where do people think the word originated?

[_the road to hana]

How did the one Church with Jesus at its head become Greek Orthodox, Catholic, Reformation, etc. with over 1,000 denominations?

How did the "restored Church" become several hundred denominations?

Wine went to water in LDS practice. Common cups went to paper/plastic disposables. Garments became increasingly abbreviated, and then separated into two pieces. Temple ordinances and oaths were changed. Scriptures were modified. Doctrines and policies were changed, and even disavowed.