"Live by the lamp of their own conceit"

[_Daniel Peterson]

But I find it simply absurd to suppose that Elder Oaks owes his position in the Twelve, in any degree whatever, to a recognition on the part of the Brethren that, through his mother, he's a distant relative of Martin Harris.

I didn't say he did.

Others have joined the conversation.

When it happens, I'll be sure to let you know.

I'm actually active in the Church, and I have a pretty good sense of Mormon society and culture -- and far and away not merely in Utah.

I'm beginning to understand why the Brethren avoid your region like the plague. It sounds very evil.

Not evil. Just full of people who draw lines in the sand with the purpose of excluding folks like me. And where do they learn this behavior? From our leaders.

Our leaders must be transmitting secret messages into your region by carrier pigeon, then, because, beyond the boundaries of your sad and oppressive area, so far as I can tell, the Brethren spend little if any time teaching the membership that converts are to be disdained as second-class. And, of course, we know that they never set foot in your area themselves. So it has to be by private message, perhaps sent in code.

When I got married, one of the Mormon Royalty in my ward told my intended husband he could do better than marrying a convert, his family having been in the church almost since the beginning. A fine welcome to the ward, yes?

As I say, your area seems distinctly subpar. Perhaps Shades is right that there are two different religions within the Church -- the one dominant in your region, and the one that is predominant elsewhere. That may explain why the Brethren so clearly avoid entering your area. Perhaps they understand that they have no loyal congregations there.

No, I don't what? Have my nose rubbed in my lesserness, whenever one of the Brethren praises his pioneer roots? Allow me to know what I know, and to point out what you don't know; and you don't know jack about this.

I don't doubt at all that your nose is rubbed in "lesserness" when any of the Brethren talk about the pioneers or about their own forebears. I just don't think that it's the Brethren doing the rubbing. You've got a neck, your head is at the end of it, your face is on your head, and your nose is right in front of your face.

[_harmony]

Others have joined the conversation.

Then address them.

Our leaders must be transmitting secret messages into your region by carrier pigeon, then, because, beyond the boundaries of your sad and oppressive area, so far as I can tell, the Brethren spend little if any time teaching the membership that converts are to be disdained as second-class. And, of course, we know that they never set foot in your area themselves. So it has to be by private message, perhaps sent in code.

On the contrary, they get it from conference. And all that celebrating the leaders' pioneer roots simply reinforces the idea that converts are "less".

I don't doubt at all that your nose is rubbed in "lesserness" when any of the Brethren talk about the pioneers or about their own forebears. I just don't think that it's the Brethren doing the rubbing. You've got a neck, your head is at the end of it, your face is on your head, and your nose is right in front of your face.

Was Hitler responsible for what went on in the gas chambers? He never pushed the button. Are our leaders responsible for the hurtful things the members say or do, based on their words in conference? After all, they don't push the button.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Then address them.

That's what I've been doing.

On the contrary, they get [the teaching that converts are to be disdained as second-class] from conference.

That's pure, unadulterated, triple-strength BS.

[_harmony]

On the contrary, they get [the teaching that converts are to be disdained as second-class] from conference.

That's pure, unadulterated, triple-thick BS.

Ummm. I live on a farm. I'm in a much better position than you to know what constitutes BS.

Let's see... we have one of the Brethren (as close to a Rock Star as the Church Office Building can find), stating his pride in his pioneer roots. Members who have no pioneer roots (all of whom are converts, since pioneer roots by definition means the person's been in the church for more than one generation) listen and know they don't have pioneer roots. Members who do have pioneer roots have their pride in those roots reinforced.

And you're trying to tell me that converts are valued? That their lack of pioneer roots is celebrated? That they should be proud of that lack?

C'mon, Daniel. You live in the heart of Zion. You know exactly what I'm talking about.

See #6.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Let's see... we have one of the Brethren (as close to a Rock Star as the Church Office Building can find), stating his pride in his pioneer roots. Members who have no pioneer roots (all of whom are converts, since pioneer roots by definition means the person's been in the church for more than one generation) listen and know they don't have pioneer roots. Members who do have pioneer roots have their pride in those roots reinforced.

That I'm proud of my parents and of my family's legacy doesn't devalue you or yours in any way.

That X is proud of his pioneer roots doesn't devalue you or yours in any way.

And you're trying to tell me that converts are valued?

Yup. They most certainly are.

That their lack of pioneer roots is celebrated? That they should be proud of that lack?

Don't talk nonsense, harmony. Of course there's nothing to be proud of in the mere lack of pioneer roots. But nobody is defining people without pioneer roots solely by that lack. Except, it seems, you.

There is much to be proud of in my father's service in Patton's Third Army, his participation in the liberation of the Konzentrationslager at Mauthausen, his kindness and gentleness, his overcoming of poverty, and the like. There is much to be proud of in my grandmother's daring departure from Norway when she was a teenage girl, arriving in the New World without a friend and with virtually no money. I'm not nothing, and they're not "lesser," simply because they weren't Mormon pioneers. And no Church leader has ever sought to persuade me otherwise.

Quite to the contrary, the family history materials that the Church puts out are enormously positive about our (non-Mormon) ancestors, their often heroic struggles, the values they've transmitted to us, and etc.

C'mon, Daniel. You live in the heart of Zion. You know exactly what I'm talking about.

I do. I think it's complete nonsense.

I also think that you're looking for yet another way to be offended by the Brethren.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

That's pure, unadulterated, triple-thick BS.

Ummm. I live on a farm. I'm in a much better position than you to know what constitutes BS.

Let's see... we have one of the Brethren (as close to a Rock Star as the Church Office Building can find), stating his pride in his pioneer roots. Members who have no pioneer roots (all of whom are converts, since pioneer roots by definition means the person's been in the church for more than one generation) listen and know they don't have pioneer roots. Members who do have pioneer roots have their pride in those roots reinforced.

And you're trying to tell me that converts are valued? That their lack of pioneer roots is celebrated? That they should be proud of that lack?

Reminds me of one of my favorite conference addresses recently. Pres. Uchtdorf's "Faith of our Father."

http://tinyurl.com/uchtdorf1

"True religion should not originate from what pleases men or the traditions of ancestors, but rather from what pleases God, our Eternal Father."

This was in conference.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Good grief. Is it true -- is it conceivable -- that President Uchtdorf married a convert?

Ugh.

I wonder if SLCentral knew that when he was approved for inclusion in the First Presidency. It seems that the SCMC were asleep at the job. I'll bet heads are gonna roll!

[_harmony]

Good grief. Is it true -- is it conceivable -- that President Uchtdorf married a convert?

That he does not declare his pride in his lack of pioneer heritage does not change the fact that his fellow Brethren have. And that by their declarations, they put another line in the sand to divide people... this time between those with pioneer heritage and those without it.

See #6.

[_harmony]

"True religion should not originate from what pleases men or the traditions of ancestors, but rather from what pleases God, our Eternal Father."

Someone should tell the people who worship at the feet of the Brethren... and Joseph Smith. And those who reinforce that hero worship by their lack of doing anything about it (except revelling in it, of course).

See #6.

[_The Nehor]

I've been going to Pioneer Day my whole life in several states and every time it is discussed at length the speaker always talked about how the heritage of the pioneers is a shared cultural heritage whether you're a first-generation convert or can trace lineage back to them. There is also usually mention of modern pioneers (i.e. converts) who turn their back on much for what they believe in and how difficult that sacrifice can be.

I can only assume that this is also a deviation in Harmony's ward. As my brother said while discussing his Mission at dinner some of the small towns he went to didn't feed them much because, "the Church is not quite as True out there." Perhaps this is true of Harmony's area where the Neo-Zoramites gather to offer haughty prayers and snub those not of Mormon royalty and use Pioneer Day as an excuse to justify their superiority so they can 'profess the blood of nobility'. Based on Book of Mormon foreshadowing I expect they'll try to establish a king soon so they can grind Harmony and the rest of the rank and file/apostates into the dust.

I'm just not sure which side to root for.....