Has your view of the church

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

changed drastically since the advent of this site?

In what ways, if any?

My view of the Church hasn't changed much. I still think it's a flawed institution that God works through and that does much good. As Hugh B. Brown said:

"We should be dauntless in our pursuit of truth and resist all demands for unthinking conformity. No one would have us become mere tape recorders of other people's thoughts. We should be modest and teachable and seek to know the truth by study and faith. There have been times when progress was halted by thought control. Tolerance and truth demand that all be heard and that competing ideas be tested against each other so that the best, which may not always be our own, can prevail. Knowledge is most complete and dependable when all points of view are heard."

In the same talk, Brother Brown also said: "We must preserve freedom of the mind in the Church and resist all efforts to supress it."

And also: "There are altogether too many people in the world who are willing to accept as true whatever is printed in a book or delivered from a pulpit. Their faith never goes below the surface soil of authority."

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

My view of the Church hasn't changed much. I still think it's a flawed institution that God works through and that does much good. As Hugh B. Brown said:

"We should be dauntless in our pursuit of truth and resist all demands for unthinking conformity. No one would have us become mere tape recorders of other people's thoughts. We should be modest and teachable and seek to know the truth by study and faith. There have been times when progress was halted by thought control. Tolerance and truth demand that all be heard and that competing ideas be tested against each other so that the best, which may not always be our own, can prevail. Knowledge is most complete and dependable when all points of view are heard."

In the same talk, Brother Brown also said: "We must preserve freedom of the mind in the Church and resist all efforts to supress it."

And also: "There are altogether too many people in the world who are willing to accept as true whatever is printed in a book or delivered from a pulpit. Their faith never goes below the surface soil of authority."

Excellent quotes.

We have not had one since Hugh B. Brown willing to speak against conformity.

[RedHeadGal]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I'm no one special. I have no great answers. I was born the way I was born, with the desires of heart that were placed there. And to be honest, probably the worst thing that could happen is for me to be placed in a position where I could enact change, because then I would have changed hats from observer/critic to revolutionary. And I will tell you one thing I have learned--almost every revolution fails.

This is an interesting point--that most revolutionary changes cannot last. So perhaps we are better off in discussions for now, trying to watch things change at a rate that's too slow. This would explain why the concept of "change" within the church provokes so much debate, it moves so slowly that you can argue each step didn't amount to much.

If you take a change as mundane as women praying in sac meeting, no one now thinks that's any big deal. It was nothing. And yet it was something.

Is the glacial pace better? Maybe. Maybe not. Regardless, it can be hard to accept that such would be true.

[CardiacCoug]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

My view of the Church hasn't changed much. I still think it's a flawed institution that God works through and that does much good. As Hugh B. Brown said:

"We should be dauntless in our pursuit of truth and resist all demands for unthinking conformity. No one would have us become mere tape recorders of other people's thoughts. We should be modest and teachable and seek to know the truth by study and faith. There have been times when progress was halted by thought control. Tolerance and truth demand that all be heard and that competing ideas be tested against each other so that the best, which may not always be our own, can prevail. Knowledge is most complete and dependable when all points of view are heard."

In the same talk, Brother Brown also said: "We must preserve freedom of the mind in the Church and resist all efforts to supress it."

And also: "There are altogether too many people in the world who are willing to accept as true whatever is printed in a book or delivered from a pulpit. Their faith never goes below the surface soil of authority."

Those quotes are great. Thanks!

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

My view of the Church hasn't changed much. I still think it's a flawed institution that God works through and that does much good. As Hugh B. Brown said:

"We should be dauntless in our pursuit of truth and resist all demands for unthinking conformity. No one would have us become mere tape recorders of other people's thoughts. We should be modest and teachable and seek to know the truth by study and faith. There have been times when progress was halted by thought control. Tolerance and truth demand that all be heard and that competing ideas be tested against each other so that the best, which may not always be our own, can prevail. Knowledge is most complete and dependable when all points of view are heard."

In the same talk, Brother Brown also said: "We must preserve freedom of the mind in the Church and resist all efforts to supress it."

And also: "There are altogether too many people in the world who are willing to accept as true whatever is printed in a book or delivered from a pulpit. Their faith never goes below the surface soil of authority."

Is there a Hugh B. Brown among the 12 or First Presidency today? My perception is that the trend has been away from men who think like this. In fact, my perception is that this is not a sentiment any of them would share. But I may be wrong about this.

Someone correct me with a quote from the last twenty years by an apostle if they can that is along these lines. That is not me being flip. I would love to have someone change my mind on that.

I think we are in a period of retrenchment, ironically coinciding with huge swaths of the membership adopting Browns view. I think the traditionalists in the church still control the public culture, but their grip on the intellectual life of the saints has slipped quite a bit. I agree with Mike that we are watching the death of apologetics, primarily because they are so unpersuasive. Folks are then left to find new ways to reconcile everything they learn in internet land with what they encounter Sunday. It will be interesting to see whether some of these new approaches find articulation in leadership as the years go by or whether the entrenchment becomes deeper. I think either is a possible response.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Is there a Hugh B. Brown among the 12 or First Presidency today? My perception is that the trend has been away from men who think link this. In fact, my perception is that this is not a sentiment any of them would share. But I may be wrong about this.

Someone correct me with a quote from the last twenty years by an apostle if they can that is along these lines. That is not me being flip. I would love to have someone change my mind on that.

I think we are in a period of retrenchment, ironically coinciding with huge swaths of the membership adopting Browns view. I think the traditionalists in the church still control the public culture, but their grip on the intellectual life of the saints has slipped quite a bit. I agree with Mike that we are watching the death of apologetics, primarily because they are so unpersuasive. Folks are then left to find new ways to reconcile everything they learn in internet land with what they encounter Sunday. It will be interesting to see whether some of these new approaches find articulation in leadership as the years go by or whether the entrenchment becomes deeper. I think either is a possible response.

Your perception is consistent with my perception of the Church leadership and Church culture. In large part, this is due to a failure in the leadership's eyes, of the Arrington experiment on openness, but the internet foists Brown's views upon the membership at large.

I think Maxwell harbored views similar to Brown, and Oaks' instincts are a little bit in that direction but he doesn't like to rock the boat. Holland may be more that way than we'd be led to believe, but the newer ones, such as Bednar, send the signal we're going back to the hardline fundamentalist approach.

[MikeWaters]

I think a lot can be read into GBH's statement that there has never been greater unity among the 12 in the past than now.

Part of what that means is the 12 having a completely united front and staying completely on message. There is a reason that in some ways, the men all blur together except for style and personality: they are all saying the same thing all the time.

Wouldn't it have been interesting if the church had invested 1 billion dollars in Jackson County instead of a shopping mall? There I go daydreaming again, I better stop that. An idle mind is the devil's workshop.....

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Part of what that means is the 12 having a completely united front and staying completely on message. There is a reason that in some ways, the men all blur together except for style and personality: they are all saying the same thing all the time.

I think that is because we now live in an age where every word they say is preserved and scrutinized online. There is more risk that an off message comment gets widely disseminated. Where did all the almost wild eyed free wheeling truth from any source thinking of Joseph disappear to.

[MikeWaters]

I love watching televisions shows about astrophysics. I am fascinated by what we have learned about the beginning of the universe, about the birth of galaxies, black holes, singularities, and the rest of it.

I bet Joseph Smith, if he were around, would feel the same way. And I bet he would have a thing or two to say about how all of that fit into the spiritual cosmos. In fact, perhaps he would even write a revelation regarding his questions to the Lord about it.

Boy would that be fun and interesting.

I will bet none of us are holding our breaths for any additions to the D&C this conference. A bible, a bible, we have a bible. What need have we of another bible?

A quad, a quad, we have a quad. What need have we of another quad?

Something like that.

Perhaps the take home point is that we are each endowed with the ability to be prophets to ourselves. We can each receive personal revelation and insight, while it may not apply to the church or anyone else, it can relate to our own cosmic existence.

Perhaps I love the cosmos because I always loved the cosmos. Who knows.

[CardiacCoug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I think a lot can be read into GBH's statement that there has never been greater unity among the 12 in the past than now.

Part of what that means is the 12 having a completely united front and staying completely on message. There is a reason that in some ways, the men all blur together except for style and personality: they are all saying the same thing all the time.

Wouldn't it have been interesting if the church had invested 1 billion dollars in Jackson County instead of a shopping mall? There I go daydreaming again, I better stop that. An idle mind is the devil's workshop.....

Do you really think a gathering of Saints to Jackson County will occur? Would very many of the normal (non-fanatical) LDS people really get excited about the Church investing in Jackson County?

I think President Hinckley's comments on men becoming Gods could also apply to a literal gathering of the Saints to Missouri. Sure, it has been taught in the past, but "I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it."