Limits of Reframing

[Brian Johnston]

Even in comments I can't agree with, I can understand how that person can find value in that particular belief (most of the time). But I'm not confident that the reverse would be true, that my unorthodox beliefs would be accepted as providing value for me.

Hawkgrrrl says something that I like a lot: "The person with the greater knowledge has the greater repsonsibility." I would add that we can follow the example of Jesus by being willing to suffer for others, especially unjustly. I have hope that its the higher path to love people as they are, and love them even if they do not understand us or are even afraid of us. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you -- the golden rule.

People generally treat others poorly out of ignorance and a lack of empathic connection. The line from Jesus "forgive them, for they know not what they do" echos in my head and heart. What a beautiful model to follow. If people knew, they would likely not treat us with fear and anger. If they felt what they did to others, they would not want to be unkind. That is a wonderful part of the idea of becoming one with God and Christ, and indeed all of humanity.

One last thing to add, I would not see things like this and have the chance to think about them if I were not in the Church. Community with others creates the challenge.

[Orson]

Some good comments on this thread.

I would not see things like this and have the chance to think about them if I were not in the Church. Community with others creates the challenge.

Amen! I try to say I love a good challenge.

[hawkgrrrl]

To boil it down into a short statement, I would say this. To be LDS, someone has to want to be LDS on some level. They can't be out to destroy and ruin the faith tradition. They have to find some enjoyment and purpose in being a part of the community.

I've said it before elsewhere, but the church allows for a lot of variation in belief, but less variation in behavior, probably because we see behavior but don't have "windows on men's souls." Personally, I think there is something to the "loyalty" factor. If you are not against the church, you are for it (to paraphrase Jesus very loosely). Some members like to take that the other direction and say if you are not for it you're against it, but those who like to judge others and feel right should also beware that they aren't mistaking their own beliefs for doctrine when they are sometimes just culturally accepted norms that are incorrect.

On the loyalty factor, when JS was confronted with apostatizing apostles, some of whom were close friends, the one test they had to be able to pass to come back to the fold was to profess loyalty to him and the church. Is that the best test of one's worthiness? Not necessarily, but it's probably a good judge of how fit one is to be in an organization. If you ran a company, would you keep an employee on who would not be loyal to the company (e.g. promote its interests, not give away trade secrets, not sabotage whatever the company was creating)? I wouldn't, no matter how brilliant or talented they were.

[Orson]

To me however, the point is still relevant – that views and doctrines do change, and the goal of the LDS doctrine (at least from the early days) is to be aligned with what is actually true (as far as can be determined).

I like the way you stated this, Orson. I hear you saying, rather than believing that the church has ALL the truth, that we are moving TOWARD the truth.

Yes! Thanks for stating it more succinctly. I like the saying "the church is truer today than it ever has been."

[kupord maizzed]

Consider Christianity. There are some who want to make very narrow definitions and delineations, but the scholars say generally if you sincerely self-identify as a Christian, you are a Christian. I think that can apply to being LDS also. An unchurched, disconnected, heretical misfit is LDS if that what he/she insists.

Nonny, based on your reply right above, it doesn't sound like your question included any element of wondering how much subversion is allowed in being LDS. But that is a sincere question for me. Can I be subversive in intent?

I think that question is interesting. You can or once could be Moslem/Muslim if you believed a sword was a part of your missionary tools. Possibly a sword also sometimes has/had a part in being LDS, but never, I believe, as a missionary tool. So I think at this time it would be outside the cloud of common values if you said you were an LDS and you wanted to use the sword to make the LDS Church in your image or make the world in the LDS image. That's an extreme. Somewhere of that, I believe you can be LDS and morally, benignly, mercifully subversive.

I would be openly contrary, but it wouldn't be genteel.

KM

[hawkgrrrl]

Mormonism is a creedless religion with (theoretically at least) an ever-expanding canon. We are supposed to "treasure up the good of all faiths" and have been taught that "Mormonism is truth; and every man who embraces it feels himself at liberty to embrace every truth." So, given that, heterodoxy should be the norm, right?

It's really the fact that there is so much focus on conservativism and orthodoxy that's so surprising. I think it's just that the orthodox and conservatives tend to be more confident, more vocal, more organized, and a little power hungry. That's okay. Let them rule the world. I'd rather understand it than rule it.

[Orson]

I'd rather understand [the world] than rule it.

Beautiful! I love that!

[mr_musicman]

Personally, I don't think that we have all knowledge or truth yet. We also don't completely understand the history. I think this is where faith comes in. Unfortunately, with 13 billion members out there, you tend to get as many opinions. It is not outside the realm of my personal testimony that things can change. Afterall, the church has changed a great deal since 1830. You just have to have a couple of constants to keep it going.

1. Christ is our Savior and head of the church. He teaches us through our leaders, line upon line and precept upon precept.

2. That Joseph Smith was a prophet with priesthood authority from God. This does not mean you agree with everything he did, but simply accept the fact that God restored his authority through him.

If you can accept those truths, then you get at the core of the Gospel. We have a Savior, and we have the authority to carry out the work of God and receive revelations that will eventually result in receiving all truth. Until that point, I think it is simply important that we desire to serve God. Afterall, the covenants we make in the church are not that we will be perfect, but that we desire to or are willing to be perfect. The first is rather impossible for us, the second is well within our power.

If your heart desires to serve God and you are seeking to do so, I believe that you fine. God will take you on a journey of learning. Sometimes he doesn't just give the answer, because the long winded road helps us learn things better and even helps us teach others. One day, we will have all truth, but we don't at the moment. As others have said, both JS and BY have said that the church encompasses all truth. If you are seeking the truth, you can consider yourself a mormon.

[Brian Johnston]

If your heart desires to serve God and you are seeking to do so, I believe that you fine. God will take you on a journey of learning. Sometimes he doesn't just give the answer, because the long winded road helps us learn things better and even helps us teach others. One day, we will have all truth, but we don't at the moment. As others have said, both JS and BY have said that the church encompasses all truth. If you are seeking the truth, you can consider yourself a mormon.

I love the way you described this. Thanks!

The basics of the Gospel are Faith, Repentance, Baptism and receiving the Gift of the Holy Ghost. After that, the search goes on -- to find the meaning and accumulate "truth" whatever that may be.

[kupord maizzed]

1. Christ ... head ... through ... leaders

2. Joseph Smith ... priesthood authority from God ...restored

If your heart desires to serve God and you are seeking to do so, I believe that you fine. <snip> If you are seeking the truth, you can consider yourself a mormon.

I be diametrically opposed to you on 1 and 2, but I am sure with you on the bottom line.