I spent the last week in the Salt Lake area and Provo. The fortuitous occurrence which necessitated my trip was a Keystone Conference on TGF-beta at the Snowbird Ski Resort in the mountains east of Sandy. Every single expense associated with the conference was paid for through a professional development allowance provided to postdocs by St. Jude and a scholarship awarded to me through the Keystone organization. To top it off, Sarah came with me. Really none of this would have been nearly as great if she hadn't been there. I'll admit, my wife is pretty much my reason for existing.
First I'll describe the conference and then I'll give an honest assessment of the state of Utah. The conference was great. It was at Snowbird, up in the mountains. The drive, the setting, and the conference accomodations couldn't have been more spectacular. It was truly gorgeous. I presented our work in a poster format on Saturday night and then as an invited oral presentation on Monday. Both came off very well. The work generated a lot of interest. I got some great suggestions about future experiments and I handled the questions that I received very well. I came away loving my science and excited to get back at it.
Now for the serious stuff. When it came time for me to move out of Utah upon my graduation from BYU I was very excited. This trip made me realize that I'm still very excited about NOT living in Utah. First of all, upon deplaning we realize that the entire Salt Lake valley is enveloped in a very thick smog. I had forgotten how awful the air quality is out there. Visibility couldn't have been more than 1/2 mile, no joke. It was disgusting and only added to the grossness of dirty snow and entire cities (Sandy, South Jordan, Taylorsville, Holladay) constructed of strip malls, big box stores, and chain restaurants. Seriously, if it isn't a chapel or a temple it's either a Del Taco, a Carl's Jr., or a Nordstrom's.
On Monday it finally started to clear up a bit and I could see that there were actually MORE chain stores than I had originally thought. So we went to Temple Square and the Church History Museum. The Church History Museum was faaaaantastic. If you ever get the chance you must go. I had no idea that some of those things still existed. But the coolest item, and by coolest I mean stupidest, was in the gift store. Yes, fellow Saints, it truly is the dispensation of the fulness of times when, for just $60 every member of the church can own their very own Liahona. No, not the foreign language version of the Ensign. I'm talking about a genuine brass replica of the Liahona. If you move it words appear just like on those magic 8 ball toys. Don't believe that the sacrilege of commercial Mormonism could stoop so low? You underestimate the power of commercialist Mormons to denegrate the sacred. They're capable of anything out there:
For only $10 you can buy a cheaper, toy version for your kiddies to play with. I'm sure that Lehi would find peace in knowing that the sacred object provided to him to receive revelation and guidance in the Judean wilderness is now a mere child's play thing. Honestly, I don't know why the church doesn't put the kibosh on crap like this. And then to think that there are suckers out there who will pay SIXTY dollars to have this in their home!!!! Good grief I hope I'm not friends with any of them.
First I'll describe the conference and then I'll give an honest assessment of the state of Utah. The conference was great. It was at Snowbird, up in the mountains. The drive, the setting, and the conference accomodations couldn't have been more spectacular. It was truly gorgeous. I presented our work in a poster format on Saturday night and then as an invited oral presentation on Monday. Both came off very well. The work generated a lot of interest. I got some great suggestions about future experiments and I handled the questions that I received very well. I came away loving my science and excited to get back at it.
Now for the serious stuff. When it came time for me to move out of Utah upon my graduation from BYU I was very excited. This trip made me realize that I'm still very excited about NOT living in Utah. First of all, upon deplaning we realize that the entire Salt Lake valley is enveloped in a very thick smog. I had forgotten how awful the air quality is out there. Visibility couldn't have been more than 1/2 mile, no joke. It was disgusting and only added to the grossness of dirty snow and entire cities (Sandy, South Jordan, Taylorsville, Holladay) constructed of strip malls, big box stores, and chain restaurants. Seriously, if it isn't a chapel or a temple it's either a Del Taco, a Carl's Jr., or a Nordstrom's.
On Monday it finally started to clear up a bit and I could see that there were actually MORE chain stores than I had originally thought. So we went to Temple Square and the Church History Museum. The Church History Museum was faaaaantastic. If you ever get the chance you must go. I had no idea that some of those things still existed. But the coolest item, and by coolest I mean stupidest, was in the gift store. Yes, fellow Saints, it truly is the dispensation of the fulness of times when, for just $60 every member of the church can own their very own Liahona. No, not the foreign language version of the Ensign. I'm talking about a genuine brass replica of the Liahona. If you move it words appear just like on those magic 8 ball toys. Don't believe that the sacrilege of commercial Mormonism could stoop so low? You underestimate the power of commercialist Mormons to denegrate the sacred. They're capable of anything out there:
For only $10 you can buy a cheaper, toy version for your kiddies to play with. I'm sure that Lehi would find peace in knowing that the sacred object provided to him to receive revelation and guidance in the Judean wilderness is now a mere child's play thing. Honestly, I don't know why the church doesn't put the kibosh on crap like this. And then to think that there are suckers out there who will pay SIXTY dollars to have this in their home!!!! Good grief I hope I'm not friends with any of them.On Tuesday we went to BYU and visited the Museum of Art where the contrast between modern Mormon kitsch (think Greg Olson, personal Liahona, and Captain Moroni action figure) and true spirituality was on full display. We were lucky enough to be there while the museum had on display a collection of Carl Heinrich Bloch's paintings of Christ including 5 of the 8 altar pieces that he painted. This was the first time that those 5 altar pieces have EVER been away from their native sites in Sweden and Denmark. The works were very impressive and spiritual and it made me think that it's quite disappointing that modern Mormons, having a knowledge of the full gospel and the guidance of the gift of the Holy Ghost, can't seem to come up with anything better than these gems:
In fact, it's a bit embarrassing and I think it's a bit of a mockery to have such AWFUL art for sale in the same building (Church History Museum) as Joseph and Hyrum Smith's death masks, the original Bible that Joseph used in his retranslation of the Bible, and original pages from the Book of Mormon translation in Oliver Cowdery's handwriting. Granted, these pieces are a sincere expression of the artists' testimonies, and I don't question their faithfulness, but is that enough to qualify it as worthy of mass production and retail sale for distribution in members' homes? Well, I suppose I could go on and on about this topic but it will just get me angry.
In fact, it's a bit embarrassing and I think it's a bit of a mockery to have such AWFUL art for sale in the same building (Church History Museum) as Joseph and Hyrum Smith's death masks, the original Bible that Joseph used in his retranslation of the Bible, and original pages from the Book of Mormon translation in Oliver Cowdery's handwriting. Granted, these pieces are a sincere expression of the artists' testimonies, and I don't question their faithfulness, but is that enough to qualify it as worthy of mass production and retail sale for distribution in members' homes? Well, I suppose I could go on and on about this topic but it will just get me angry.BYU was fabulous as always. Well, mostly. Based on the fashions that I saw on at least 50% of the females on campus I suppose it is now perfectly acceptable to wear form fitting clothing if you call them "skinny jeans." That was disappointing. Also disappointing was BYU's lack of green space. The new and beautiful Joseph F. Smith Building (which wasn't completed when I left Provo) has a very large courtyard which offered a great opportunity for green space. Instead it is a humongous space filled in with more concrete. Disappointing, but the overall image of BYU is one of extraordinary cleanliness compared to Ohio State.
The Cougareat still serves awesome salad wraps, and Sugar and Spice (I think that was the name of two of those co-eds in skinny jeans that I saw) still serves the BEST bread and honey butter in the history of the world.
Sarah and I met with our old virology professor, Dr. Brent Johnson. I really like him and he shaped my career. We sat in on one of his classes, a class which wasn't around when I was there. It was a small class (only 6 students) and it met in a boardroom where the students gathered around the table and had an open discussion about the material from the textbook. I thought it was a great format for encouraging critical thinking and scientific discussion. I'm pleased to see that BYU is continuing to offer a stellar, student-centered education. Dr. Johnson even introduced Sarah and me and allowed me to chime in on a few topics.
Lastly, our final two nights in the area Sarah and I stayed at Parrish Place Bed and Breakfast in Sugar House, just 5 miles south of downtown Salt Lake. It is an old historic home owned and operated by a couple very friendly Swedes with beautiful rooms and a spectacular breakfast of muffins, granola, yogurt, fruit, juice, milk, and hot chocolate delivered to your room. If you're ever in Salt Lake I highly recommend that you stay there.
So Utah is still out there. It's still unique. It still has some good points but in general I'm glad to be looking out my window right now onto Memphis, TN.
I have to agree that some of the new artwork is merchandising is a bit hokey. And WAY OVERPRICED since it is practically a monopoly. Heck, have you been in a traditional Christian bookstore? They have taken some of the religious things so much farther than any members have.
ReplyDeleteBut, I remember people badmouthing the paintings by Arnold Freeburg. Now they are widely accepted.
On the flip side of that coin. I don't necessarily think that some of the "action figures" for kids, or coloring books, etc. are a bad thing. When you teach a child you do it in a way that he/she can understand. Parker loves the Living Scriptures videos (cartoons).
I on the other hand prefer the works by Minerva Tichert. I think its more of a growing process. As we appreciate the gospel more, we rise to a new level of understanding.
One of Parkers favorite games is to have me (loosely) tie his hands behind his back. Then he pretends to pray for strength and "breaks the cords that bound him" like Nephi. He loves doing that. I think it is silly. But it is his way of acting like Nephi. He regularly says how Nephi is his favorite Prophet.
Glad you had a great trip!
Just as long as Parker doesn't take that 'hand-tying' to another level as a married adult, I guess we'll be ok.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I just had to laugh about this so much. I hear ya Troy, but I can't even comment because I've been exploding with so much to say in this general area on my blog, I think if I actually post my thoughts it'll be explosive. So, for now I keep my mouth shut, and hold on tight to my little brass liahona replica.
Lol, I could go on for pages about the state of popular Mormon art. For brevity's sake, I will just say that you need to go to some galleries, the MOA, and the Springville Museum of Art which has an annual religious art show if you want to find unique and thoughtful religious art.
ReplyDeleteIt is important to remember that Bloch was a product of his time, and the next Bloch work will look nothing like is predecessor's.
On the other matter, what I find most difficult about some of the things sold is the commodification of the gospel. Sometimes I think it comes close to priest craft, and that is books as much or more than toys. So it is not really the items so much as the intention that unsettles me. Somethings seem like a shameless attempt to cash in on the gospel.
Amen, Kyle. Have you ever flipped through the monthly Deseret Book catalog? There's absolutely NO originality whatsoever. The name escapes me currently but there is a book being sold now that is nothing more than a Mormony spin on The DaVinci Code. Something about a secret code that turns up on a church document and some guy getting thrown into a whirlwind adventure. I mean, if Deseret Book is going to sell crap, and they do sell plenty of crap, they could at least sell crap that is an original idea rather than something that is ripped off of another popular novel but given a churchy flavor and written very poorly.
ReplyDeleteAnd that brings me to my final point - Why is it that most LDS authors feel the need to base their fictional novels around the gospel? I understand that they're writing from their experiences but does it ALWAYS have to include the gospel? There are exceptions of course but why can't LDS authors write books that are just books, good books? I think I know the answer and it nauseates me. I think it's because there is a large audience (largely in Arizona, Idaho, Utah, Colorado, Nevada) of schmucks who will read any old piece of crap, and find it "inspiring", if it mentions the gospel. I just have to keep reminding myself that Deseret Book is a private business, with no affiliation with the church, that has to make a profit and they do so by catering to a certain audience. Much the same as the Jerry Springer show.
Actually, Deseret Book is owned by the Church. The bookstore chain is wholly owned by Deseret Management Corporation (a "for-profit" asset management company), which is owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
ReplyDeleteSorry to burst your bubble Troy.
I am not sure how a non-profit can own a for-profit company. That seems odd to me.
ReplyDeleteWell then I think we need to distinguish "church-owned" from "church-operated" because I doubt the church treats Deseret Book the same way that it treats the curriculum department. I can't believe that "the brethren", as it were, personally sign off on every crappy little item that Deseret Book puts on its shelf the same way that they approve the Sunday School lessons that we get each week.
ReplyDeleteI have to think this way, you see, because I would have a problem believing that the little Liahona gadget is given the full blessing of the priesthood leaders. I doubt that they are even aware it exists. At any rate there are apparently too many Mormons with too much disposable income if that's the kind of stuff that we're buying at Deseret Book these days.
Actually, that is completely legal and common in the business world.
ReplyDeleteAnd "not-for-profit" or "non-profit" doesn't mean that they cannot make money. It only means that the company doesn't distribute surplus at the end of the fiscal year to shareholders or owners or someone like that.
They use the surplus income for other things instead. But boy can they still make a fortune:)
Troy,
ReplyDeleteI think you would have to be terribly naive to think that the General Authorities and highest leadership of the church just ignores what Deseret Book is doing.
Especially since they appointed her as the President and COO after serving in the General Relief Society Presidency.
Besides, the President of the Church and the quorum of the twelve all publish through Deseret Book. They are VERY aware of what they sell. Sheesh! It's like you guys can't comprehend that the church is officially a business. It has to be a business identity in this world. I think it might surprise you at the number of businesses that the church owns and operates. It is pretty impressive!
I understand what each is, I have worked for a NPO (and for-profit obviously). I was just unaware that one could own the other. With all the problems the church has defending its NPO status, I'm surprised they haven't gotten rid of Deseret Book to be honest. They must have pretty big walls between them institutionally.
ReplyDeleteYou're extrapolating from what I've said Ammon. I'm aware of the business-mindedness of the church. Much has been made in the national press in the last 10 years about the church's assets. I went to one of their several colleges, remember. BYU is very much a business. I was not saying that the church pays no attention to what Deseret Book is doing. My point was, if you re-read what I wrote, that the church (meaning the priesthood leadership) likely does not approve/disapprove everything that Deseret does. They couldn't possibly have that much influence on Deseret and still accomplish the more important business of running the church.
ReplyDeleteAnd then my real point was that Deseret Book sells some really stupid stuff and I hope that each item isn't specifically approved of by the first presidency.
Ammon, have you have had personal experiences with the mismanagement and underhandedness that takes place in a "church owned" business? I have found that it is hard to have such a cavalier attitude towards these types of issues when you have seen things that would make you want to leave any company for ethics issues and it is not just ran by a member, but ostensibly owned by the church itself.
ReplyDeleteI am with Troy. I refuse to believe that the brethren spend near the amount of effort on these side projects as they do on the gospel. They have their hands full running the affairs of the church.
People are flawed yes, people in church etc., but money breeds greed and corruption. There is a reason why the Book of Mormon explicitly warns about priest-craft. The careful separation of the church from its side ventures is important imo.
Poor Ammon, you always seem to be alone in your opinions on here recently. I think it's probably a factor of blogs being a poor way to communicate subtleties in points-of-view.
ReplyDeleteAs for the tax issue it seems like the Church dodges the issue by placing its for-profit business ventures in the hands of Deseret Management Corporation which holds the church's business firms. Seems like alot of semantics to me but let's not get into how ridiculous our tax code is.
At any rate, I stand by my statement that the church leadership is not involved in the daily operations of Deseret Book. It just makes no sense to me. But even if you give me clear evidence that they do I will, for my own faith and sanity, refuse to believe that Pres. Monson approved the sale of the personal liahona thing.
You guys are hilarious. Its so fun to watch you guys freak out over such trivial stuff. Who cares if somebody marketed a liahona thing. Obviously somebody is getting something out of it. If that is a thing of value to them, who are we to poo-poo that?
ReplyDeleteThe "market" will drive the products. If nobody buys it then they won't make it.
Of course the General Authorities aren't approving products for sale at DB. But I am sure that they have walked through the stores and have seen the stuff. Heck, I would bet their spouses have purchased a bunch of that stuff. But, if they thought it was inappropriate, I doubt it would remain on the shelves for long.
Wait... I just got a great idea. I need to mass produce LABAN'S SWORD replicas (made of steel and brass) to distribute to children through Deseret Book. I'll bet I make a fortune! :)
Here is my issue. I am sure that the money changers could have argued that the were providing a valuable service to temple visitors. In the end, I can't know the motivation behind some of these products, but many seem to be a means simply to make money off of the gospel.
ReplyDeleteTime and place considerations are not always spot on either.
This becomes more of a philosophical discussion now if we want to talk about the pros and cons of marketing such things. In the end, whether or not somebody in Idaho Falls feels the need to prop a little liahona up on their mantle has no effect on my life at all. I will have a particular opinion about that person but that's a separate issue. Ultimately it doesn't matter but let's discuss it.
ReplyDeleteI think the church (and its subsidiaries) ought to be encouraging products of higher spiritual quality. There must be someone, somewhere, who has better ideas than a little liahona. I just think that the eternal gospel of Jesus Christ is belittled when it is turned into a commodity of that sort. And that's all this is - a commodity. Something to be bought and sold. There's a section of The Screwtape Letters where the Devil is encouraging Screwtape to build on the fact that his "client" has a particular mental image of the God to whom he prays. He wants Screwtape to keep the guy focused on the image of God that he has created in his own mind rather than the true nature of God who created him. This doesn't mean that I'm opposed to artistic depictions of Christ but I think with all of the cheesy art, the liahonas, and what not, our worship and our spiritual feelings are focused on items rather than internal feelings. I think this is the very reason that our chapels are very plain and ordinary. It's to keep us focused on the message and the personal spiritual feelings rather than ornate decoration.
Ammon, would you feel the same way if it was a toy Urim and Thummim rather than a liahona? I think of this liahona thing along those lines. The liahona is something very sacred, very holy. I don't think it should be turned into a toy regardless of whether a select few might find some value in it. Again, it doesn't affect my life one bit and yes, the market drives the products but I think Deseret could be pivotal in elevating the market to a higher, more mature, level.
Wow Troy! Now that I know that purchasing one of these things will instill a "particular opinion about" me I am definitely going to order one of these things for my mantle!
ReplyDeleteThe way I see it. Purchasing something like this is essentially positive, if not terribly religious. I can think of about a million things one could purchase instead that wouldn't necessarily be positive in any way at all:)
How do I miss the discussions??? Well, here's what I think...considering that a big part of the Church should be taking care of the poor and needy, and not only to provide for people spiritually, I find it highly distasteful and questionable how much business there is associated with the Church. It seems to me that a lot of that money could be put to better use, as well as the fact that I simply question some of the businesses as morally "top-choice" for the Church.
ReplyDeleteThat stuff really rubs me the wrong way, but since I know that no one is perfect, including prophets and apostles, who probably can't shed their cultural upbringing like everyone else, I'll just led it slide.
However, I think wasting your money on stupid gadgets, like a liahona, aren't great. I think it's stupid. But that's me. Clearly it could be something worse - it could be pornography, or drugs or whatever. In that sense, sure, it's better. But why don't we as members waste more of our money on those who are in need, and truly positive and helpful things, rather than toys, unhealthy food, stupid gadgets, etc. ? It really bugs me. And I'm not saying I'm perfect in that regard...but, it bothers me how little focus there is at times within the Church on how to use our resources wisely to lift up others/serve others, and how it almost seems ok to be wasteful and indulgent (as long as you don't go into debt) when most of the world is so very impoverished.
Very nice Fran. This discussion was getting stale and needed a kick in the pants. I like everything you say. I look around our communities sometimes and see other denominations organizing groups that go into the inner cities and work with disadvantaged youth etc. They organize food drives, clothing drives, etc. And what do we do? We focus on ourselves too much. How to prepare for emergencies. How to make a four course meal out of 10 grains of wheat and 3 packs of kool-aid. How to make little decorative things for your cutesy Mormon home. Emergency prep and food storage are worthy things but we're so gosh darn exclusive. Sure when there's a natural disaster the Mormon Helping Hands in their yellow shirts will show up and clear away brush and shingles but then we go back to our communities and hide. We're terrible at getting involved in the community. I personally am terrible at getting involved so I recognize that without the church's organizational power I could still do things and maybe I'll try but I think there's alot the church could be doing to get out there and make themselves known by addressing social needs locally. The church organization itself does send food and supplies all over the world, and lots of them, which is great but people in Memphis, TN don't know that. They need to see the Mormons in Memphis, TN helping out locally.
ReplyDeleteWhen we first moved to Columbus I found out that there was a homeless shelter downtown that the ward visited every other month to serve meals. I went one time and it was great, exactly the kind of thing that needs to be done. Sadly, that regular activity came to an end and we stopped going.
And ask Sarah about a few of the activities that she wanted to plan when she was Enrichment Coordinator but were rejected by the RS president. Sad. Zion can't be obtained by potluck dinners, knitting classes, church basketball, and setting up chairs for Christmas activities. Stake softball tournaments? Now that's a different story.
I think that you guys have seriously underestimated what members of the Church do for others outside of the Church. Perhaps the "let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth" doctrine has created a terrible mis-perception on what goes on by wonderful members of the church.
ReplyDeleteI know dozens of amazing people who reach out to others on a daily basis. Of course they do not label their services as a congregational service project.
Churches who do that stuff for the praise of the world "have their reward."
I think you guys have made some hefty, and very negative, "hasty generalizations" on this thread. Nothing like ripping your own religion up in a public forum for others to read. I think that there is enough of that crap all over the web already.
And inferring that other churches do congregational service activities for the praise of the world isn't a "hasty generalization?"
ReplyDeleteI don't discount the good things that people do. I recognized my own shortcomings in that area. I think that alot of people in the church are like me. We have larger-than-average families, we have jobs. We have callings. We (try) to have FHE. We go to the temple regularly. We wonder where the time is to perform service in our communities. If the wards even made an effort to inform members about volunteer opportunities in their cities that would be an improvement. I'm just speaking the truth when I say there is very little in the way of service activites that doesn't involve setting up chairs, helping another member of the church move, or cleaning up a yard for an elderly sister. Our light would be shining alot brighter for the world to see if we stepped out of our own circle, as an organization, sometimes. We Mormons can be an awful cliquish crowd.
And as to your final point Ammon, we're not "ripping our religion up." We're ripping the culture of the members of the church up. I separate the two because the culture that is associated with the church has nothing to do with the gospel. If it did, the same culture would exist in Asia and South America and Europe and Australia. I can only speak for Asia when I say that the "Mormon Culture" does not exist. Nobody's buying crap from Deseret Book in Korea.
Besides, a little honest criticism isn't a bad thing. It's not like were belittling doctrine here, the gospel message and the structure of the church is perfect; everything else involves human beings and, hence, ceases to be perfect which means there is room for improvement which means discussing those flaws is not at all inappropriate. In fact, discussing them is how they will begin to improve.
One bit of clarification on my last point there, lest I set Ammon off on a tirade. When I say the structure of the church is perfect I include all decisions made by the First Presidency and Quorum of the 12 Apostles as relates to the church as a whole and acting in their callings as such.
ReplyDeleteBecause of this I have no qualms whatsoever about the church's many business ventures. I feel that getting involved in these things aren't merely men's decisions. Such wide-scale moves by the church are certainly prayed on before being committed to. These are, after all, things that affect the organization of the church. Whose church is it if these decisions are made without consulting God? Or if God's will is not followed in these matters? So if God's will is sought out about such things (and they certainly must be) then who are we to question them? I guess that's the only thing I would disagree with Fran on.
I will add a word of caution on the church owned businesses topic. While I have no doubt about the revelation leading the church itself, I do not necessarily ascribe inspiration for the business dealings and or decisions of some businesses owned by the church. The church organization itself is separate from the multiple businesses owned by it.
ReplyDeleteI am trying to think of the best way of describing this. The church might have various legal entities in order to function in a modern society, but that does not make it a business in the same was McDonald's or Walmart. The organization of the church does not in my opinion include these various side ventures, it is the lords church set up in wards and stakes directly under the first presidency and the twelve. That is the chruch and it existed before and will out last various business on the side. They are fluff that can be discarded at any moment.
Now as for the money that side businesses make, I firmly believe that any profits are put to good use by the church in general .
So, I'm with Troy...mostly. Like he said, I'm sure there are lots of nice members, doing nice things for others on their own. Great. But, my issues are with the Church as a group not stepping up to the plate nearly enough (or at all), and then there are still the members. I've seen plenty of reluctance for volunteering even with the few things we're asked to do (like cleaning the temple/church, storehouse, or helping move). It seems like it's the same people usually, and that even beyond that there usually isn't some great excitement to go out and serve somehow. Now again, as Troy pointed out - it's not like I'm perfect in this regard. And I'm sure there are lots of things I don't see, but in comparison to some (many) other Churches in terms of reaching out to the community, I am not impressed with us.
ReplyDeleteBut, really, to me it's not just the actual service we give. To me it's also a certain kind of mindset we have. Let me use an example from this last Sunday. In a talk there was mention of a "tender mercy" that was given to a divorced mother, who had been taking care of her family for the last few years, and due to the financial strains that placed on them all, hadn't bought a thing for herself in 3 years. It was mentioned how her purse was getting all old and torn up etc. And the tender mercy came from a ward/bishop who had put aside $200 in gift cards to give to the children so they could buy something for their mother.
Well, that was indeed sweet. And tender. And a mercy. And very generous. But at the same time, the fact that I was supposed to feel sad for someone who hadn't bought anything for herself in 3 years, and didn't even have a nice purse, bothered me. The majority of women in the world count themselves lucky if they have a roof of their heads, and a little bit to eat. That would be their tender mercy. A new purse, or any non-life sustaining item would probably be something beyond a tender mercy...a miracle? Dunno.
I think we're so out of touch with the suffering not only in our communities, but on a global level. And then we feel great about ourselves when we buy the bum on the street a sandwich, or help someone move. Or give a sister money so she can get some fun stuff like a purse or whatever. Again, those are nice starting points, and probably far better than doing nothing, or doing bad stuff. But in reality, those things are barely scratching the surface.
I think if we really cared about our brothers and sisters the way we ought to, our lives as members would still look a lot different than they do now. Instead I think, a lot of us get very comfortable with thinking we're good and righteous because we don't drink, smoke, wear skirts down to the knee, go to the temple, and finish reading the BoM the by end of the year - or stuff like that.
Anyway, as for the inspired Church leadership/business decision stuff - I'm really not sure that all of that is inspired. I'm sorry. I'm simply not convinced that on any level (local or at the very top) all decisions and words are completely inspired. I think sometimes decisions are simply made or things said simply based on what seems wise/intelligent or right. I don't have anything to prove my notion of this. But, my dad, a sealer in the temple, and someone who was a mission president, and a guy who goes for a long walk each morning to pray and sing hymns for like 1 hours, told me that not all of his decisions as a stake presidents, bishop, mission president and area seventy were inspired. Sometimes he just had to make a choice, and he did. Sometimes there was clear inspiration.
ReplyDeleteSo there. I could very well be wrong, but I just don't think everything that happens even within the organization of the Church is inspired. I also don't think that everything that comes out of the mouth of a prophet or apostle is automatically the word of God. If it was, then I feel we'd have a lot more consistency. But with some things we don't. Some things that prophets/apostles said 50 years ago, aren't said today, or even the opposite is said and so forth. So, I think sometimes you just get opinions, or thoughts, or cultural views, even from the very top. And I think sometimes decisions are made that simply seem good and right from one perspective, but aren't necessarily the will of the Lord (though they may not necessarily be against his will either).
I think the Lord leads the Church. But sometimes I feel it's like taking a little kid somewhere - lots of detours, sometimes progressing slowly, sometimes running, sometimes tripping up. But you get there in the end. We have a promise that God won't lead us astray. But I've never read anything that suggests that prophets and apostles are infallible, or that mistakes even within the Church cannot happen (and then be corrected).
Just some thoughts not directly related to the original post.
Maybe I should clarify my last comment a bit more as well, unless you all have a heart attack and think I'm going apostate or something.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the way the Church is structured is "true" (as in there being a prophet, apostles, teachers, etc., the way we baptize, sacrament, and all that stuff). But, I believe people are imperfect - all of them. That would have to include prophets for me. I think once there is a human being in place, there will be mistakes. Do I think that the prophets/apostles are great sinners. Probably not. But, I think a prophet is just as capable of falling for any kind of temptation as the next guy. That doesn't mean that I think they will or do, but I think they could. Because I believe in human beings not being perfect, I just have to assume that sometimes some of the stuff that happens in Church is a "mistake". Alma, when he started baptizing (in Mosiah), certainly didn't use the apparently correct prayer, and this was an important ordinance we're talking about. And he was a priest (and prophet). How could that be? Well, to me, it's simply errors humans commit. Interestingly enough, Christ seemed to correct that once he had a chance. So, to me stuff happens, and stuff gets corrected. Maybe like with Elder Packer's last conference talk. It was interesting to me how the written version was quite a bit different from the talk he gave in conference. Why did it get changed? Did he not pray and receive inspiration before hand? Again, to me, maybe he just didn't pick the right words, maybe he had inspiration, but worded it wrong, or who knows what. Maybe the Church just gave in to outward pressure. I don't really care.
Anyway, it seems like we don't really know a whole lot about how the Church operates on the highest level. I mean, we don't really know who's in charge of the business stuff, and who oversees it, and how those people get put into place for that. At least I don't really know. I'd hope that it's a prayerful, inspired process. But, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of it is simply a matter of who appears to be "qualified" to do the job. I think a lot of callings are made the same way. And that's not necessarily wrong. I just don't know that that would be a good reason for me to put my trust 100 percent into something like that.
President Wilford Woodruff stated: "I say to Israel, The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of the Church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God." (The Discourses of Wilford Woodruff)
ReplyDeleteEzra Taft Benson, then a Member of the First Presidency gave a talk entitled "Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet." This talk was reiterated several times during the past General Conference and has been printed in the latest Conference Issue of the Ensign (Which according to our current Prophet is considered modern-day scripture).
In that talk He said "The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything."
And his sixth fundamental is as follows
"Sixth: The prophet does not have to say "Thus saith the Lord" to give us scripture.
Sometimes there are those who haggle over words. They might say the prophet gave us counsel but that we are not obligated to follow it unless he says it is a commandment. But the Lord says of the Prophet Joseph, "Thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you" (D&C 21:4; italics added).
And speaking of taking counsel from the prophet, in D&C 108:1, the Lord states: "Verily thus saith the Lord unto you, my servant Lyman: Your sins are forgiven you, because you have obeyed my voice in coming up hither this morning to receive counsel of him whom I have appointed" (italics added).
Said Brigham Young, "I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture" (Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. [London: Latter-day Saints' Book Depot], 13:95)."
http://speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.php?id=6751
I think it's interesting that this talk has been referenced so many times recently.
Funny I think it is interesting that so many people equate, "the prophet does not have to say "Thus saith the Lord" to give us scripture," with, "anything the prophet says is scripture." They are not now nor have they ever been the same.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, that talk by President Benson was given at a BYU devotional not in general conference. Yes it has been quoted in General Conference, but so has C.S. Lewis, repeatedly.
None of us are doubting the leadership of the church in their callings. Saying that I think Deseret Book is run as a company and not through inspiration like the church does not mean I doubt the prophet.
Kyle, this really isn't about Deseret Book anymore. So, my latest post really wasn't about that.
ReplyDeleteWell, I understood your point Ammon. But, that's just the thing. One prophet says this, another one says something else etc. I'm not talking about picking and choosing, or questioning the Church leadership at every step, but there are discripancies in what is being said even amongst the 'brethren'.
ReplyDeleteFor example, there have been talks (and scriptures) on what constitutes the "official" word of God from prophets. Then another prophet comes along and says something else (or adds to it). Then another one comes along and says the opposite. So, what is one to make of things like that? What am I supposed to think when Pres. Kimball says that masturbation is the cause for homosexuality, and then our current apostles and prophets say we don't know what causes homosexuality? Who's right? Neither? Both? Did one make a mistake maybe?
There are lots of those kind of scenarios, and the only reason I can explain such things is by assuming that mistakes happen. And why wouldn't they? No one is perfect. Just because the Lord has said that he won't allow a prophet to lead us astray, doesn't equate that he won't allow detours and errors. As I said, it may very well be like walking somewhere with a child. If as a parent you are walking to the mail box with your kid, you may not allow any other end result (aka you won't permit leading somewhere else other than the mail box), but you may very well allow for little steps, big steps, or some side steps on the way to the mail box.
Anyway, but then again, as Kyle pointed out, just because the Lord doesn't always have to say that it's his word, does that mean that everything coming forth out of the mouth of a prophet IS the word of God? I don't think so. Therefore, what am I to make of the discourses of Wilford Woodroof? Is all of it the word of God? Some of it? None of it?
Anyway, those are my views. To be honest, I probably shouldn't post them here, because I doubt that Ammon and I will get anything out of talking about this. But whatever, there it is anyway.