What the church SHOULD do...

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Mormon Red Death

I think the church should do more teaching about finances then the whole "stay out of debt/pay your tithing talks". Perhaps lessons in primary YM/YW and gospel doctrine that would help our young one know more about the practicality of their financial decisions.

Funny you should say this. My wife was called as the laurel instructor not too long ago and felt inspred that the older laurels needed more finncial training. As a result, she broke out the girls that were going to go to college next year and has taken them into a separte class and given them separate evenings at our home where they have received very real and very practical instructions in everything from taxes to credit cards (and how they work) to balancing checkbooks and even to the advantages of saving early in life (e.g. IRA and 401(k)). Her goal has been to truly prepare these girls for some of the issues they will face as they begin life on their own.

IOW, nothing about the 'church' prevents this sort of isntruction from being given wihtin the current structure, it just needs someone to recognize the need.

[Detroitdad]

I am particularly fond of the South/Central American university concept. Probably my favorite thing about the church right now is the Perpetual Education Fund. But I would love to see that concept extended to include an actual university, because it would provide an environment that would be conducive to building a kingdom, just like BYU is. For all of the individuals who live in areas where Mormons are not common this could have the same effect.

I would like to see encouragement in creating cultural centers that could have an impact on the visibility in the community and provide an environment where LDS families could take their children to fraternize with other LDS kids (or anyone else that wanted to pay) to be in a Mormon influenced environment. I am not suggesting that the Church give much if any seed capital, just that this type of thing be encouraged.

I would like to see the church not take political stands that are not going to bring them anything other than criticism (such as gay marriage) and remain neutral unless they can actually influence something.

I would love to see more understanding that the Church is a global church, and less emphasis on pushing the American social norms as appropriate for all. By this I mean, more than one pair of earrings? How benign can you get?

I will try to think of more, but I think that the changes I would really like to see are less to do with the church and more to do with the underlying culture that is prevalent amongst the members.

Of course bi-annual, 2 hour church would be the best.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Detroitdad

I am particularly fond of the South/Central American university concept. Probably my favorite thing about the church right now is the Perpetual Education Fund. But I would love to see that concept extended to include an actual university, because it would provide an environment that would be conducive to building a kingdom, just like BYU is. For all of the individuals who live in areas where Mormons are not common this could have the same effect.

I would like to see encouragement in creating cultural centers that could have an impact on the visibility in the community and provide an environment where LDS families could take their children to fraternize with other LDS kids (or anyone else that wanted to pay) to be in a Mormon influenced environment. I am not suggesting that the Church give much if any seed capital, just that this type of thing be encouraged.

I would like to see the church not take political stands that are not going to bring them anything other than criticism (such as gay marriage) and remain neutral unless they can actually influence something.

I would love to see more understanding that the Church is a global church, and less emphasis on pushing the American social norms as appropriate for all. By this I mean, more than one pair of earrings? How benign can you get?

I will try to think of more, but I think that the changes I would really like to see are less to do with the church and more to do with the underlying culture that is prevalent amongst the members.

Of course bi-annual, 2 hour church would be the best.

I'm not certain I want to steady the ark, but ...

I like the thought of a South American Church sponsored university. And perhaps some day if it is ever merited, an Asian one as well.

Nothing raises profile like a large university. If our people in other continents could become part of the financiers and intelligentsia, it would be great.

Shorter church is fine by me. I do find the longer Church hours are great for kids. So perhaps adults could meet for sacrament and thereafter analyze the various internet sites while waiting for kids to get out?

I don't want our Church to become a bunch of PR pansies, unwilling to take a stand. However, how many people have we offended by being against gay marriage? It's not like celibacy is a big thing amongst gays or anybody else for that matter, so our product has limited appeal any way. The Church stance on gay marriage has limited or no impact upon its gospel message, because those that reject that stance will reject the Gospel any how.

Cultural centers might also be a great idea.

[Cali Coug]

I would like to see more of an emphasis on the global aspect of the church as well. To me, this would involve far more minorities in high leadership postitions of the church. This is clearly out of our hands, but something I would like to see happen.

I would like to see the Relief Society repackage itself as a society that provides relief to others. The church has a tremendously poor following in most countries outside of the US. I would like to see an emphasis on service projects to assist those people (and obviously those poor within the US as well). I think ward sponsored service projects for foreign members would do a lot to make this more of a global church.

I would like to see talks in General Conference given in languages other than English. I think it would send a message of inclusivity to foreign non-English speaking members.

I would like to see the church make it clearer that they are politically neutral, and that what Ezra Taft Benson said about Mormons and Democrats was wrong.

I would like to see mission presidents be paid for their service where necessary to enable poor people to serve as mission presidents. I feel like we are creating an elite ruling class in the church through the mission president program, since they are frequently tapped to serve in other callings based in part on their experience as a mission president. In general, only the very wealthy can be a mission president.

I love the idea of a university in South America and other continents.

This should work for now!

[DirtyHippieUTE]

Schools...

I think the idea of schools in foreign countries is a very good one. The church runs at least two prep schools in Mexico. They are both overwhelming successes. The education the students receive in both secular and sacred matters is well worth the expense to the church. I'm glad my tithing goes toward those schools.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

Noble purpose. I'm sure that calling him a fascist (among other things) will further your goal of a better domain at CB.

Jefe feels he has to represent the church and BYU. And just like the church and BYU try to manipulate public opinion, Jefe does it too. I love the church and BYU but sometimes they chew up the little guy for the "greater good".

I got many, many posts deleted on cougarboard, and these were football posts, not religion posts. He and his gang feel a need to manipulate the way BYU is perceived. It's too bad he feels that way. The church and BYU are great enough to stand on their own merit, without anyone trying to manipulate thought.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

BYUinNYC has inspired me.

Use this thread to post all the things you think the church should do but is not doing.

And even things the church shouldn't do but is doing anyway.

Most of the beefs people have with the church comes from it being too large.

The church today looks nothing like the church in Jesus' day. Back then they were rebels. They made spontaneous decisions. They seperated themselves from the large organized religion of the day, by focusing on the spirit of the law not being bogged down in the letter.

Our church is buried in policy. But really how else could it be? You don't have mountains of legislature in a church this size and you get immediate inconsistency and apostacy.

Back then Jesus protected the sinner and sent the accusers running. Now the sinner is paraded before a high council court and the network of gossipy wives gets a full update on their neighbors every Sunday after ward council.

Corianton confessed to his dad and was told to go back out and be a good missionary. Now I have a fully repentant and able boy in my priest's quorum who has failed to meet the newly raised bar to serve a mission.

One thing I'd like to see is that we stop pretending church callings are inspired. Come to me with a few options and let me pick.

Oh and two hour church is brilliant.

[non sequitur]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingus

No, you don't understand. There are people on this board who disagree with what the inspired leaders of the Church are doing.

This is for them.

Since you choose to blindly defer to everything the leaders of the Church say, how in the world would you ever know whether or not they leaders of the Church are inspired? For all you know they stopped being inspired 5 years ago and you never knew it, because you simply assumed they must be inspired. Your brand of zealotry is not only small-minded, it is dangerous. It is people like you who end up strapping C4 to their belts, because they never stopped to wonder if what they were being told made any sense (I confess that strapping on C4 may be an extreme example; dressing up like indians and slitting the throats of unsuspecting travellers would be a more apt example).

[Detroitdad]

is a little transparency with regard to the payment and direction of tithing funds. I know that the Church is entitled to keep its habits confidential but some transparency would be nice.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by non sequitur

Since you choose to blindly defer to everything the leaders of the Church say, how in the world would you ever know whether or not they leaders of the Church are inspired? For all you know they stopped being inspired 5 years ago and you never knew it, because you simply assumed they must be inspired. Your brand of zealotry is not only small-minded, it is dangerous. It is people like you who end up strapping C4 to their belts, because they never stopped to wonder if what they were being told made any sense (I confess that strapping on C4 may be an extreme example; dressing up like indians and slitting the throats of unsuspecting travellers would be a more apt example).

Surely you could have tied the nazis into this post in order to achieve a hyperbolic hat trick?

WHy do you assume he assumed? I am not sure if your post was meant for Lingo alone or not, but it has always been my position that an essential part of a decision to follow the prohpet on this or other issues is to prayerfully ponder and seek your own confirmation of what to do (and this is the doctrinal position as well, I beleive). Having done so, your criticism would be invalid expcet as applied to the larger issue of testimony in general.