Deciphering "LDS claims"

[SeattleUte]

The Mormon and Catholic churches bear the common characteristic that they are monolithic, insular, highly organized and hierarchical institutions. This sets them apart from the crazy quilt of myriad Protestant sects. However, one respect in which they differ is that the Catholic Church takes great pains to clarify doctrinal points, many arcane and obscure, often through encyclicals issued by the Pope to the Bishops. Such communications have covered myriad subjects, everything from de-Latinizing the mass, to abortion, to evolution, to nuclear weapons, to sexual preference, to the shroud of Turin, to Catholic complicty in the Holocaust. The list is endless. These enclyclicals are invariably clear and incisive. I don't believe anyone ever accused the Catholic Church of lack of clarity with respect to its position on any subject.

MikeWaters made an interesting point yesterday when he said the General Authorities never comment on subjects such as Joseph Smith's method in generating the Book of Abraham. I could show you some General Conference talks from the '70's in which apostles claimed that all American aborigines were descendants of Book of Mormon peoples. Some of us remember missionary materials that made that claim. What is the Church's current position on that issue? Who knows? Was the priesthood ban doctrine or policy? What was its purpose? This is precisely the kind of thing a papal encyclical would address firmly, and in detail. What exactly is the Church's position on "grace"? Does it resemble Martin Luther's rigid predestination construct, Catholic self-determination, or something in between? How DID the Book of Abraham come to be?

From what I've seen the Church only clarifies a doctrinal point when it is dealing with a PR disaster, as with Blood Atonement, and then only insofar as it has to. As a result, "Mormon Doctrine" is this pastiche of vague scriptural references, folk lore, Deseret Book published works by General Authorities, FARMS monographs, and Internet traffic. Clearly this opacity is deliberate and institutionalized.

[All-American]

So should the church speak in definite terms when it doesn't know the definite answer? Find the argument, make a creed, force belief of said creed, and excommunicate any who oppose it? Not exactly a recipe for success. When the church doesn't know the answer, I see no reason why it should make one up and declare it doctrine.

A second ago you criticized the church for its intellectual dishonesty. Now, when it exercizes intellectual honesty, you criticize it for "deliberate and institutionalized opacity."

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by All-American

So should the church speak in definite terms when it doesn't know the definite answer? Find the argument, make a creed, force belief of said creed, and excommunicate any who oppose it? Not exactly a recipe for success. When the church doesn't know the answer, I see no reason why it should make one up and declare it doctrine.

A second ago you criticized the church for its intellectual dishonesty. Now, when it exercizes intellectual honesty, you criticize it for "deliberate and institutionalized opacity."

Amen to that.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by All-American

So should the church speak in definite terms when it doesn't know the definite answer? Find the argument, make a creed, force belief of said creed, and excommunicate any who oppose it? Not exactly a recipe for success. When the church doesn't know the answer, I see no reason why it should make one up and declare it doctrine.

A second ago you criticized the church for its intellectual dishonesty. Now, when it exercizes intellectual honesty, you criticize it for "deliberate and institutionalized opacity."

No. I think that more communication in this regard with members really would ultimately foster more candor, acknowledgement as to past errors, current uncertainties and mysteries. Many papal encyclicals involve this type of difficult parsing. Being explicit and clear can also mean accepting responsibiltiy or saying you just don't know the answer as to this and that. But surely they could definitievly clarify subjects such as the status of the priesthood ban in Mormon doctrine and the meaning of grace to Mormons. I most emphatically don't expect them to make stuff up.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

No. I think that more communication in this regard with membersr really would ultimately foster more candor, acknowledgement as to past errors, current uncertainties and mysteries. Many papal encyclicals involve this type of difficult parsing. Being explicit and clear can also mean accepting responsibiltiy or saying you just don't know the answer as to this and that. But surely they could definitievly clarify subjects such as the status of the priesthood ban in Mormon doctrine and the meaning of grace to Mormons.

What a tremendous waste of time it would be trying to enumerate all the things we don't know!

Besides, I suspect that the answers to the important questions are already available to those who want them. Both you and I have managed to form our opinions regarding the priesthood ban and grace without any more assistance than the church has already given.

The attitude of the church is to tread softly where the ground is uncertain. I see no reason to try to change that-- in fact, any other attitude would be quite arrogant.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by All-American

What a tremendous waste of time it would be trying to enumerate all the things we don't know!

The attitude of the church is to tread softly where the ground is uncertain. I see no reason to try to change that-- in fact, any other attitude would be quite arrogant.

How ironic given the Church's claim to "modern revelation."

[All-American]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

How ironic given the Church's claim to "modern revelation."

Modern revelation does not mean omniscience. Would you prefer that the church claim to know all things anyway, to be consistent with your interpretation of its doctrine?

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by All-American

What a tremendous waste of time it would be trying to enumerate all the things we don't know!

While I agree in part, is it not odd that the 'one and only true and breathing church run by Jesus,' is unable to answer so many questions?

This is why I believe I lean towards a more open door, large tent policy, multiple chance provided plan, instead of the LDS dogma plan presented by missionaries across the world.

I believe one church has authority, but that many have much truth, and many will lead to further light and knowledge.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

While I agree in part, is it not odd that the 'one and only true and breathing church run by Jesus,' is unable to answer so many questions?

This is why I believe I lean towards a more open door, large tent policy, multiple chance provided plan, instead of the LDS dogma plan presented by missionaries across the world.

I believe one church has authority, but that many have much truth, and many will lead to further light and knowledge.

Why is it so important to answer so many questions?

Isn't the struggle the point?

[All-American]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

While I agree in part, is it not odd that the 'one and only true and breathing church run by Jesus,' is unable to answer so many questions?

This is why I believe I lean towards a more open door, large tent policy, multiple chance provided plan, instead of the LDS dogma plan presented by missionaries across the world.

I believe one church has authority, but that many have much truth, and many will lead to further light and knowledge.

If it is odd, at least it is consistant. Even in Jesus' day, he would deliberately withhold information from the rest of the world when they were not ready to receive it. He taught in "deliberately and institutionally opaque" parables, insisted on lessons punctuated by the "he who has ears to hear, let him hear" statement, and left his disciples in confusion time and time again. If you're worried that the Latter Day Saint church doesn't give you all of the answers at once, you can at least take comfort in the fact that you're in good company.