My fondest hope for Monson's presidency

[Tex]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I'm the last person in the world Tex would pick as a counselor.

Probably not the last, but definitely in the bottom tier. I wouldn't be able to handle your constant whining and pessimism bringing the presidency down.

That said, I don't think a president/bishop does himself any good by selecting two totally like-minded individuals. You want to have a counselor, not a yes-man. But you don't want to have an opponent.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Yeah sure, Tex. You have a long history of open-mindedness.

Don't make this about me, Leb. This is about Mike and his ideas.

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by Adam

Both. Satan looks for places to put his hooks (to continue your analogy), by lying about our history, hiding our history, twisting our history, we give great openings to Satan wherein to put his hooks. Honestly tackling our history, which is starting to happen with Bushman and Prince and Compton and Hardy and Quinn building on what Arrington and Alexander started in the 80s and 90s, is the right way to go.

The church has gone from fighting honest history (firing Arrington as church historian and making it a GA position) to allowing it (Bushman's book was sold by Deseret Book, but they wouldn't publish it). The next step is to embrace it. I look forward to that day.



I think it is mainstream Mormon doctrine to believe Wilford Woodruff's statements excerpted after the Manifesto in the DC regarding God taking a prophet who is leading the church astray. I think it is unquestionable that HBLee was a racist (as were most white men born in America around the turn of the century) and he refused to consider the question/ask god about giving blacks the priesthood. I think it is undeniable that HBLee was taken long before his normal lifespan and health should have carried him. I think it is a fact that SWK gave blacks the priesthood shortly thereafter.

You are uncomfortable with the obvious "therefore" statement that follows these facts. You say it isn't our place to use our heads and say "therefore".

I understand and accept that most Mormons agree with you. I do not.

It is an interesting theology that says man has no right to use their god-given agency to determine for themselves if their leader is right on a given policy/doctrinal point. To quote a great modern poet: "I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill." (Extra credit to the person that can name to poet without using Google.)

If one determines the leader is wrong, a second separate step is to determine if you should follow that leader anyway.

I have no problem saying HBLee was wrong on blacks and the priesthood. I might have stayed in the church anyway because the church, even with significant flaws, is the repository of the keys of baptism through sealing and I want to partake, and have my family partake, of those ordinances.

Church Historian was an ecclesiastical leader before Arrington. His brief tenure was the first and only legitimate academic. It is unfortunate it was then as such a move would be really interesting today, in fact I think we will see a more academic inclusion in that office going forward. The church is realizing it needs its academics. Trully, even God loves needlenecked wankers who dwell in a ivory castle.

[MikeWaters]

The church needs academics, but realizes, I suppose, that they are only good at putting out CES employees.

I don't know how that one will get solved, with every academic looking over his shoulder waiting to be disfellowshipped or excommunicated.

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

The church needs academics, but realizes, I suppose, that they are only good at putting out CES employees.

I don't know how that one will get solved, with every academic looking over his shoulder waiting to be disfellowshipped or excommunicated.

I think the Church will have no choice. The reality is that with the internet and so much information so readily available it will be impossible to hide from the facts concerning LDS History. There will be demand from more and more rank and file for explanations and our apoligists are as good as anyones!

[Tex]

It needs more academics. It doesn't need anymore apostates or rent-a-intellectuals.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

I think the Church will have no choice. The reality is that with the internet and so much information so readily available it will be impossible to hide from the facts concerning LDS History. There will be demand from more and more rank and file for explanations and our apoligists are as good as anyones!

The irony of the church not being involved in the understanding of its own history is ironic, beyond words.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Tex

Don't make this about me, Leb. This is about Mike and his ideas.

LOL.

"Don't make it personal, Leb. I am trying to make fun of Mike."

[Sleeping in EQ]

As someone in the Church hierarchy (who shall remain nameless) told me some time back:

"We need to find a way to treat you guys [scholars] better on the local level. That's where this scholars vs. authorities business is at its worst."

That's not an exact quote, but its pretty close.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

LOL.

"Don't make it personal, Leb. I am trying to make fun of Mike."

Oh, I didn't say it wasn't personal, Leb. And anyway, Mike doesn't need you to ride to his defense. He's a big boy.