The "New" Mormon Reformation

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

I'm not going to nit pick you here, AA, but the fact is that the mullahs are trying to downplay what's going on (Move along, there's nothing to see here!"), because they are the ones being taken to the woodshed. We could disagree about what counts as "reform" and "revival" until the cows come home, but the fact is there have been several periods of attempted course correction in the Church. Brigham Young in the 1850s, Joseph F. Smith in the wake of the Smoot hearings, and even David O. McKay.

The hagiographic wall, a wall that CES types and mullahs have been trying to build for decades is showing alot of cracks (they've been trying to build it all along, really, but they've been more sucessful since CES has gone fundy--I know, not every CES employee is that way, but those who aren't are often embattled), When Mormons respond to a Church-sponsored survey and say that they want their Church to level with them in terms of its history, the seasons are changing (in the Ecclesiastes 3 sense). When the Church actually asks for feedback about the PBS documentary from its members, the seasons are changing. When a Church publication discusses scholarly responses to various versions of the First Vision, something that it has very much downplayed in recent years (there has been the occasional Ensign article on a touch historical or doctrinal topic, and especially during the Hoffmann stuff, but nothing like the old Improvement Era days. For the most part manuals, conference talks and so on have been 'correlated'), the seasons are changing. When a document comes through official Church channels declaring a few core doctrines, affirming heterodoxy and Christian life in the face of the plurality of perspectives throughout it's history, the seasons are changing (note: I don't think the Church's heterodoxy ever really changed, but the mullahs have had their way in official publications in recent years). When members talk about the "web Church" and the "Official Church" while my stake can't get 10 people to show up for an Institute class, the seasons are changing. When my HT family stops me in the foyer to ask me about polyandry and half a dozen people gather around to listen to my answer, the seasons are changing. When Elder Packer backs off of his famous CES talk that slammed intellectuals on national television, the seasons are changing...

Aren't these priamrily adminsitrartive changes? Can a refromation be based on administrative changes?

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by creekster

Aren't these priamrily adminsitrartive changes? Can a refromation be based on administrative changes?

Said like a mullah? (Mostly kidding here, creek,).

There is, of course, an administrative dimension, but much of the significance is cultural. There is a major cultural shift going on in Mormonism. As I said to AA, to get bogged down in a definition on this seems alot to me like trying to avoid the fact that significant things are going on.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

Said like a mullah? (Mostly kidding here, creek,).

There is a major cultural shift going on in Mormonism. We could get bogged down over arguing definitions, but the fact is, some very significant things are going on.

I have mullah-ish tendencies (at least as I understand the term) and don't try to hide it. I think it is a lot better to say culural shift than refomation, simply becasue the term reformation includes much that isn't applicable here. I think it is more of a process of accretion, as the cultural impulse to which you refer has always been around, it's just slowly growing as it is a more satisfying approach for more people.

Here's a question I have been wondering about: How much do you think the cold war environemnt influenced the mullah-ish tendecies decried by so many? And I mean much more than just the well-documneted Bircher tendecncies of some of our leaders. I mean the indirect influence of the whole cold war environment which was so pervasive in our national culture in the 50s and 60s and 70s.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by creekster

I have mullah-ish tendencies (at least as I understand the term) and don't try to hide it. I think it is a lot better to say culural shift than refomation, simply becasue the term reformation includes much that isn't applicable here. I think it is more of a process of accretion, as the cultural impulse to which you refer has always been around, it's just slowly growing as it is a more satisfying approach for more people.

Here's a question I have been wondering about: How much do you think the cold war environemnt influenced the mullah-ish tendecies decried by so many? And I mean much more than just the well-documneted Bircher tendecncies of some of our leaders. I mean the indirect influence of the whole cold war environment which was so pervasive in our national culture in the 50s and 60s and 70s.

Someone could write a very good book in answer to your question. Off the top of my head, I would think that the cold war environment was quite influential. For one, it helped emphazie eschatological theology (The world is ending!), which has long been a favorite teaching of fundy-leaning folks and has a way of undermining confidence in social programs, heterodoxy, and the acceptance of the cultural "other." It also helped the conflation of religious fundmanentalism and American jingoism, which, while certainly an element in the J. Birch society, has it's peculiarly Mormon articulations in Skousen's seminars and so on. And then there's the fact that scholars in the humanities never quite dispelled the whiff of anti-Americanism that the Red Scare attached to them. I'm just thinking out loud here, but I suspect that there's a strong connection.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

Someone could write a very good book in answer to your question. Off the top of my head, I would think that the cold war environment was quite influential. For one, it helped emphazie eschatological theology (The world is ending!), which has long been a favorite teaching of fundy-leaning folks and has a way of undermining confidence in social programs, heterodoxy, and the acceptance of the cultural "other." It also helped the conflation of religious fundmanentalism and American jingoism, which, while certainly an element in the J. Birch society, has it's peculiarly Mormon articulations in Skousen's seminars and so on. And then there's the fact that scholars in the humanities never quite dispelled the whiff of anti-Americanism that the Red Scare attached to them. I'm just thinking out loud here, but I suspect that there's a strong connection.

I agree with your off the top commetns. I feel like it was quite influential and, just as in many cutlural areas LDS tend to lag a little, the cold war thaw is only now happening fully, which accounts in part for this newly noticed attitutde.

You should write that book.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

I'm not going to nit pick you here, AA, but the fact is that the mullahs are trying to downplay what's going on ("Move along, there's nothing to see here!"), because they are the ones being taken to the woodshed.
The hagiographic wall, a wall that CES types and mullahs have been trying to build for decades is showing alot of cracks (they've been trying to build it all along, really, but they've been more sucessful since CES has gone fundy--I know, not every CES employee is that way, but those who aren't are often embattled), When Mormons respond to a Church-sponsored survey and say that they want their Church to level with them in terms of its history, the seasons are changing (in the Ecclesiastes 3 sense). When the Church actually asks for feedback about the PBS documentary from its members, the seasons are changing. When a Church publication discusses scholarly responses to various versions of the First Vision, something that it has very much downplayed in recent years (there has been the occasional Ensign article on a "touchy" historical or doctrinal topic, and especially during the Hoffmann stuff, but nothing like the old Improvement Era days. For the most part manuals, conference talks and so on have been 'correlated'), the seasons are changing.

Do you think the "mullah" types in the church are disturbed by these developments? I haven't really noticed that much complaining.

[All-American]

I'm not ignoring the changes. I just don't think they are so remarkable as to merit a title so sweeping as "reformation." When Catholicism underwent a "reformation," huge segments of the church broke away and founded protestantism. I don't think the average member of the church, if he notices anything different in the last few years, is very affected by them.

[Archaea]

Cultural changes resulting from administrative tinkering. Does that satisfy everybody?

[SeattleUte]

Most here are not the same as the majority of Mormons I grew up with in Salt Lake in the 70's and 80's. You're also more like my brothers than my parents or my sisters. Based on that narrow sampling, I'd say there's some kind of sea change going on. But I think the sampling is too narrow. I go over to CB and see not a whole lot has changed. This reformation talk is wishful thinking me thinks. One caveat: The LDS Church does presently have a leader who seems to prioritize assimilation as opposed to highlighting cultural, historical and doctrinal differences. But though the President he is but one man. I don't really know what's going on except I do think they have relegated Joseph to a small part of the basement in the VC.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by BlueK

Do you think the "mullah" types in the church are disturbed by these developments? I haven't really noticed that much complaining.

What is there to complain about?

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

I don't really know what's going on except I do think they have relegated Joseph to a small part of the basement in the VC.

LOL, yeah ... that Joseph guy is a teeny part of the LDS faith. Who is he again?