quote:

---

In what the Deseret News referred to as "stunningly candid" comments, Fuller Theological Seminary president and Beliefnet columnist Richard J. Mouw apologized to Mormons for evangelicals' tendency to distort the truth about Latter-day Saints' beliefs. "Let me state it clearly. We evangelicals have sinned against you," Mouw said. The speech is making the rounds among surprised and generally pleased evangelical and Mormon groups. We reprint the remarks below.

It is difficult for me to find adequate words to express how thrilled I am to be here this evening. Here we are, evangelical Protestants and members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, gathered together in this Salt Lake Tabernacle, for an event that is described as “An Evening of Friendship.”

I am not being melodramatic when I say that this is surely an historic occasion. To be sure, there have long been friendships between some evangelicals and some LDS folks. But they have not appeared on the public radar screen. Our public relations between our two communities have been—to put it mildly—decidedly unfriendly. From the very beginning, when Joseph Smith organized his church in 1830, my evangelical forebears hurled angry accusations and vehement denunciations at the Mormon community—a practice that continues from some evangelical quarters even into this present day. And I think it is fair to say that some Mormons have on occasion responded in kind. Friendship with each other has not come easily for our two communities.

But in recent times things have begun to change. Evangelicals and Mormons have worked together on important matters of public morality. Here in Utah, the Standing Together ministry has been willing to take some considerable risks in countering the more aggressive and disruptive evangelical attacks against the LDS church. And Pastor Greg Johnson’s well-attended dialogues with Professor Bob Millet have done much to model a new spirit of frank but friendly exchange about important faith topics. And now this evening we are experiencing the gracious hospitality of the LDS leadership, who have welcomed us all into this meeting place, which has played—and continues to play—such an important role in the life of the Mormon community.

On a personal level, over the past half-dozen years I have been a member of a small group of evangelical scholars who have been engaged in lengthy closed-door discussions about spiritual and theological matters with a small group of our LDS counterparts. We have not been afraid to argue strenuously with each other, but our arguments have been conducted in a sincere desire genuinely to understand each other—and in the process we have formed some deep bonds of friendship.

I know that I have learned much in this continuing dialogue, and I am now convinced that we evangelicals have often seriously misrepresented the beliefs and practices of the Mormon community. Indeed, let me state it bluntly to the LDS folks here this evening: we have sinned against you. The God of the Scriptures makes it clear that it is a terrible thing to bear false witness against our neighbors, and we have been guilty of that sort of transgression in things we have said about you. We have told you what you believe without making a sincere effort first of all to ask you what you believe.

We have made much of the need to provide you with a strong defense of traditional Christian convictions, regularly quoting the Apostle Peter’s mandate that we present to people like you a reasoned account of the hope that lies with in us—but we have not been careful to follow the same Apostle’s counsel that immediately follows that mandate, when he tells us that we must always make our case with “gentleness and reverence” toward those with whom we are speaking. Indeed, we have even on occasion demonized you, weaving conspiracy theories about what the LDS community is “really” trying to accomplish in the world. And even at our best, we have—and this is true of both of our communities—we have talked past each other, setting forth oversimplified and distorted accounts of what the other group believes.
Click to learn more...

I have formed some wonderful friendships with Mormons in the past few years. These friends have helped me to see the ways in which I have often misinterpreted Mormon thought. To be sure, as a result of those conversations I also remained convinced that there are very real issues of disagreement between us—and that some of these issues are matters of eternal signficiance. But we can now discuss these topics as friends And tonight many more of our friends have come together in this place for a very public and large-scale “Evening of Friendship.” God be praised!

In just a month and a half we will greet the year 2005, which marks the 200th anniversary of the birth of Joseph Smith. During this year there will be many occasions to pay special attention to Joseph’s life and teachings, and I hope many in the evangelical community will take part in those events. But this evening we are not here to talk about Joseph Smith, but about the One whose birth we will celebrate again just before the bicentennial year of Joseph’s birth makes its appearance. This is the One about whose birth we sing—in words, I should add, that many of us love to hear sung by that great choir that sings these words in this Tabernacle—“the hopes and fears of all the years are met in thee tonight.”

What a wonderful thing it is that we can meet together to talk about the Lord Jesus and about who he is and what he has done on our behalf. There is much here to talk about. I personally take great encouragement from words that Joseph Smith uttered on the occasion of the founding of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in April of 1830: “we know,” Joseph said, “that all men must repent and believe on the name of Jesus Christ, and worship the Father in his name, and endure in faith on his name to the end, or they cannot be saved in the kingdom of God.” And then he added: “And we know that justification through the grace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is just and true, and we know also that sanctification through the grace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is just and true, to all those who love and serve God with all their mights, minds, and strength.”

I greet you this evening in that spirit—as one who wants more than anything else to love and serve God with all my might, mind and strength, in the power made available by the amazing grace that sent the Lord Jesus to Bethlehem’s manger, and to the Garden of Gethsemane, and to the Cross of Calvary, where he shed his blood to pay the debt of our sin—a debt that we could never pay on our own.

This is the spirit in which Ravi Zacharias is going to speak to us this evening—the spirit of devotion to the One whose name is above every name, the One who alone is mighty to save, and before whom someday every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that he is Lord to the glory of the Father. May this wonderful “Evening of Friendship” point us all to that great day. Thank you and God bless you.

---

Questions? Comments? Grenades?
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
Aw, the upstarts are making friends with each other.

In all seriousness, this is a very good thing.

Dagonee

[ November 24, 2004, 10:42 PM: Message edited by: Dagonee ]
 

---

Posted by Derrell (Member # 6062) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Da_Goat (Member # 5529) on :
 
While I like this - as I like anything that displays a peacable spirit - I'm still not satisfied. LDS is not the only religion whose beliefs have been guessed instead of learned, and Evangelicals are not the only ones who have done the guessing. Of course, my expectations of humanity are pretty high, so I doubt they'll all be reached.

Good start, though.
 

---

Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
 
I think it's great! I read about Pastor Greg Johnson's group in an article relating to Genearl Conference, and sent him an email thanking him for his actions. Got a very gracious email in reply. Love is what changes people, not its opposite. We need more efforts to understand each other in this world.
 

---

Posted by raventh1 (Member # 3750) on :
 
I wonder if this means less bi-annual protesting during the LDS General Conference
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
I wouldn't bet on it, unfortunately. Homosexuality isn't the only issue that attracts people like Phelps.

Dagonee
 

---

Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
 

quote:

---

And even at our best, we have—and this is true of both of our communities—we have talked past each other, setting forth oversimplified and distorted accounts of what the other group believes.
Click to learn more...

---

quote:

---

Members of both groups don't seem to be shy about trying to enact laws enforcing morals based upon their religious codes.

---

quote:

---

So belonging to a religious group automatically disqualifies someone from trying to influence the society they live in, while holding other beliefs that do not come under the heading of "religion" allows you to push whatever ideas you want??

---

Yes. That's it precisely.

Of course not, Cashew, but your first post makes it clear you are only interested in arguing with straw men. (Which is ironic, given Reverend Mouw's admission.) Have fun without me.

[ November 25, 2004, 02:50 PM: Message edited by: Icarus ]
 

---

Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
 
Yes, the conjunction of beliefs and state is another of the founding ideals of our nation, moreso than the separation of church and state is.
 

---

Posted by Khavanon (Member # 929) on :
 
I'm impressed. It's nice to see more unity between religions. I think the more religions come together, the better collective reputation they will all have. That's not to say there won't be certain people who will mess things up for everyone (fanatics). Even if it seems kind of political, public displays of unity is good.
 

---

Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
 
Icarus, I'm not trying to build a straw man. If I misinterpreted what you said, forgive me. But this is what you said:

quote:

---

The phrase "public morals" frightens me, because it seems to mean so much more than publicly setting a good example and teaching those who wish to listen. Members of both groups don't seem to be shy about trying to enact laws enforcing morals based upon their religious codes.

---

quote:

---

Why did he say "Click to learn more?" Is this some sort of weird evangelical ritual I don't know about? Or is it a Mormon thing? That's really odd.

---

quote:

---

Yes, the conjunction of beliefs and state is another of the founding ideals of our nation, moreso than the separation of church and state is.

---

quote:

---

You single out religious groups here, but surely, whoever, either group or individual, tries to enact laws does it from the basis of what they believe to be right or wrong.

---

Okay.

Here's the misunderstanding. We can't possibly all agree on what right and wrong are. There may be some major points where we can be certain of consensus, but I think we'd be surprised at how few these are. Therefore, I don't think right and wrong are a good basis to pass laws on, in a democracy (or something close to it).

Rather, I think we should pass laws on the basis of preserving people's rights. The actions that should be illegal are those that can be demonstrated to infringe on rights. The old "right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins" argument. It's illegal for you to hit me, not because hitting me is wrong, much less swinging your fist, but because when you hit me you deprive me of my right to be free from pain caused directly by you.

Are there gray areas here? Yes, there still are. But at least we are closer to arguing from the same set of principals, if we can agree on a set of principals that does not come out of the bible. Can Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Wiccans lobby to create laws? Yes they can, because they can still argue in terms of infringing upon rights, instead of in terms of their scripture.

Now I think I'll go see how the turkey is doing.
 

---

Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
 
Thanks Icarus, I appreciate the answer, and I agree with you. In a world where few if any can agree on absolute values, or even if there are such things, the 'infringement of rights' measuring stick is as good as any, and better than most.
 

---