posted
Can any of the LDS folks comment on the Newsweek article? I found it very informative since I know little of your faith. But I want to know if what was in there was accurate.
I never understood why so many said that the Alvin stories were somewhat based on the Joseph Smith's life, but now I do.
October 17, 2005, Newsweek, U.S. Edition The Mormon Odyssey
Posts: 514 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I found it to be kind of lukewarm and blandly neutral. The writer wrote it like a straight news story. But it didn't have any really off-the-wall misinterpretations in it, which is good. It didn't make much of a splash with me.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Carefully and respectfully, if a bit blandly written-- almost something I'd expect to see in the Ensign. But factually accurate.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The picture of the "Mormon couple" is kind of funny, because it's not just a Mormon couple posing. They just got married, and are having their pictures taken. Pretty much a once-in-a-lifetime event. Mormon couples don't just up and pose like that at the temple with photographers hanging around. Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Central tenets of Mormonism seem confusing—even literally incredible—to those outside the faith. An angel named Moroni? "Plural" marriage? A resurrected Jesus visiting the New World? These are questions posed by potential converts, and also by historians and scientists testing Smith's claims."
Certainly not all central tenets. The resurrected Christ and his gospel, certainly. Outsiders tend to focus much more on stuff closer to the periphery.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The article was written by a member of the Church, who was being careful to not appear to be biased. That's why it is so bland. My wife had an office, for a time, that had a window overlooking the front of the Salt Lake temple. It was an infinately enjoyable view. I've never seen an ugly bride.
Posts: 1167 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
As always, I felt that there was a bit that came off misrepresented. But on the whole, it was more fair than most ( I would hope so though, with an LDS author).
Posts: 137 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
And speaking of I've nevers: I've never met a GA who was less than sweet when you met him in person. We went to visit my husband's grandfather, who lives in a retirement building that is caddy-corner to Church Headquarters, and as we were going in, a man who I recognized as a member of the 70 (although I am ashamed to say I can't think of his name!) crossed the street just to coo over my daughter. Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it was a pretty good article. Other than a few times when they attributed things to Joseph Smith the man, his personal charisma, or to the history of persecution.
Example:
quote:This culture of taking care of one's own almost certainly has its roots in the many decades of persecution the faithful endured on their long journey west—what was a curse then has, in the fullness of time, become a blessing.
LDS would say that our culture has its roots in divine revelation. "mourn with those who mourn and comfort those who stand in need of comfort". And that the success of missionary efforts then and now depends mainly on the testimony of the spirit directly to those investigating the church, and not on Joseph Smith's personal charisma.
But other than that, I found nothing to object to. That's wonderfully refreshing! I think it's the first mainstream news article I've read that talked about the church in ways that I didn't find offensive and totally off base.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Smith's vision—optimistic, vigorous, a source of continuing personal growth for all who accept its blessings—in many ways echoes the American Dream. Millions around the world now see in their own lives what a young man found for himself in that New York grove.
posted
Thanks a bunch, you all! I'm glad that your faith was covered in a fair and non-offensive manner. I tend to cringe when I see Roman Catholicism mentioned in a news article these days (for obvious reasons). What kills me is the media's focus on the actions of a relatively few bad individuals instead of the mysteries of faith that we celebrate in Mass each Sunday. I suspect that our [RC] current experience is analogous to what the LDS must endure when the media focuses on plural marriage.
Posts: 514 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I've never met a GA who was less than sweet when you met him in person.
Aw, I have. No horror stories, but less than sweet. No, I'm not sharing details. I wish I could say the above, but alas, no.
I, in my infinite paranoia, am chalking it up to being clearly the only adult female in the room who was there on business herself rather than accompanying her husband. Which makes it his problem.
posted
I'm pretty sure I'm supposed to be feeling sorry for myself and resolving to fit into the expected mold as soon as possible so I can be acknowledged, but when that kind of thing happens (usually by regular members - I am not sure that was the reasoning for the above occurance - I am paranoid by now) it just ticks me off and leads to unfortunate opinions about their imaginations. Everything's fine between me and the Lord, and all the lesser judgers can bite me. Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have never met an Apostle that was less than sweet in person, and in fact I've never met a Seventy that was less than sweet, either; however, I know that there are at least some of the latter that can be less than sweet at times. My father, when he was a bishop, didn't get along with the GA that presided over our area (I don't remember the exact administrative position this Seventy held, because this was back before Area Authorities, perhaps during the time of Regional Representatives.)
As for Apostles, I have a number of stories of running into them while I lived in Salt Lake, and they were always super cool.
Posts: 1652 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I did meet a Seventy once who taught my mission a bunch of crazy fringey extradoctrinal speculation about the creation of the earth (which of course, everyone but me suddenly considered to be God's honest truth, forcing me to undertake a bit of reeducation about the canon and sources of official doctrine) ... but apart from that one weird experience, everything else I've seen done by a General Authority (all during my mission, really) has been awesome, and my mission tended to create uncomfortable situations that they had to be pretty awesome to get out of They have my utmost respect, as a whole, as people who are not only legit and inspired according to my faith, but also downright inspiring when it comes to leadership and dealing with people.
Actually, that first guy MAY have been an Area Authority Seventy, come to think of it ... I'm not too certain now ... it's been a while Posts: 1539 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Agnostics and atheists need their own titles, don't they? I'd use "General Authority," but I guess it's already taken. Maybe "Quantum Master?"
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
katharina: I think one thing about having older gentleman leading things is that a few are still stuck in old habits. Sometimes these habits take generations to get rid of. I've heard my bishop and stake president say some cringeworthy things that just never would have crossed my mind to say. (I'm in the bishopric, by the way, so I get to hear a lot of stuff.)
It somehow doesn't apply to the Apostles, though. Maybe they walk on a higher plane or something - but they don't seem to be afflicted with generational habits.
Especially President Hinckley. I love that guy. He has a cane, and he doesn't know what to do with it - so he waves it at people and bangs on his friends. It's like he's 25, stuck in a 90-year-old body.
Posts: 73 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I do think the article should have disclosed that the author is LDS. I mean, not that I think she showed much bias, it seems only right.
Posts: 700 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
It was a business function, so there was no way he was speaking for the church. It's okay - it wasn't anything official, and it wasn't even a church situation. It was an encounter in the business world, and I think the problem was that he didn't think I belonged there. That's partly why I'm not sharing details - it would suck to never have a chance to be human, even when outside a church setting. But it does mean that I don't have any illusions that they are perfect day in and out.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Katharina's last point is a good one. They're good men striving to be faithful followers of Christ, but they're men, not perfect, and we need to allow them to be human. In my experience, for the most part they succeed in their desire to be witnesses of Christ in their actions and attitudes, and they're not afraid to admit their imperfections.
Posts: 867 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that it's okay that the author didn't disclose her religious affiliation. Now if somehow she felt that she had to approve this piece through the church before submitting it, and did so, then I think it's a stickier moral widget.
Huzzah for the piece. It's fine. It's bland. I think it did more good than harm. To my ear, it's softly written, but that's a minor vice.
The one feeling I do get from the piece is that I naturally read it in the voice of the teacher in river's dream in Serenity. There is something about the diction that rings false, or at least simple.
Maybe because it's a history piece, a bit of a preamble, in fact if it were part of a series, I think this would make a fine first installment, as long as the next bits were more muscular.
Even this:
quote:Within limits, the church encourages internal debate, arguing that doubt can be an important precursor to faith. "I think the Lord expects us to think," President Gordon B. Hinckley, the incumbent prophet who Mormons believe leads the church through divine revelation, told NEWSWEEK. "That which comes easily departs easily. That which comes of struggle remains." What authorities do not accept, however, is those who publicly doubt and actively preach against church doctrines and leaders. In 1993 six LDS academics (known as the September Six for the month of their disciplinary action) were tried in church courts for issues related to spreading allegedly false historical and feminist teachings. Five were excommunicated. In the late 1970s LDS leaders limited access to church records, prompting charges that they were discouraging unauthorized accounts of church history. "Some authorities apparently preferred that we have no history except that kept by public-relations writers," wrote Leonard J. Arrington, the then director of the church's historical department.
is discarded in a way that, while not high-handed, is a little bit flip.
I want to read about how the doctrine affects people, and how the doctrine affects people differently in their day to day lives, and how despite those differences, all understand themselves as remaining true to Smith's vision, unless, of course, all LDS are uniform, which I don't think is the case. If everyone agrees about everything important, then the piece is fine. But really, is that the case?
She tosses out Romney and Reid as if they are the same guy with two different names. And how the heck can anyone miss the overwhelming blinding whiteness of the religion's followers. All of these issues are brushed upon and cast off in a way that's unfulfilling.
Now if the piece is light to my ears, and light to the ears of a believers, why is it news?
In the church's defense, it should be noted that the "overwhelming blinding whiteness" is much more prevalent in the United States than it is worldwide. If you look at overall membership statistics, the Church is very diverse.
In my experience, ALL religion in America seems to be pretty racially segregated. There are exceptions, of course, but the majority of my black friends who are Christian--and I have many, since I'm the only white member of my university's Gospel Choir--feel much more comfortable attending a church that is traditionally black. So it's not just Mormons. It's an American phenomenon.
Posts: 786 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anyone who comments on the "overwhelming blinding whiteness" should attend my ward in West Philly.
Posts: 194 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
United States-5,208,827 South America-2,548,979 Mexico-884,071 Asia-750,478 Central America-472,038 Europe-412,907 South Pacific-363,875 Canada-158,511 Africa-153,565 Caribbean-115,610
As right as you ever are, Irami.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, Jeff, I do find it a little disingenuous of Mormons to cite their overseas recruitment stats when accused of being overwhelmingly white.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, we welcome everyone into the church. There seems to be a prejudice against joining it by many Black Americans. But we invite them anyway. And in many areas, they do join the church. Sometimes in large numbers, sometimes in small. There are a ton of hispanic members in America, at least in many parts. (The ward I attended while visiting Atlanta was actually more than half Spanish-speaking.) There are many Samoan members in parts of Utah. The ward we lived in in Richardson, TX for a while was attatched to the Chinese branch-- we had seperate Sacrament meetings and Sunday School classes because of the language thing, but Primary, Relief Society, and the Priesthood quorums met together. The list goes on.
My ward is not "blindingly white". Neither are many of the wards I've attended across the country. I don't feel the need to cite overseas recruitment, at least not exclusively, although we are truly a world-wide Church. That is our doctrine and that is the true nature of it.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I was in Detroit, we were often told by people that they did not want to attend a white church. Since they'd never heard of the church before, I can only assume that they thought it was a white church because I and my comp were white. We got used to adding that the only white people at church were the missionaries.
I think church is one of the places that people segregate themselves. Because of that, I don't consider it a flaw of the organizations necessarily.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
Why is it disingenuous to respond to accusations of whitewashing with the fact that nearly half of our current membership isn't white?
My particular ward is 'blindingly white' because the region it contains is blindingly white. That's neither here nor there, though. ---- For the record, though, it's pretty obvious why converting African Americans is more difficult than...umm, whatever the accepted term is, whites. I mean, up until about twenty-five years ago, we had some very specific rules about African Americans (and others) that weren't very friendly.
But that's not the way things are now. And no matter what anyone says, we aren't 'blindingly white'.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Or the one I was in in Vancouver, BC, Canada. There were people there from something like 43 different countries. But then, Vancouver is a major port city in Canada with a high immigrant population anyway.
Oh, and Richmond (south across the river from Vancouver proper) has at least one Chinese ward.
Edmonton, Alberta has quite a few Spanish wards. I don't know how many - they grow far too fast for me to keep track.
posted
My ward in Las Vegas is pretty blindingly white, but we do have a few interracial couples. And the majority of wards in Vegas are not nearly as white as mine.
Posts: 1652 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
![[Group Hug]](graemlins/grouphug.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Maybe "Quantum Master?"
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
