The Nashville Statement

[Jeffret]

In the Mormon Church, the Proclamation on the Family has been used for years as a political tool, to beat women, gays, lesbians, and other sexual minorities over the head. The Church uses it to assert that only one form of family is correct, that gender roles are eternal, and anything else is not acceptable before god.

Admittedly, when it comes to really casting shade, though, the Mormon Church is kind of a lightweight. The really get into it you need to gather together a bunch of self-righteous, holier-than-thou evangelicals. Of such was born what they call, the Nashville Statement, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/eva ... 95c2a217fc.

The mayor of Nashville, the city, Megan Barry, disavows the statement and the name,

The @CBMWorg's so-called "Nashville Statement" is poorly named and does not represent the inclusive values of the city & people of Nashville

The evangelical pastors are also pretty clear that Mormonism is evil, adding polygamy as one of their denounced practices. Oddly, their Bible contains god-supported instances of that one. Nevertheless, they know what's right.

[oliver_denom]

I have faith that this is one issue which will eventually resolve itself with time. The numbers look clear on public opinion, there's increasing acceptance on all sides of the political spectrum.

The only places where this will still be a topic of conversation in 30 years will be within religions like this and Mormonism. Everyone else, I think, will have moved on.

[Hagoth]

the leaders explained that the document is a response to what they feel to be an “increasingly post-Christian” culture.

By which they mean post-evangelical, and thank goodness for that. I understand why Mormons are so afraid of LGBT acceptance, because it undermines the whole Adam-Eve-temple-bow-down-to-male-priesthood thing. What do these people really have to gain/protect by making such an ass-hat move?

Is this a serious trend or just the death throes of a culture that is bitter because they don't always get their way anymore?

[Hagoth]

The only places where this will still be a topic of conversation in 30 years will be within religions like this and Mormonism. Everyone else, I think, will have moved on.

I wonder if Mormonism will someday be the last hold-out. Eventually they would fold as they did with polygamy.

Earlier I suggested that it would destroy LDS doctrine, but I had forgotten that polygamy was once essential for salvation and we abandoned that as soon as it got too hot in the kitchen. The more I think about it the more I realize that they could reinvent the doctrine in a similar way. If you take 5 minutes to think about the eternal families concept it falls apart anyway. A lot of older people, who are beyond most of their tithing paying years, would be extremely pissed-off but a lot of future tithing payers might rejoice and decide to stick around.

[oliver_denom]

The only places where this will still be a topic of conversation in 30 years will be within religions like this and Mormonism. Everyone else, I think, will have moved on.

I wonder if Mormonism will someday be the last hold-out. Eventually they would fold as they did with polygamy.

Earlier I suggested that it would destroy LDS doctrine, but I had forgotten that polygamy was once essential for salvation and we abandoned that as soon as it got too hot in the kitchen. The more I think about it the more I realize that they could reinvent the doctrine in a similar way. If you take 5 minutes to think about the eternal families concept it falls apart anyway. A lot of older people, who are beyond most of their tithing paying years, would be extremely pissed-off but a lot of future tithing payers might rejoice and decide to stick around.

I think we'll know by their reaction to declining numbers, both in activity and conversions. If they start saying things like "the time of the gentiles has been fulfilled" and start talking about how those with the truth will always be a small portion of the whole, or a righteous remnant, then they've decided to be a smaller and more ideologically pure organization. Instead, if they react with alarm and start back peddling or adding nuance to past statements, then we can expect a change sooner than later.

[Hagoth]

Potential long-range outcome if the church sticks to its guns:

The church becomes completely irrelevant and membership dwindles A few younger, more charismatic entrepreneurial opportunist leaders work their way to the top where they can take full advantage of the wealth of the church's malls, office buildings, land holdings, orchards, ranches... Mormon worship distances itself from its roots and settles into the megachurch televangelist model. Fundamentalist splinters will keep the dream of Joseph-/Brigham queer-free mormondom alive but none will ever gain anything like the former influence and power of Imperial Mormonism. All will consider themselves the One True Church.

[Jeffret]

the leaders explained that the document is a response to what they feel to be an “increasingly post-Christian” culture.

By which they mean post-evangelical, and thank goodness for that. I understand why Mormons are so afraid of LGBT acceptance, because it undermines the whole Adam-Eve-temple-bow-down-to-male-priesthood thing. What do these people really have to gain/protect by making such an ass-hat move?

It's substantially driven by their authoritarian, patriarchal mindset. They're terrified of gays treating them like they treat women. Or that the set of people they're allowed to discriminate against might not be totally fixed. Pretty much none of the authors were women.

It's also driven by their need to have some group to vilify and attack. They're based upon having a group to discriminate against. It's faded off a bit since gays started marrying all across the country and the world didn't end, but there used to be an annual list published of biggest anti-Christian attacks in the U.S. Nearly all of these attacks on Christianity were reductions on their ability to impose their will and discriminate against LGBT folks.

They're still hugely committed to the idea that they must quash LGBT people or else they will do the same to them. Their identity is all tied up in it. Indeed, for many of them, they're terrified that unless they continually gays they'll end up like that themselves. And for many of them it's true.

Is this a serious trend or just the death throes of a culture that is bitter because they don't always get their way anymore?

Given our current political environment, it's really hard to tell for sure, but it does seem to be a pretty marginalized group. Sure, they got a lot of pastors together to make the statement and they've gotten a number of people to sign, but mostly society has become more accepting. There's no indication that these sorts of things are really winning them more converts.

[Jeffret]

I wonder if Mormonism will someday be the last hold-out. Eventually they would fold as they did with polygamy.

I think that's pretty unlikely. The contrast between the Nashville Statement and the PotF is pretty stark. The PotF was written back when anti-gay animus was socially acceptable. The Mormon Church is much more concerned with being mainstream. And it's much larger. The Nashville Statement is authored and endorsed by some significant religious celebrities, but not so much by significant religious institutions.

The Mormon Church of today is far different from the polygamous church. While they share the same name, it's pretty a completely different church. Today's Church wouldn't support polygamy and moves to wipe out the suggestion quickly. At least publicly.

Earlier I suggested that it would destroy LDS doctrine, but I had forgotten that polygamy was once essential for salvation and we abandoned that as soon as it got too hot in the kitchen. The more I think about it the more I realize that they could reinvent the doctrine in a similar way. If you take 5 minutes to think about the eternal families concept it falls apart anyway. A lot of older people, who are beyond most of their tithing paying years, would be extremely pissed-off but a lot of future tithing payers might rejoice and decide to stick around.

LDS doctrine has changed dramatically before, essentially completely reversing itself. It could happen in this area. In theory, the idea of continuing revelation provides the perfect out. In practice it's much more complicated. They could just stop talking about it, talk more about acceptance, and then quietly promote a policy that is completely opposite the current one. Certainly it would cause some members to leave, but that's a problem anyway. At some point attacking LGBT will probably be a clear loser.

[moksha]

Why Nashville? If they had been truer to their conservative religious values they would have held the signing in Gods Wrath, Georgia. If they had a sense of the sublime they would have signed it in French Lick, Indiana. My guess is that more people would take a look at the French Lick Statement than they would the Gods Wrath Statement.

[Hagoth]

Jeff wrote:

They're based upon having a group to discriminate against

.
Which is exactly what people in our church, like Dallin Oaks, are talking about when they use the code words "religious freedom." It's kind of ironic coming from an organization that is so keenly sensitive about their image of themselves as being on the pointy end of the persecution stick. I'm reminded of that parable where the debtor begs for for forgiveness, receives it, and immediately abuses without mercy someone who's in debt to him.

[Emower]

I think its inevitable that the church will fold on the gay issue. It literally a matter of when. If the old duffers will never go there, in time the younger duffers moving up will. The only way this will not happen is if support of Gay marriage becomes a test for moving up in the church. This is already at work I suppose, but when more and more people voice support it will become less and less tenable.

Potential long-range outcome if the church sticks to its guns:

The church becomes completely irrelevant and membership dwindles A few younger, more charismatic entrepreneurial opportunist leaders work their way to the top where they can take full advantage of the wealth of the church's malls, office buildings, land holdings, orchards, ranches... Mormon worship distances itself from its roots and settles into the megachurch televangelist model. Fundamentalist splinters will keep the dream of Joseph-/Brigham queer-free mormondom alive but none will ever gain anything like the former influence and power of Imperial Mormonism. All will consider themselves the One True Church.

The only way the church sticks to its guns is if it is ok with becoming irrelevant in society. I dont think it will even be successful in the televangelist style with such a draconian view of gay marriage in the future. I think we all agree that the church is too worried about the bottom line to let that happen. We need to not look at the church as being run by 15 old duffers, and rather as 15 old duffers being run by an entity called "The Church."

[Give It Time]

We need to not look at the church as being run by 15 old duffers, and rather as 15 old duffers being run by an entity called "The Church."

I've never had the words, but this is how I've felt. I've said it that the church has painted itself into a corner, but I like this better.

As for the link and the Family Proc, these are why I'm spiritual and not religious.

[Jeffret]

Jeff wrote:

They're based upon having a group to discriminate against

.
Which is exactly what people in our church, like Dallin Oaks, are talking about when they use the code words "religious freedom." It's kind of ironic coming from an organization that is so keenly sensitive about their image of themselves as being on the pointy end of the persecution stick. I'm reminded of that parable where the debtor begs for for forgiveness, receives it, and immediately abuses without mercy someone who's in debt to him.

This is exactly what Oaks and the Church talk about with "religious freedom". Their freedom hasn't been a problem. What they want it special recognition in society for their leadership positions in the Church. They want people to look up to them, think nicely of them, and respect and follow their pronouncements. And they want to retain the ability to discriminate freely without disagreement or reprobation. These desired freedoms are not special privileges, which are eroding from them, partly based upon their desires to retain them. The more they attempt to tighten their grip, the more these slip through their fingers.

[Emower]

The more they attempt to tighten their grip, the more these slip through their fingers.

[moksha]

I think its inevitable that the church will fold on the gay issue. It literally a matter of when. If the old duffers will never go there, in time the younger duffers moving up will.

The power structure in the Church was set up so that if societal pressure had not intervened, the Church would still be practicing polygamy and supporting racial segregation. That is why outside societal pressure is essential if we as a Church are to become a better people. Why? It has something to do with TBMs not showing up for reveille during the Heaven War.

[moksha]

There was no need to tarnish the name of Nashville with any hateful religious statement. They should have called it The Proclamation on the Family Part II: the wrath of the Evangelicals.

The trouble with Evangelicals is that they take the "onward Christian soldiers marching as to war" literally.