Bill Reel "What has to go?"

[blazerb]

I was listening to the most recent public release from Bill Reel. He asked what aspects of the "dominant narrative," as described by Bushman, need to be revised. He also says that these things need to be revised.

Here's my take. If the church leaders allow an open discussion on the historical problems in the traditional stories, nothing will be left. There are problems with everything from the first vision, to the BoM, to priesthood restoration. I have had friends use the fact that Joseph Smith referred to Elijah coming at some future time well after 1836 as proof that it happened in 1836. That makes no sense. The whole thing falls apart with any degree of scrutiny unless you start with the belief that it all happened, as Bushman and other believing historians do. It all has to go at some level.

I know this is not a new idea here, but I state my agreement that church leaders cannot allow such a discussion to take place if they want the church to continue to operate as it has. There would be mass exodus. I am not suggesting that the church would cease to exist. It would just be a much smaller, more fanatical group of people who are able to look at evidence and give it exactly the opposite meaning from what it shows. It occurs to me that this is very nearly the characteristic that Joseph Smith used to describe those in outer darkness: "Able to look at the noonday Sun and say it is dark," or something like that.

I'm probably going off the rails, now. I feel angry and depressed. I'll take a break.

[BriansThoughtMirror]

I'll join the speculators and say Bill is on his way out. I agree- once you ask critically what has to go, the answer will be, pretty much everything. It's different than asking, "how can I maintain belief?"

[Corsair]

I am in the delightfully ironic position of feeling some affinity for Community of Christ after meeting a local CoC pastor. The LDS church is in the unenviable position of facing historical and doctrinal revision when the internet is in full swing. The CoC went through those painful changes when information about Joseph Smith's bad decisions was not front page news. They made the change when it could be done with much more introspection and less criticism from apostates and skeptics.

This is why I don't think that the LDS church will change. The strong, forward thinking leadership needed for this kind of endeavor does not appear to exist. The newest apostles are company men who have defended the orthodox narrative for decades. The kind of men and women who could usher in this kind of change are either relegated to scholarship with little chance of serious leadership. It's Brother and Sister Terryl and Fiona Givens who could provide the pastoral apologetics, not Elder Givens or President Givens. Richard Bushman is a Patriarch, which is distinctly not a leadership position.

I don't see a way forward that preserves strong believers and allows historical changes. Tithing revenue is quite vulnerable, of course, and I think the institutional ego will not want to admit that they were wrong in any foundational way. It will simply be amusing to watch how the LDS church reacts going forward.

[blazerb]

It will simply be amusing to watch how the LDS church reacts going forward.

I think I'll be happier if I can adopt this attitude.

[Hagoth]

This is why I don't think that the LDS church will change.

I think they have changed quite a bit in that they have become a church of apologetics. And they have tried to move more into mainstream Christianity, even though mainstream Christianity continues to reject them. They have buddied up with The Great and Abominable Church. They have increased the font size of the words JESUS CHRIST in their logo. But you're right, they can't fully remove very many of these elements from the Jenga tower. I think we will hear a lot more of the "it's not important to your salvation" rhetoric. Maybe a change in the logo:

The Church of Jesus Christ of It's not important to your salvation

[Rebel]

I agree 100% with Corsair , leadership that is needed just isn't there !!! Maybe some day before it is to late .... I don't know. I know I do agree with much of the COC perspective.

[Emower]

I think we underestimate the church's desire to be accepted. A peculiar people makes a great mantra at general conference, but really the church is interested in survival. If it becomes clear that a rejection of doctrine is needed going forward, those doctrines will be moved to the status of "I dont know that we teach that."

[el-asherah]

I think we underestimate the church's desire to be accepted. A peculiar people makes a great mantra at general conference, but really the church is interested in survival. If it becomes clear that a rejection of doctrine is needed going forward, those doctrines will be moved to the status of "I dont know that we teach that."

I totally agree, however the timing also has to be right. The church must preserve tithing dollars from the older generation of members who were taught the old narrative, the church can not afford a mass exodus of money. So they will wait, and slowly push the old narrative down the memory hole as the older generation dies off. This process could take 2 to 3 decades, before we get "we never taught that", but it certainly does start with "I don't know that we teach that".

This is probably why the church hides the essays, so the older generation does not find them, the church wants the old generation to continue believing the old narrative. While the church seems more willing to change to a newer narrative for the younger generation such as through the CES system.

[Red Ryder]

The best answer is;

I have to go.

Whether or not the church has the leadership, ability, or willingness to change is irrelevant. The doctrinal foundation of change is already built into the system. The church has already survived significant 180 degree turns. Polygamy. Blacks and the priesthood. Pantomiming ritualistic throat slashings and disembowellings in the temple. Naked initiatories with 116 count reformed Egyptian cotton sheets sown open along the sides for easy access to bless your loins and sinuses. Janitors, roads shows, scouts, et al.

The church could continue to scrub itself of its absurdities, doctrines, and Bednars for another 100 years while the future generations wait around for normalcy.

Or I can leave.

Bill can leave.

You can leave.

Why wait for the church to change?

[1smartdodog]

I listened to Bill. If all those things vanished the church would cease to exist as it is. It would be a wholely different organization. I doubt it would appeal to the average member. No the church will continue as is until it collapses or shrinks to a manageable level.

[blazerb]

The best answer is;

I have to go.

Right now, I don't exactly need to go, but I have had to back off from everything I used to do at church. The church is not getting better anytime soon.

[MalcolmVillager]

The best place to put the apology and correction is in the electronic space on the web and tools. The old folks won't find them and the young people will accept them. This keeps the rich old folks oblivious while changing the narrative for the next generation.

That and buy real estate and stock while ignoring the poor and malnourished.