The Religion of My Parents

[redjay]

Now the church preaches tithing to the growing population of the destitute. Today's church has staked out territory in divisive cultural issues, reflecting the division in the USA. Church leadership looks like an elite country club, as do the big money interests who control our government. The only moral issues the church really cares about have to do with sex, not things like civil rights or social justice. I can certainly see how this church has made itself irrelevant to my kids who are all disaffected to one degree or another.

Is this winning strategy? I'm not talking about eternal truths supporting the "one, true church" and sacred priesthood ordinances of salvation. I'm simply wondering about organizational longevity, demographic resilience, and simple survival of an LDS culture. Will current LDS policies lead to growth or even preservation of the church?

I remember listening to a MS podcast - I think it was with Greg Prince - where he said the church does well in aspirational situations (when countries are developing) as they see the church as associated with success (Im paraphrasing). So the that combined with an anti-LBT stance might go down quite well in Africa, but I think the future proliferation of the internet in Africa will hamper church growth. However, African tithing dollars will be far less than the European and Western dollars. So the church may consider to grow - and it probably has enough investments to cover costs over the medium term (couple of decades or longer). In 30 years time Africa could be a much wealthier continent, and there could be a dollar ROI. Interesting times. But as for Europe, it just seems to be a slow death. Would I say this was a winning strategy - perhaps, it's a risk either way (to go conservative vs liberal). And I should imagine the Q12 will go with what they know (Conservatism) unless the church is on it's knees with regard to activity and finances. Not sure if that answered your question

[Thoughtful]

Now the church preaches tithing to the growing population of the destitute. Today's church has staked out territory in divisive cultural issues, reflecting the division in the USA. Church leadership looks like an elite country club, as do the big money interests who control our government. The only moral issues the church really cares about have to do with sex, not things like civil rights or social justice. I can certainly see how this church has made itself irrelevant to my kids who are all disaffected to one degree or another.

Is this winning strategy? I'm not talking about eternal truths supporting the "one, true church" and sacred priesthood ordinances of salvation. I'm simply wondering about organizational longevity, demographic resilience, and simple survival of an LDS culture. Will current LDS policies lead to growth or even preservation of the church?

I remember listening to a MS podcast - I think it was with Greg Prince - where he said the church does well in aspirational situations (when countries are developing) as they see the church as associated with success (Im paraphrasing). So the that combined with an anti-LBT stance might go down quite well in Africa, but I think the future proliferation of the internet in Africa will hamper church growth. However, African tithing dollars will be far less than the European and Western dollars. So the church may consider to grow - and it probably has enough investments to cover costs over the medium term (couple of decades or longer). In 30 years time Africa could be a much wealthier continent, and there could be a dollar ROI. Interesting times. But as for Europe, it just seems to be a slow death. Would I say this was a winning strategy - perhaps, it's a risk either way (to go conservative vs liberal). And I should imagine the Q12 will go with what they know (Conservatism) unless the church is on it's knees with regard to activity and finances. Not sure if that answered your question

I agree with this. The temple president in my area was a MP in Africa. Women there joined the church because men (missionaries) actually asked their opinion and talked to them. The church makes their husbands think about being good to their wife and kids. The same institution that is the most oppressive area of my first world life, is liberating for these folks.

But it's also a horribly colonial mindset, and another embarrassing leak about stamping out local cultures in favor of gospel culture has popped up. Gospel culture appearing to mean American white middle class patriarchal culture.

[Red Ryder]

Did you guys read the Africa leaks?

Tithing and replacing traditional cultures with gospel doctrines were among the top priorities for the church there.

I'll find the link and repost it here.

https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/documents/8 ... erview.pdf

3. Establishing a gospel culture that supersedes local cultures

Establishing firmly in the hearts and minds of the people a gospel culture that supersedes local cultures and traditions.

[wtfluff]

Did you guys read the Africa leaks?

Tithing and replacing traditional cultures with gospel doctrines were among the top priorities for the church there.

I'll find the link and repost it here.

https://mormonleaks.io/wiki/documents/8 ... erview.pdf

3. Establishing a gospel culture that supersedes local cultures

Establishing firmly in the hearts and minds of the people a gospel culture that supersedes local cultures and traditions.

Yep, that "revelation" in those documents is extremely sad. There's always been an underlying thought amongst "returned missionaries" who've served abroad that a big part of the church's "proclaim the gospel" is cultural imperialism. Those of us who are disaffected simply say it out loud more than others. As I said, it's sad to actually see it in print as a literal goal of the LDS Corporation.

I had to laugh nervously about that statement, and the other about "helping" folks in Africa become less impoverished by "paying tithing". The nervous laugh was a bit forced, because I really wanted to cry; And the old white guys in the impenetrable bubble in downtown SLC probably actually believe that taking these poor folks money to buy and develop real-estate (and pay themselves) is actually good for the impoverished.

Sometimes I do literally hate the "religion" I was born into; Or, I guess I should stick with the original theme / title of the thread, Sometimes I really do hate the Religion of my Parents.

[DPRoberts]

I served my mission in a third world country outside of the United States. I also saw the cultural imperialistic attitude of several of my white missionary companions and I thought at the time that they did not understand the gospel. On reflection now I believe that they did understand the church far better than I.

[Give It Time]

I'll be interested to see the information about Africa. I know the conditions for women in Africa are simply horrific. Frankly, if the church can alleviate some of those problems, I think it's a good thing. I'm going to add a however. You know I will.

I actually had a smattering of thoughts. Interesting question and comments. The seventies were definitely a time of upheaval. This time, I see as just as tumultuous for the same reasons, repackaged. The church was more social and fun when I was younger. Back when my testimony was first reforming, I read a thread talking about a phrase that seemed to be a pretty reliable indicator of disaffection. That phrase is "the church is a great place to raise children". It's like the speaker no longer has a testimony and is desperately trying to grasp at a reason to continue with this very demanding religion.

I remember both of my parents saying this. I remember both of them had an air of desperation when they said this. I remember things changing after they said this. I think my parents were going to divorce. I think my father started having his affair. My mother did what I'm doing and became more of a spiritual seeker. She tried to hold the marriage together, but started to talk to my father and tell him she didn't appreciate how oppressive he was. The year I heard them say that significant statement? It would have been 1978-9. I think both my parents lost their testimonies over the lifting of the priesthood ban.

I see the world has changed enormously just from the advent of WiFi and the iPhone. There are old issues, recycling. Illicit drugs use had a lot of people scared. Now it's legalization of marijuana and crystal meth, but I don't think people are as scared of drugs as they used to be. I recently heard someone joke that comparing what medications you're on is a new first date topic. Women are still fighting for equal rights and will be for a very long time. Three things that came out of the feminist movement and never really died are domestic violence awareness, women claiming their sexual power and how that's evolving into discussions about consent, rights for homosexuals and people whose sexuality registers as "queer" under a patriarchal construct.

The church works very well within a patriarchal construct. We know this. This is a lot of why the church does so well in third world countries where the patriarchy has run too amok. The church can and does improve conditions in those countries, particularly for women. However, as things come to improve and generations pass, women discover there is still a glass ceiling. Thing is, women want to be the best individuals they can be. That isn't against doctrine. However, for women, "in the Lord's way" becomes something that cuts us off at the knees. The younger generations eventually get to see there are actually more opportunities for growth and self actualization outside the church.

Another thought just occurred to me. The rising generation is going to be extremely mobile. This church is extremely neighborhood/stability oriented. The next generation of church leaders will be tasked with exactly how to align ward boundaries when a lot of the congregation is location independent.

Finally, circling back to Africa. Conditions there are terrible for women. Personally, if the church is something that will be embraced because of it's patriarchy and can improve the conditions of and treatment of women, then I hope my son serves his mission there.