A 'Plan' rolling forth to fill the world or putting out brush fires?

[Born Free]

I had lunch with a Post-Mo friend yesterday, and as he spoke of what he saw in the Church's reactive approach to its challenges, I saw something I have never sighted before.

I have spoken/written previously in the Post-Mo Stages threads of seeing that I had handled my problems with the Church in isolation, never keeping sight of the sheer breadth and spread of the problems I had with it. Many others report similar.

My friend spoke of the Church responding to its critics and its doctrinal problems in a similarly hotspotch, haphazard manner; that in placing a band-aid on their problems in one area, they appear to lose track that that opens up problems on other fronts. Embracing the 'limited geography' model to avoid BoM issues, open themselves up to credibility problems on hundereds of other fronts where leaders are on record as referring to all of the continent and all the Inidans including the Polynesians as descendents of Lehi's group.

As I listened to him, I realised that if someone was describing a military or business leader responding in this manner, you would seriously doubt his ability. Ongoing uncoordinated reactiveness is the sign of a leader/organisation in serious trouble usually. Its serious stumbling is usually nearer rather than further away.

Any thoughts?

Daryl

[peter_mary]

I had lunch with a Post-Mo friend yesterday, and as he spoke of what he saw in the Church's reactive approach to its challenges, I saw something I have never sighted before.

I have spoken/written previously in the Post-Mo Stages threads of seeing that I had handled my problems with the Church in isolation, never keeping sight of the sheer breadth and spread of the problems I had with it. Many others report similar.

My friend spoke of the Church responding to its critics and its doctrinal problems in a similarly hotspotch, haphazard manner; that in placing a band-aid on their problems in one area, they appear to lose track that that opens up problems on other fronts. Embracing the 'limited geography' model to avoid BoM issues, open themselves up to credibility problems on hundereds of other fronts where leaders are on record as referring to all of the continent and all the Inidans including the Polynesians as descendents of Lehi's group.

As I listened to him, I realised that if someone was describing a military or business leader responding in this manner, you would seriously doubt his ability. Ongoing uncoordinated reactiveness is the sign of a leader/organisation in serious trouble usually. Its serious stumbling is usually nearer rather than further away.

Any thoughts?

Daryl

My only thought is that this is exactly why there is a gradual "mainstreaming" that occurs with all the worlds really great cults...they get too big for the span of control, fight it for a while, but eventually they have to make a choice: Cut the fringe members off and regain control of the core, or open things up wider to bring the fring in closer and allow new people with even broader views to come in, too.

In my mind, that's what you're describing. Trying to control the church at the level they are accustomed to when it is THIS big is much like trying to control a wet bar of soap in the shower by squeezing it tighter and tighter. You get the picture...it ricochets all over the shower with you flailing your hands trying to regain control.

They're clamping down on the wet soap, and it pops up somewhere else. The question is, what will they do next? Clamp down tighter, or relax their grip? If they relax, they may find they are appealing to a greater number of folks, but they won't have the same degree of control.

In the end, all that probably really matters is whether or not you make more money controlling the hell out of a small bunch, or only gently sheparding a large bunch...guess we'll see what they decide, but I've been clear in other threads that I believe the Bushman book is evidence of trying to open up, talk a little more, and mainstream just a tad more...

[free thinker]

You know it's kinda funny for me now. I don't care if there are 50 million or 5 million mormons ten years from now.


I am so very glad to be outside looking in now. What a great blessing to be postmo rather than current mo.


I wish them the best. We will be here to help people pick up the pieces of thier lives after being broken on the rough shoals in the great sea of mormonism.

ft

[fh451]

As I listened to him, I realised that if someone was describing a military or business leader responding in this manner, you would seriously doubt his ability. Ongoing uncoordinated reactiveness is the sign of a leader/organisation in serious trouble usually. Its serious stumbling is usually nearer rather than further away.

Any thoughts?
I think a significant part of the problem is that there really is no new "mission" for the church to accomplish. They've been doing basically the same thing for 150 years, and leadership requires a clear vision of where you are going. Sitting and waiting for the second coming is getting old. The problem of "redeeming the dead" is a little repetative and anyone who thinks about it should know it is totally intractable. So what do you do? Obsess over silly details like tattoos and ear piercing. There is no inspiration to be had from the leadership, but unfortunately, they do have a mountain of moola to keep the gig going for a long time. So while the organization may be mired in mediocrity, I don't know that you could say it is "in trouble" in the sense that it will fall apart any time soon.

Bob

[Born Free]

I think a significant part of the problem is that there really is no new "mission" for the church to accomplish. They've been doing basically the same thing for 150 years, and leadership requires a clear vision of where you are going. Sitting and waiting for the second coming is getting old. The problem of "redeeming the dead" is a little repetative and anyone who thinks about it should know it is totally intractable. So what do you do? Obsess over silly details like tattoos and ear piercing. There is no inspiration to be had from the leadership, but unfortunately, they do have a mountain of moola to keep the gig going for a long time. So while the organization may be mired in mediocrity, I don't know that you could say it is "in trouble" in the sense that it will fall apart any time soon.

Bob
Bob,

Using your theory re cash reserves, wealthy families should be immune from divorce.

Has anyone graphed the rate at which is attacks intellectuals? Is that on the up and up?

This is a seige mentaility machine which thrives on perceived external enemies; which in turn thrive on fear and ignorance. Things like the internet are cutting a swathe through that. It makes an interresting sociological study.

Daryl

[dogzilla]

Bob,

Using your theory re cash reserves, wealthy families should be immune from divorce.

Has anyone graphed the rate at which is attacks intellectuals? Is that on the up and up?

This is a seige mentaility machine which thrives on perceived external enemies; which in turn thrive on fear and ignorance. Things like the internet are cutting a swathe through that. It makes an interresting sociological study.

Daryl

What he means is there is no enemy to fight. Rather , the enemies of the original church do not exist in the same manner. Accessibility of information is now the greatest enemy of the church and they can't very well ban the internet. Well, I suppose they could try, but then they'd have another straw man (like porn), for their attention misdirection activities.

I think I'd like to add to that: Yes, leadership of the church lacks focus. They have no single central mission anymore. But also... the church lacks relevance. That's where the discussions of tattoos and similar minutia come into play. I think the leadership is making a very feeble stab at trying to make the church relevant to modern life and the world today. "Be in the world, not of the world," doesn't seem very effective to me. I had to be "of the world" in order to get a job and pay the rent (just until my RM white knight comes along to sweep me off my feet and consign me to a life of mindless breeding). The Word of Wisdom is completely irrelevant and has nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity, spirituality or really, much of anything else.

But then again, it is my opinion that Christianity is irrelevant when turned into a mass-marketed megachurch monster. (Two points for alliteration today!)

[fh451]

Bob,

Using your theory re cash reserves, wealthy families should be immune from divorce.
Sorry, I don't get what you mean here. All I was saying is that even if there is a very large membership exodus from the church, the "church" itself has enough money to continue the core program for many years. Temple square will be maintained and the business interests of the church will be propegated. The organization frankly does not rely on doctrine or spirituality anymore. It's mostly a company.

And if two really rich people get divorced, what do you have? Two rich people!

Bob