| |
|
Saturday, December 13, 2003
|
|
Not surprisingly, Albert Mohler comes out squarely against a recent book by John Killinger, entitled Ten Things I Learned Wrong From a Conservative Church. Killinger's perpective is similar to that of noted Episcopal bishop John Shelby Spong--he makes the case for liberal Protestantism as the "real" Christian church embodying the spirit of tolerance and charity, as opposed to the fundamentalist, conservative brand of Protestantism that has swept across the Sunbelt in the last fifty years. Just to give you a hint of how different Mr. Killinger is from his conservative cousins, he wrote a book arguing that the Harry Potter books are NOT satanic and evil, they are just good kids books! See God, the Devil, and Harry Potter: A Christian Minister's Defense of the Beloved Novels. (Well, he actually argued that Harry is a Christ-figure of sorts, but you don't need to go that far if you don't want to.)
The topic of liberal versus conservative (theology, not politics) should be of interest to Mormons because Mormonism is much closer to the fundamentalist, conservative Christian outlook than is generally recognized. An overwrought dedication to scriptural literalism, scriptural inerrancy, and supernaturalism characterizes both movements. And both movements consider the liberal wing of their party to be the enemy. Mormonism simply excommunicates Mormons who "go liberal" (or tries to, anyway), so the liberal arm of Mormonism is a disorganized rabble of ex-Mormons, Sunstone Mormons, and closet liberals. The diversity of Protestantism precludes such an easy organizational solution to their "liberal problem," but by forcing a dialogue (of sorts) I think the cause of truth is advanced. Dialogue is good. Mormonism needs less finger-pointing and more dialogue. Mormonism needs more liberal Mormons. And a token liberal GA would be a nice gesture, too.
11:36:26 PM 
|
|
 James G. Blaine
Albert Mohler has a very readable weblog article at Crosswalks.com showing the ugly heritage of the Washington constitutional provision, a state "Blaine amendment," at issue in the recently argued case of Locke v. Davey. You may remember this cute rhyme from your high school American history book: "Blaine, Blaine, James G. Blaine, the continental liar from the state of Maine." Yup, same guy. He lost the 1884 presidential race to Grover Cleveland, but he nevertheless managed to leave his mark on history by promoting an anti-Catholic constitutional amendment. It employed neutral, strict separationist language with the goal of prohibiting any state aid to parochial schools (while crypto-Protestantism reigned as the informally established national religion of the public schools). The amendment failed at the federal level, but similar amendments were more successful at the state level. Let's hope Protestants get on the right side this time and cheer for Davey rather than Blaine.
10:57:39 PM
|
|
BYU fans spent most of the recent BYU-Oklahoma State game booing a former BYU student now playing for OSU. Sample: In light of the behavior many fans exhibited Saturday night against former BYU-turned-Oklahoma State basketball player Daniel Bobik, many BYU students and professors are wondering how students at BYU got so petty and intolerant.
Let's see: LDS youth are taught to see the world in simple black and white, good guys versus bad guys, us versus them, Mormons versus Gentiles, Church of the Lamb and Church of the Devil terms all their life--then BYU blames the students for being petty and intolerant? If Church leaders want to overcome pettiness and intolerance, they should create an LDS organizational culture that teaches morality and charity instead of conformity and groupthink. It took a basketball game for them to figure out they've got a problem? [BYU NewsNet : Religion
10:35:56 PM
|
|
Nice comments on tolerance in this BYUNewsNet story. Sample: The key to tolerance is to distinguish between what is church doctrine and what is left up to personal choice. Well, that's a bit confusing--makes it sound like tolerance is reserved for areas of personal choice, while intolerance gets a green light where church doctrine has spoken.
There's also this interesting quote from a First Presidence message in 1910 about science: Our religion is not hostile to real science. That which is demonstrated, we accept with joy; but vain philosophy, human theory and mere speculations of men, we do not accept nor do we adopt anything contrary to divine revelation or to good common sense. In other words, our religion IS hostile to science when it is contrary to divine revelation or to common sense. [BYU NewsNet : Religion]
10:20:30 PM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2004 Dave's Mormon Inquiry Weblog.
Last update: 3/3/2004; 12:04:06 AM.
|
|
|
