http://www.huffingtonpost.com/noam-chomsky/us-global-power_b_851992.html
"In Tunisia and Egypt, the recent popular uprisings have won impressive victories, but as the Carnegie Endowment reported, while names have changed, the regimes remain: "A change in ruling elites and system of governance is still a distant goal." The report discusses internal barriers to democracy, but ignores the external ones, which as always are significant."

I remember when the RLDS church become more liberal. There was a significant fall out. The leaders of the LDS church are no better than petty dictators in my mind, but does this fact ignore the fact that the large numbers of lay Mormons WANT what theses little men are offering?

Would any potential liberal leaning apostle be excommunicated the moment he tried to make a move in that direction? Same with more fundamentalist ones? Ones trying to bring back things like polygamy and keeping women from praying in Sacrament Meeting?

Is the Mormon religion just too big to fail? It's "Grand Doctrine" basically the entrenched conservativism with a fantastic "American" myth wrapper?

+1

Don't know much about LDS but From what I do know, yes, It's not going anywhere. Not anytime in near future, anyways.

There will always be people looking for answers and the TSCC will always be around to try to sell them the morg mindset.

As long as there are people who are willing to buy feel-good emotions, there will be people willing to sell them.

In the long run, no. All you have to do is go to Italy or Greece and see all of the crumbling pagan temples. No church or religion is too big to fail.

I suspect those who think who postulate that the LDS church is "too big" to fail live in Utah or the so-called Morridor. It is nearly non-existent elsewhere.

Where I live it could go away and 99.95% of the Oklahoma City would never even knew something happened.

Odell Campbell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I suspect those who think who postulate that the
> LDS church is "too big" to fail live in Utah or
> the so-called Morridor. It is nearly non-existent
> elsewhere.

It exists here. Here isn't Utah. And let me qualify "fail." I mean go the way of The Community of Christ. I would love some kind of fragmentation in LDS Inc.

Bought time some drama happened in that Morgtuary to those dead eaters and gerontological dinos.

I wasn't aware that Community of Christ had failed.

JoD3:360 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wasn't aware that Community of Christ had
> failed.
http://www.rlds.org/news/2010/june/IntoTheFuture-Veazey.pdf

"You are aware—perhaps more than most—of the financial challenges we face as we move into the future."

"Frankly, I am in a dilemma. I am torn between the fundamental enduring hope and faith that is the foundation of my relationship with God, and the realities facing us in the church and the global economy."


Where there are believers, there is money. But I should have said "too big to splinter, then decline significantly and ultimately fail."

This letter as we read near the end is in response to many members who as ministers and Priesthood holders were threatening to cease paying tithes and offerings and withhold otherfiancial support in retaliation to the church considering the Ordination of Gays in the Priesthood.

It is true that the church had been having great finacial difficulties in 2009-2010, and at that time the church released DC 164 which was in response to both accepting membership on their previous baptism, and oin considering whether to Ordain Gays. The latter half of DC 164 does not give the go-ahead to do so, but what has happened is the formation of Regional and National Conferences.

The main reason for creating regional conferences is that members in Haiti and in Nigeria are in danger if they are seen as supporting Gay Priesthood/Marriage. Thus it would seem that there will be confernces where Gay discussions will take place that won't be given to others. It is a mess.

The church won't be fracturing over finances, it will fracture along the lines of those who support Gay marriage and ordination and those who do not.

By the way, last year in the UN vote on Human Rights, not one single African nation voted to cease the time-honored tradition of killing Homosexuals. Haiti and Dominican Republic also refused to support legislation that would protect gay men and women.

But back to the finances, yes it is bad. People are few, donations are little and ambitions are big. One thing that the church did around 2000 (which I thought was awesome) that proved fiancially harmful was to accept service to charities and donations to the poor as an acceptable tithe. Unfortuinately the accountability took a nosedive.

While that gave people more freedom to help the poor and to support needs, it also removed the expectation to tithe and the money slowed down as people either gave it elsewhere or just didn't give as generously as before.

Thanks for the link. I had read a little of it before and read a lot of backlash by the people it was aimed at.

Interesting. Thanks for the reply. I didn't know the back story on homosexual priesthood. I thought it was a for sure.

for it to fail because if you compare it to the other churches that have failed, one difference I see is that the LDS members willingly pay $$ to keep it afloat. They are not taxed into it, or forced into it, they give in order to receive their reward. And just like other faiths that have promised rewards in the hereafter, until something HUGE would happen, you can't convince them otherwise not to blindly follow.

HUGE to me would be a prophet falling in a very public arena. Perhaps bringing back polygamy, or bringing back the ban on blacks holding the priesthood, or being found out as a sex abuser, or simply being outed as a gay man.

Problem is, the reason I am stepping back from the church, is that they run this like a business and they would never allow anyone in power to have revelation that was not passed through the board as acceptable revelation. Nothing revealed since BY that was not a direct result of political pressure.

I wonder when members will get all Yertle and sneeze.

I think the men who end up being General Authorities are born and bred for that position. I don't think any of them will ever go rogue, because before they even get close to the $, they have to measure up on obedience. I am sure they know 10-20 years in advance whether someone will be in the top 15. They can't let anyone in the top that they are afraid will SING.

I was reading about how John D. Rockefeller and John Rockefeller used the family fortune to control things through philanthropy. Rockefeller gained great influence over the prodestant church's in the the US by setting up an organization (National Council on Church's) that would give church's financial aid and also provide clergy training. I noticed when the RLDS got into financial trouble they joined this organization.

What's to say the Utah church hasn't cut some deals with organization of people of influence. In the old days the church actually used it's membership as collateral bank loans. They told the bankers in the east the members will do anything we tell them to and the bank accepted this as collateral. I call it using slaves as collateral but that's just me.

In todays world there's lots of people of influence who want Utah resources or to keep a few million people in line. The church; especially, under Hinkley wanted to mainstream. Hinkley seemed to get a lot a favors in New York City. I often wonder what kind of deals Hinkley made and who to. In the last 20 years the church has been operating more and more as a business and not as a church. Has it been infiltrated by some slick business people who take advantage of the dumb geriatric fools posing as church leaders?

This is what I see now. There are at least two church's. The public one where the prophet and apostles go around in and the financial church where all funds now centrally go and is managed by people the members don't even see or know they exist. More and more of this money seems to going into all sorts of commercial schemes. I think the only reason they build temples and meeting houses now is too many people connected to the church make money on the construction and selling materials. I often wonder who really runs the church and is that person or group even visible anymore. With that much money and influence over so many people and such stupid and old people at the top, you damn well know someone is going to worm their way in.

Soviet Union was bigger. It failed.

Bob T Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Soviet Union was bigger. It failed.

May the Lord bless and keep the Morg as well as it did the USSR.

with the Prez, he went to the next GC and found his name was no longer on the list of apostles to be sustained. No person who embarrasses the leaders will be kept around.

A rogue apostle could try to start his own church, but it would be without any money or use of trademarked materials.

The last big break was probably the FLDS crew, and they had a major lifestyle issue to draw people over.

What issue would tempt people to stop following the official leaders today?

Heresy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What issue would tempt people to stop following
> the official leaders today?

Great question.

What most Mormon polygamists know and what most official leaders want to wish away - or excommunicate away - is the fact there is a substantial number of mainstream Mormons interested in Mormon polygamy. My sister belongs to the splinter group most "mainstream" among the offerings out there. It is called "The Apostolic United Brethren" and they hold that Tommy & Co. are inspired to lead in most things - the biggest one they aren't inspired to lead is "The Principle" or "Patriarchal Priesthood" as it was practiced in the past.

But I don't think polygamy interest is a big enough issue to sway a significant number of people. I think that something more "mainstream" would do it. The temple has always been a weird aspect of Mormonism because it doesn't apply to general Christianity and because the Mormon theology doesn't talk about it much.

I think a bunch of vacant temples could prompt a leader to do something that would stop lots of people from being Mormons.

Atheism is where Christianity was 2000 years ago. I think we are beginning to see more and more people begin to realize the shortcomings of the ancient belief systems and a need to create something more modern and in harmony with current scientific and cultural understanding. However, with computers and technology I think the change will happen much more rapidly. Which is why the Pope and Mormon leaders are talking out so much against it. They realize that their power is weakening and people are not listening to their words. Will the church fail? No I think it will die a slow death as people increasingly view it as irrelevant in their lives. Its monies will be siphoned off into various investments and construction projects run by the well connected royalty.

Buddhism however I think may see a resurgence of popularity because there is little in its teachings that conflicts with science and it advocates for peace, tolerance, and harmony. Things we need in our modern global society.

Let's see...so far Catholics are encouraged to use technology..guess they figure they have nothing to fear...everyone already knows all their past and present big time mistakes.

You rarely can dig up dirt..it's all in the open.

stormy

It's generational, traditional, familial base is well established.

I don't see it failing. Changing, yes, but not failing. It's financial corporate base is managed in such a way it won't go belly-up.
Is it possible? Sure, anything is possible, but certainly, not likely.

Besides, I take the position that religion is an important part of most human beings lives throughout history. And we have the RIGHT to be believers. Besides, it's the core of the social, familial, traditional, rituals in most areas of the world. Always has been.

I agree with you Susie Q...anyone can believe whatever they choose...not in some countries but in ours.

stormy

Well perhaps we may have thought the Soviet Union was too big to fail. Er...but when you look at the state of Russia today, maybe that's not much comfort. Still, a substantial portion of people in Eastern Europe are free.

unfortunately, the following apply:

Some people enjoy... even Flourish in the Heavily-Structured environment/culture of LDS, Inc...

Few, most minor decisions for the rank-and-file
'Simon Says'... again, no major decisions

all kinds of Ambiguity abt 'doctrine'.(such as it is/isn't)
therefore, they can change/adapt whenever they like...

Lots of mos in the child-bearing yrs haven't had time / a breather to figure things out On Their Own; thus, lots of BIC future tithe-payers & missionaries. Once Uve been on a mission, 'Most' are Cemented In.