Quote:
Originally Posted by ShouldIMoveOrStayPut...?
I suppose it is beneficial to have diverse, independent off the beaten path individuals within an organized religion. Although to the degree they are a "free thinker", they may be limited due to the boundaries or constraints of the beliefs of said religion. Standing one's ground another positive attribute IMO.
|
I have a signature that I use on another forum I participate on. It says:
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself."
~Rudyard Kipling ~
That pretty much describes my personal outlook when it comes to being somewhat of a "free thinker."
Quote:
Fair enough! Rather than manifest a quick, poorly thought out question, let me ponder it and get back to you with one.
A quick thought (and this is not my question) might be how the LDS tolerates thoughts or ideas among its members that conflict with or even negate church doctrine, but does that fall under the category of what the church "teaches?" In any case, respond or leave rhetorical, I'm fine with either.
|
It really depends on a lot of things. As I said in my last post (to Normstad), I consider myself a strong LGBT ally. Every year for the past six years, I have marched in Salt Lake City's annual Pride Parade with a group called "Mormons Building Bridges." We are doing everything in our power to extend a hand of fellowship to the LGBT community, regardless of the fact that the Church, as an institution, has greatly marginalized this group of people. I am not afraid of any repercussions for marching or for posting on the group's Facebook page. As a matter of fact, I do so with the blessing of my Mormon bishop who, incidentally, has a transgendered daughter.
I have never been afraid to state (on forums such as this one) that I believed that my Church's pre-1978 ban on Black men holding our lay priesthood was based on the racial prejudices of some of our early leaders, notably Brigham Young. It was not until fairly recently that the Church "more or less" acknowledged this to be the case. I was never called on the carpet for anything I said in this regard. My husband actually taught a group of LDS High Priests one Sunday and presented some material along this line that was probably very disturbing to certain individuals who would prefer to think that our leaders are infallible. He was never chastised for having done so.
Now, if we were to call together a group of Church members and attempt to convince them that our leaders had fallen into apostasy, and that he and I had been told by the Lord that we needed to set the members straight on various doctrines, I am relatively certain that we wouldn't be members of the Church for very long. Likewise, I was to march up the steps of the Church Administration Building and demand a private audience with the President of the Church, insisting that I be ordained to the priesthood and were to invite 500 of my closest friends to picket the building as I made my demands, I might find myself in a bit of hot water.
I guess the bottom line is that we are free to believe as we wish and may express our feelings and concerns in a respectful way without having to worry about excommunication or anything like that. Certain actions are, however, likely to result in discipline. I'd say that almost without exception, anyone who has been excommunicated for "apostasy," has seen the writing on the wall before ever actually doing anything out of line. I don't think anybody who is ever called into a disciplinary council is surprised by it.