Episode 16: The International Church

Since it came up in the discussion, the German Enquiry Commission on (so-called) Sects and Psycho-groups, as well as the letter from six professors quoted from in the episode, can be found at the following links:

- German Final Report, html (posted on the CESNUR website);
- Official German Final Report, pdf (from German parliament’s website)
- Official English Translation of the Final Report, pdf (from cult-watcher website)
- Press Release of Six German Professors (from CESNUR website)

So long as we’re offering links, here’s the story of how being Mormon in Belgium can be a hassle:

“Alessia” at Times and Seasons.

Also, an example of Mormons finding themselves on the “good list” in Austria:

State-recognized religions:

Old Catholic Church
Armenian Apostolic Church
Protestant “Evangelische” Church
Greek Orthodox Church
Islamic Community in Austria
Jewish Community in Austria
Roman Catholic Church
Kirche Jesu Christi der Heiligen der Letzten Tage (Mormonen)
Coptic Orthodox Church
Methodist Church
New Apostolic Church
Buddhist Community in Austria
Syrian Orthodox Church

There are a few other groups who have second-tier status.

I should add that the fact that the LDS Church is on the “good list” doesn’t do much to change the public perception that it’s a “Sekte” but it does allow the church to avoid hassle from the state. It also gives it the right, as I mentioned on the podcast, to have a cemetery plot in the city cemetery in Vienna, among other things. Having a “Mormon” cemetery is quite an amazing thing, btw.

Sorry the audio was poor my end. I blame George Bush.

re # 3, how does the german report compare to the french report?

That’s a good question. I am a little more familiar with the Belgian situation (and list of cults). I think they are pretty similar in that, internally, both reports are absolutely convinced that they mean no harm whatsoever to most of the religions (with a few notable exceptions, predominantly Scientology) identified as cults and that this is an essential service for the citizens of their countries. In their minds they are being completely tolerant — and maybe that is true after all: they barely tolerate the existence of minority religions but keep very close tabs on them.

The distressing aspect really is that what these approaches do is create a body, center, or report that public officials can refer to in making policy or social decisions. For example, the most recent report of the Center created in Belgium to oversee the list of harmful sectarian organizations notes in its introduction that

The credibility enjoyed by the Center in Belgium continues to extend beyond our borders to the point that our institution is cited as an example of what should be created in those countries where there still does not exist a public organ of information about harmful sectarian organizations.

(La crédibilité dont bénéficie le Centre en Belgique continue à dépasser nos frontières au point que notre institution est citée en exemple de ce qui devrait être créé dans les pays oú il n’existe pas encore d’organe public d’information sur les organisations sectaires nuisibles.)

This is distressing to members of the organizations that appear on the list of harmful sectarian organizations because an organ of the state is issuing judgments about those organizations to people and other public entities that call in with questions. For example, if some public agency official has some degree of latitude or discretion in performing a duty and encounters a Mormon or Jehova’s Witness, or the adherent of some other minority religion, and makes a call to the Center to get information, and the Center gives biased, negative, or outright false information, then that could really detriment individual’s lives. The 2005-2006 report notes that although 81.1% of the inquiries received by the Center come from the general public, 18.8% of the inquiries to the Center came from public authorities of various kinds, for example the police (34.6% and 17.5% from the courts/legal system) (pg. 16).

Interestingly, whereas Mormons were the subject of 1.6% of the inquiries in the 2003-2004 report, the inquiries have dropped below a number worth representing on the charts in the 2005-2006 report. This could suggest a correlation of a weakening missionary program with a reduction in number of inquiries. Most likely, though, Mormons have simply been included with a bigger grouping, probably the category represented as “emanating or dissident from protestantism”.

Mayan E: about that France Toulouse mission video, on YouTube, I’m kind of wondering if we have ‘discovered’ a new doctrine there; since in France and Europe they have only 2 to 4 odd baptism per month per mission while in Latin America they have 2 to 4 baptism PER COMPANIONSHIP, like 200 odd baptism per month per mission, does this prove that the missionaries in Europe are all Wankers while the ones in Latin America are all faithful non-Wankers who are full of the spirit?

I guess this mission president has really come across something new here; or he is just completely out of line?

John F,

let me help you. maybe this will clear up why it was so surprising to hear you, and now read your commentary, regarding the use of “so-called.”

from tolworthy/Wiki:

Church leaders often use the phrase “so-called” as a way to denigrate intellectuals, science, history, etc. The implication is that these names are not appropriate in the given context. That is, the history is not really history, the science is not really science, and so on.

These subjects are not always labelled so-called. And sometimes the label is used in a non-pejorative way, as when describing an unusual technical or legal usage of a word. But usually the context indicates that church leaders treat the subject with suspicion. This could therefore be seen as a list of dangerous topics for Mormons.

so-called intellectuals

(It has been suggested that the following examples sound amusing when spoken in the voice of Homer Simpson, and accompanied by resentful muttering)

“so-called thinking people” (Boyd K. Packer, “From Such Turn Away,” Ensign May 1985)

“so-called scholars” (Boyd K. Packer, Talk to the All-Church Coordinating Council, May 18, 1993)

“so-called intellectuals” – Spencer W. Kimball, “Fortify Your Homes against Evil,” (Ensign, May 1979, 4)

“so-called academic learning.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, as reported by his son-in-law, “The Soul of a Prophet,” Ensign, Aug 1972)

“so-called higher criticism” (Dallin H. Oaks, The Historicity of the Book of Mormon, FARMS)

“so-called learned people” (Richard C. Edgley, “Keep the Faith,” Ensign, May 1993, 11)

“in the so-called name of learning” (Russell M. Nelson, “Protect the Spiritual Power Line,” Ensign, Nov 1984)

“so-called experts” (Victor L. Brown, Jr., New Era, Nov. 1973, 36–37)

“so-called science” (Joseph F. Smith, Presidents of the Church: Joseph F. Smith” 39)

“so-called educators” (David B. Haight, “Power of Evil,” Ensign, July 1973)

“so-called sophisticated communities” (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Harold B. Lee, 59)

“so-called social commentary” (“Q&A: Questions and Answers,” New Era, June 1997, 17)

“our so-called intellect” (F. Enzio Busche, “Truth Is the Issue,” Ensign, Nov. 1993, 24)

“so-called wise men” (Joseph B. Wirthlin, “The Language of the Spirit,” Ensign, Nov. 1975, 104)

“so-called (economic) solutions” (N. Eldon Tanner, “Constancy Amid Change,” Ensign, Nov 1979)

so-called science and history

“history, so-called, or geology or science, so-called” (Elder Oaks Interview Transcript from PBS Documentary, LDS newsroom, 20 July 2007)

“so-called modern civilization” and “so-called civilization” (Robert L. Simpson, “Do It,” New Era, Aug. 1977, 31)

“‘so-called’ modern thought and modern progress. We take no such course.” (Howard W. Hunter, “Of the World or of the Kingdom?” Ensign, Jan. 1974, 53)

“so-called problem of overpopulation” (John H. Groberg, “There Is the Light,” New Era, Mar. 1977, 45)

and on the LDS church in particular…

“so-called fundamentalists” (Church Response to Jon Krakauer’s Under the Banner of Heaven, LDS newsroom, 27 June 2003)

“so-called prophecy by someone outside the Church” (Vaughn J. Featherstone, “Food Storage,” Ensign, May 1976)

“so-called atheist” (Boyd K. Packer, “What Every Freshman Should Know,” New Era October 1973)

“so-called enlightened doctrine” (L. Tom Perry, “Back to Gospel Basics,” Ensign May 1993)

“so-called riot in the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor.” (Elder Oaks Interview Transcript from PBS Documentary, LDS newsroom, 20 July 2007)

“so-called Mountain Meadows Massacre.” (Daniel C. Peterson, letter to the editor in the Weekly Standard, 9/15/2007, Volume 013, Issue 02)

so-called Christian churches

“so-called churches” (Boyd K. Packer, “Inspiring Music—Worthy Thoughts,” Ensign, Jan. 1974, 25)

“so-called Christian churches” (Ezra Taft Benson, “Five Marks of the Divinity of Jesus Christ,” New Era, Dec. 1980, 44)

“so-called Christian ministers” (Donald Q. Cannon, “Who Is Jesus Christ?” New Era, Mar. 1978, 10)

“so-called Christian scholars.” (Ezra Taft Benson, “Five Marks of the Divinity of Jesus Christ,” New Era, Dec. 1980, 44)

“so-called teachers of Christianity” (Spencer W. Kimball, “Revelation: The Word of the Lord to His Prophets,” Ensign, May 1977)

“so-called Christian nations” (Harold B. Lee, “Plain and Precious Things,” Ensign, Aug. 1972, 2)

“so-called Christian world” (Marion G. Romney, “Jesus—Savior and Redeemer,” New Era, Apr. 1984, 33)

“so-called Christendom” (Ezra Taft Benson, “Listen to a Prophet’s Voice,” Ensign, Jan 1973)

“so-called major religions” (L. H. O. Stobbe, “On Making Appointments with Our God,” Ensign, Nov. 1972, 37)

so-called culture

“so-called culture” (Arthur Henry King, “Language in a World Church,” New Era, August 1974. Arthur Henry King was a highly literary convert and later London Temple president. he noted that “most so-called culture in the world is against the gospel, not for it”)

“so-called entertainment” (H. Burke Peterson, “Leave It Alone,” New Era, Jan. 1995, 44)

“so-called ways of the world” (L. Tom Perry, “Treasures of Testimony,” New Era, May 2005, 44)

“so-called music” and “so-called art” (Gordon B. Hinckley, “Your Greatest Challenge, Mother,” Ensign, Nov. 2000, 97)

“so-called acceptable motion picture” (Robert L. Simpson, “Pollution of the Mind,” Ensign, Jan 1973)

“so-called chat-rooms” (Gordon B. Hinckley, “Rise Up, O Men of God,” Ensign, Nov 2006, 59–61)

“so-called stars” (M. Russell Ballard, “Let Our Voices Be Heard,” Ensign Nov 2003)

“so-called balanced man” (Carlos E. Asay, “Be Men!” Ensign May 1992)

so-called success

“so-called success stories” (Boyd K. Packer, Talk to the All-Church Coordinating Council, May 18, 1993)

“so-called temporal achievements” (Richard C. Edgley, “Keep the Faith,” Ensign, May 1993, 11)

“so-called heroes” (Durrel A. Woolsey, “An Eternal Key,” Ensign, Nov. 1990, 43)

“so-called creative genius” (G. Homer Durham, “The Home as an Educational Institution,” Ensign, May 1979, 10)

“so-called rewards” (OT Class Member Study Guide, 16: “I Cannot Go Beyond the Word of the Lord”, 11–12)

“so-called security” (Charles Didier, “Spiritual Security,” Ensign, May 1987)

“so-called “quality” time” (Barbara B. Smith, “Her Children Arise Up, and Call Her Blessed,” Ensign May 1982)

so-called happiness

“so-called happiness” (a reader, in “Q&A: Questions and Answers,” New Era, Sep 2002, 16)

“so-called fun and sociability” (N. Eldon Tanner, “Trusting the Lord’s Promise,” Ensign Aug 1981)

“so-called pleasure” (Ezra Taft Benson, “Satan’s Thrust—Youth,” Ensign, Dec. 1971, 53)

“so-called comforts of life” (Jeffrey R. Holland, “For Times of Trouble,” New Era, Oct 1980)

“so-called satisfaction” (Richard L. Evans, “The Spoken Word,” New Era, Nov. 1971, 46)

“so-called good life” (Sheri L. Dew, “We Are Women of God,” New Era, Nov. 2000, 12)

“our so-called image” (Neal A. Maxwell, “Meekness—A Dimension of True Discipleship,” Ensign, March 1983)

“so-called honor.” (“Q&A: Questions and Answers,” New Era, July 1993, 17)

so-called freedom

“so-called alternative life-styles” (James E. Faust, “Serving the Lord and Resisting the Devil,” Liahona, Nov. 1995, 3)

“so-called freedom” (Thomas S. Monson, “Come Follow Me,” Tambuli, Nov. 1988, 2)

“so-called individual freedoms” (L. Tom Perry, “What Seek Ye?” Liahona May 2005)

“so-called private choices” (James E. Faust, “Will I Be Happy?” Ensign, May 1987, 80)

“so-called personal matters… so-called freedoms” (Gordon B. Hinckley, “In Opposition to Evil,” Liahona, Sept. 2004)

“so-called rights” (Thomas S. Monson, “Pornography—The Deadly Carrier,” Liahona, November 2001)

“so-called opportunity” (H. Burke Peterson, “Mother, Catch the Vision of Your Call,” Ensign, May 1974)

“so-called needs” (Lynn G. Robbins, “Tithing—a Commandment Even for the Destitute,” Liahona, May 2005)

“so-called needs of women” (Boyd K. Packer, “The Relief Society,” Ensign May 1998)

“so-called laws” (Theodore M. Burton, “In Defense of Faith,” New Era, Feb. 1975, 4, referring to the laws of science)

so-called sexual freedom

“so-called planned families” (John H. Groberg, “There Is the Light,” New Era, Mar. 1977, 45)

“so-called freedom of the sexes” (Spencer W. Kimball, “The Time to Labor Is Now,” Ensign, Nov. 1975, 4)

“so-called harmless meetings” (of boys and girls) (Ezra Taft Benson, “The Law of Chastity,” Ensign, Jan 1988)

“so-called gays and lesbians” (Gordon B. Hinckley, “What Are People Asking about Us?” Ensign, Nov. 1998, 70)

“so-called same gender marriage” (Lance B. Wickman, “Same-Gender Attraction,” LDS Newsroom Pulic Issues page, undated)

“so-called “safe-sex” programs” (The Church Responds to HIV/AIDS A World AIDS Day Interview With Elder Robert C. Oaks, LDS newsroom, 1 December 2005)

“so-called incompatibility” (Dallin H. Oaks, “Divorce,” Ensign, May 2007, 70–73)

so-called reality

“so-called realism” (Thomas S. Monson, “True to the Faith,” Ensign, May 2006, 18)

“so-called real world” (Janette Hales Beckham, “Listen to the Whisper,” New Era, Aug. 1998, 46)

“so-called real life” (Boyd K. Packer, “The Clean Voice of Youth,” New Era, Jan. 1976, 5)

“so-called experience” (Boyd K. Packer, Interview Transcript from PBS Documentary, 20 July 2007 at LDS newsroom)

so-called perfect testimony

“so-called perfect testimony’” (Robert L. Simpson, “No Shortcuts,” Ensign, May 1987)

“so-called sure sign from heaven.” (ibid)

This category is interesting because it deals with gospel topics, not sins. It appears to be saying that nobody knows for sure if the church is true. The complete paragraph reads: “Now the third great question:

“How can we be certain that the Church is true?” Can anyone gain a so-called perfect testimony here in mortality? I think all of us here are still in the never-ending process of a developing testimony. Youth of Zion, forget about receiving a miracle, or the so-called sure sign from heaven. There are no shortcuts to eternity. Thus, extreme patience becomes another key factor as we develop our testimony over a lifetime. It is simply “line upon line, precept upon precept; here a little, and there a little,” just as the scriptures say (D&C 128:21).”

Robert L. Simpson

…and so on.

Faced with the frequent use of “so-called,” many disaffected church members refer to the Mormon church as “The So-Called Church” or TSCC for short.

john f.

let me see if i can be clear on this.

you do not like that the church is classified as a “harmful sectarian [organization].”

i am asking what standards were used in making that classification, and which of those standards were applied inappropriately. for example, if one of the standards is that a “harmful sect” requires members to chop off their left ear lobe then clearly, the LDS church is not a harmful sect. if one of the standards is that it considers itself the ONLY true church and that all other church are the whores of the earth, well, the government may have had some concerns.

is your contention with the label that the church does not qualify under any standard? or that the church does not qualify under enough standards?

as for you having an interest in the government not labeling the church a “harmful cult,” well, i dont suppose that your subjective thoughts, hopes, dreams or fantasies were a big factor in their decision. i would love to be described as the greatest closer in Major League Baseball, but for now, i cant be too disappointed to be described as a short fat guy.

To take this in a different direction, J. Nelson-Seawright, Dialogue published an article a few years ago, and Sunstone had some sessions which talked about poverty among church members. The Sunstone session that I attended said that the per capita amount spent from Fast Offerings in South America is far lower compared to the US than the difference in cost of living. The man who spoke talked about malnourished kids who are members of the church– but don’t receive help even for basic nutritional needs because the funds aren’t available to church leaders there. Do you have any other comments on that?

John F,

how can i make this more clear?

by what standard was the church classified as a sect? are there any of those standards that were not appropriately applied?

i read comment 13. i allow that there are biases, but how did that affect the application of the standards which you said were subjective.

it looks to me as if you are saying the LDS church is not a harmful sectarian organization where the government is saying the LDS church is not a harmful sectarian organization.

what were the standards that the government applied to come to an opposite conclusion?

i understand your standard – a harmful sectarian organization is bad. the lds church is not bad. therefore, the church is not a harmful sectarian organization.

what standard did the governments use? do you know? or, are you simply accusing them of being biased for coming to a different conclusion than yours?

Mayan Elephant,

I have a difficult time accepting their conclusions because of the comments I made in my previous post. I am also biased because of my membership in the church. It is in fact too easy for me to disregard this report because of the methods and process of its creation – I also don’t speak German so it is impossible for me to actually read the report

There was an open letter from some prominent German professors giving 10 points in there objection to the report it can be found here

http://www.cesnur.org/testi/SixProfessors.htm

I hope that helps – I am not sure if John F. can read German so I will let him answer for himself

Thanks for the link! I am not sure why I did not see it.

I started reading through the report – I could not find were it calls out the LDS church specifically. Is it rapped under Fundamental Christianity?

re # 20, I don’t have specific page numbers of the English report except for page 24 where it indicates that Mormons and former Mormons were given the opportunity to attend closed-door (in-camera) hearings to present their case.

re # 21, On the other hand, even the worst stories that I have heard about the discrimination of Mormons in Germany do not compare for the difficulties that, lets say a feminist teacher, will encounter in Utah. Utah is a much less hospitable region when it comes to religious differences.

As much as I love Germany, I don’t agree with this. Germany is far less tolerant of religions and religious differences than Utah. Of course, Germany is entirely tolerant of religious differences if the religions at issue are Catholicism of Lutheranism.

Mormons who are less competent in bureaucratic environments might suffer serious discrimination. German state and society provide considerable resources with respect to minorities’ liberty but if you lack the ability to use them then your situation can be dire.

Bingo. That is the crux of the problem. Where the state is making life difficult for people through giving bureacrats discretion to express their intolerance toward other people’s religious affiliations/beliefs, and those bureaucrats do that or are even encouraged to do that (through such things as lists labelling religions as cults or harmful sectarian organizations) then there is a serious problem.

JohnF,

Utah is off the charts when it comes to intolerance John. Dangerously intolerant. In fact, the government of Utah is willing to risk the public health in general and individual health because of a religious bias. want proof? check this out –

=============
On Wednesday, the Utah Department of Health announced a $1 million gift to fund a public awareness campaign about the STD human papillomavirus (HPV) and its link to cervical cancer. The money, from industrialist Jon Huntsman Sr., will also go to purchase the HPV vaccine Gardasil for females.

It is the second time in two years that private benefactors have financed public health concerns that the state Legislature has declined to address. Last year, after lawmakers cut the Medicaid dental program, James Sorenson and Intermountain Healthcare gave $1 million each to provide care to the poor and disabled.

Rep. Karen Morgan (D-Salt Lake City) had asked the Legislature to spend $1 million to raise public awareness about HPV and provide Gardasil to under- and un-insured females. Fearing the vaccine would increase promiscuity, the lawmakers allotted only $25,000 for the effort. Morgan said she hoped Huntsman’s gift would show the Legislature “how great a need” there is for HPV education and Gardasil. She plans to ask the state for $1 million to $2 million next year.

An advisory committee, including Hunstman, doctors, and health department employees, will determine how the money will be spent and which age group to target for vaccination. David Sundwall, executive director of the health department, said the committee must be sensitive so as not to give the impression that early sexual activity is advisable. However, he noted, “It’s absolutely irresponsible if we assume young people in Utah aren’t having sex.”
==============

john f, with all due respect, i dont think the discrimination effect is too great for members of a listed church when someone even as interested as you cant even answer what standards were or were not met in order to get on the list. in my opinion, it doesnt come close to a legislature refusing to fund a cancer vaccine based on their religious bias and deference to the leaders of a local religious institution.

re # 24, that example does not show that the government of Utah is intolerant of other people’s religions, so, actually, it doesn’t relate to this discussion. It is a policy decision by the Utah legislature that does not relate to an official state church passing judgment on other religions under the color of state law, and the consequences that such action has for the adherents of minority religions as citizens of the state.

On another point, in other discussions you have argued forcefully against Latter-day Saints labelling people who are criticizing Mormons and their beliefs as “anti-mormons” or describing people who no longer believe in the truth claims of the Church as having “fallen away from the Church” based on the argument that it inhibits or completely shuts down discussion because it places people in a box from the outset of the discussion. It seems that this argument does not bring you to the same conclusion with labelling the Church a “cult” or “harmful sectarian organization”. I would be interested to know why not.

With regard to your question to Hellmut about whether he has had the opportunity to read the German version of these documents, I would also be interested to know the reason for that question. I provided a link to the English translation of the German Final Report. That’s the official English translation done by the German Parliament, so you can read the document yourself. Your question to Hellmut implies that you think I am lying or being somehow deceitfult about the contents of the German-language documents at issue here. If that is the case, my question would be why you would assume that I am lying about something.

I understand.

Interesting podcast although I would have like to have heard some discussion about church unit consolidations in SA by Holland and how that is affecting the church and/or FTM program. Maybe some commentary about missionary effectiveness in foreign countries would have been interesting too.

Sorry, but I can’t fathom that some day GC addresses will be natively spoken in Spanish with English translations. If Spanish speakers make up such a large percentage of membership already, where are the proportionate non-American Spanish speaking GA’s? No disrespect to non-English speakers, but the power of this church is in SLC and that’s where it’s going to forever be. Not that I care either way, but that’s the true reality.

LiP

Lip: You are right with power staying in Salt Lake City and in English.

Notice that today all GA’s from non-english speaking countries (Mexico, Germany, Ecuador, Brazil, Argentina,…) deliver their GConference talks in English. Also note that ‘Preach my Gospel’ actually pressures missionaries to learn English during their missions.

And, although I personally would prefer to see more Area Presidencies made up with locals, I don’t have a problem with the continuation of the US/SLC domination of church power. After all, those who founded the church and gave so much to it and suffered so much in the Mormon exodus and in building a state in the dessert, they actually deserve a lot more than, say, the members who joined the church in the post war era. All the people I know who where baptized in Latin America never went through anything like what the early Mormons did in Missouri or Nauvoo…..-those pioneers where a breed apart. After all being ridiculed for not drinking wine just isn’t the same as losing your kids in the snow in Wyoming or somewhere.

So those pioneers, I think, have a case in asking God to let the church stay in their descendents hands, the majority of the church or the ‘Power of this Church’ as you put it. Or the opposite could also be true, that God sends most future GA’s to US families to honour the pioneers sacrifices.There may be an odd apostle or two who isn’t a pioneer descendant, like Utchdorf, but the majority will be, for me, at least until the second coming.

So, is Mormon Matters dead, or just a victim of John’s overfilled schedule?

I assumed maybe we got grounded for a couple of weeks.

“So, is Mormon Matters dead, or just a victim of John’s overfilled schedule?”

Seems dead now -since mormon stories keeps going.

When’s the funeral?

I’ve been living abroad for some 27 years now, mostly in Europe (Germany and Italy), but also in Asia (Japan, Cambodia, and Pakistan), and now in Africa (Democratic Republic of Congo). I’m now on my way out of the church, partly from seeing firsthand how the church is definitely NOT a “world church,” as is its claim and hope. (But mostly I’m walking because of the church’s inability to come to terms with its own history.)

Regarding its inability to perform as a true world church is, I believe, the church’s genuine American history and leadership base, and the Americans’ general (can’t speak for everyone, of course, but trust me on this one) inabilty to function in an international setting, as well as Americans’ generally startling ignorance that there is a world beyond their own borders. And that maybe people think and act differently beyond those borders. Ach, nein! D’oh!, kann das eigentlich wahr sein? Vraiment? Porca madonna! Different languages AND different thought patterns?!

Obviously I’m waxing cynical, for which I beg forgiveness. But the inability of the American-based square-peg-in-a-round-hole mentality to adopt and to adapt to other cultures, or to consciously prevent the church from adapting to other cultures, as it were, just inserts a great spanner into the works, and causes all kinds of bad feelings. These bad feelings are more openly voiced in other western cultures where people are world-savvy and more prone to speak out. The Germans, for instance, really resented visiting Americans who tried to inflict Utah on Frankfurt, and let everyone know it. The bewildered Congolese just stare blankly.

It’s so sad on Sundays to see the impoverished and under-educated Congolese trudge though such foreign and contrived territory, and to see–at least on Sundays–their culture snuffed out in order to better squeeze themselves into that oddly shaped hole, all due to a church that values its American roots more than the roots of any others. Dommage. In their weak and vain effort to come off as a “world church,” it’s no wonder people are using the cynical “TSCC.”

Thanks. You’re very kind.
tweedmeister