<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Church is a &#8220;what&#8221;?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/</link>
	<description>A weekly podcast exploring Mormon culture and current events.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:18:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Benjamin Orchard</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/#comment-4110</link>
		<dc:creator>Benjamin Orchard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 14:57:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/#comment-4110</guid>
		<description>Which is why I think the post a while back about this being an essentially creedless church (and I think it is, despite the articles of faith) is important.  I think what we run into is that so often we want to define what God has not seen fit to define.  We want to have absolutes, where really it doesn&#039;t matter, and in fact it may be very important that the absolute NOT be available just yet.  We yearn for truth, but when we describe it verbally, we do so imprecisely, and that causes turbulence.

I think that our language is part of the great barrier here.  Our language describes and works in a linear fashion, it forces our mind to traverse in a very straight path, but I think that often times the truth is extremely complex, non-linear and difficult to describe in a linear fashion.  Yet when you see it through a spiritual lens it suddenly becomes very clear and simple.  Then you attempt to describe it.  And you lose it.  I think that&#039;s what has happened to many of the prophets, and to many of the early saints.  They attempted to describe ideas and concepts that they say through a spiritual lens, but language failed them.  

The church attempts to do the same thing-describe spiritual concepts and eternal principeles in linear language, and it is only able to acheive a flawed approximation.  Nothing we do will ever perfectly describe the eternal concepts, but they might help convey enough information to spark the spiritual experience.  I think that&#039;s what the scriptures are about--providing enough information to provoke a spiritual experience that will convey what you really need to learn.  The church is attempting the same thing as a whole.  Thus, the policies are convoluted, the language tortuous, and sometimes we feel like people are going at things a bit oddly.

Still great metaphor, and I&#039;m going to blatantly plagiarize.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Which is why I think the post a while back about this being an essentially creedless church (and I think it is, despite the articles of faith) is important.  I think what we run into is that so often we want to define what God has not seen fit to define.  We want to have absolutes, where really it doesn&#8217;t matter, and in fact it may be very important that the absolute NOT be available just yet.  We yearn for truth, but when we describe it verbally, we do so imprecisely, and that causes turbulence.</p>
<p>I think that our language is part of the great barrier here.  Our language describes and works in a linear fashion, it forces our mind to traverse in a very straight path, but I think that often times the truth is extremely complex, non-linear and difficult to describe in a linear fashion.  Yet when you see it through a spiritual lens it suddenly becomes very clear and simple.  Then you attempt to describe it.  And you lose it.  I think that&#8217;s what has happened to many of the prophets, and to many of the early saints.  They attempted to describe ideas and concepts that they say through a spiritual lens, but language failed them.  </p>
<p>The church attempts to do the same thing-describe spiritual concepts and eternal principeles in linear language, and it is only able to acheive a flawed approximation.  Nothing we do will ever perfectly describe the eternal concepts, but they might help convey enough information to spark the spiritual experience.  I think that&#8217;s what the scriptures are about&#8211;providing enough information to provoke a spiritual experience that will convey what you really need to learn.  The church is attempting the same thing as a whole.  Thus, the policies are convoluted, the language tortuous, and sometimes we feel like people are going at things a bit oddly.</p>
<p>Still great metaphor, and I&#8217;m going to blatantly plagiarize.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Marsh</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/#comment-4091</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Marsh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2008 03:00:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/#comment-4091</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been working on this metaphor since 1997 when I was talking with Kathy Pullins and it hit me that this was a good metaphor for the Church (my wife was speaking for her at the Womens Conference that Kathy was in charge of -- my wife&#039;s talk is at http://adrr.com/living/001w.htm ).

But it hit me that turbulence and overshooting was unavoidable.  Any position will always have turbulence and overshooting as a result.  It just is and just is unavoidable.  I think we need to understand both things, and to understand what kinds of turbulence and overshooting any position will create, what harms it causes and what harms it avoids.

Stay in the center of a river channel and the current will sweep some away.  Stick to the edges and some will be crushed against the banks.  All we can do is minimize it the best we can.  But I see turbulence in just about every position.  Consider abortion and how it wraps over into the stem cell debate.  Encouraging women to gain homemaking skills and how that causes some to feel that women shouldn&#039;t be educated or have employment skills.

It is a good reason to teach people to think for themselves and to understand that they can have a personal relationship and guidance from the Spirit, to carry them past those sorts of things.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been working on this metaphor since 1997 when I was talking with Kathy Pullins and it hit me that this was a good metaphor for the Church (my wife was speaking for her at the Womens Conference that Kathy was in charge of &#8212; my wife&#8217;s talk is at <a href="http://adrr.com/living/001w.htm" rel="nofollow">http://adrr.com/living/001w.htm</a> ).</p>
<p>But it hit me that turbulence and overshooting was unavoidable.  Any position will always have turbulence and overshooting as a result.  It just is and just is unavoidable.  I think we need to understand both things, and to understand what kinds of turbulence and overshooting any position will create, what harms it causes and what harms it avoids.</p>
<p>Stay in the center of a river channel and the current will sweep some away.  Stick to the edges and some will be crushed against the banks.  All we can do is minimize it the best we can.  But I see turbulence in just about every position.  Consider abortion and how it wraps over into the stem cell debate.  Encouraging women to gain homemaking skills and how that causes some to feel that women shouldn&#8217;t be educated or have employment skills.</p>
<p>It is a good reason to teach people to think for themselves and to understand that they can have a personal relationship and guidance from the Spirit, to carry them past those sorts of things.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Wellington</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/#comment-4074</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Wellington</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 23:42:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/#comment-4074</guid>
		<description>Curse you Stephen...you answered the post that I was preparing...lol...Perhpas I can build on the excellent post you have created here. Thank you for the spiritual insight.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Curse you Stephen&#8230;you answered the post that I was preparing&#8230;lol&#8230;Perhpas I can build on the excellent post you have created here. Thank you for the spiritual insight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kent</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/#comment-4054</link>
		<dc:creator>Kent</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 21:26:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/#comment-4054</guid>
		<description>I am now an official Stephen Marsh fanboy. Your insights on Polygamy and other issues are always spot on!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am now an official Stephen Marsh fanboy. Your insights on Polygamy and other issues are always spot on!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Nilsson</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/#comment-4052</link>
		<dc:creator>John Nilsson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 21:21:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/#comment-4052</guid>
		<description>Stephen, 

I appreciate the trouble you took to relate your metaphor to the recent discussion on attendance at temple sealings on this site.  Do you see other advantages to your metaphor in helping Church members deal with turbulence, or to see turbulence as something other than malevolent?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stephen, </p>
<p>I appreciate the trouble you took to relate your metaphor to the recent discussion on attendance at temple sealings on this site.  Do you see other advantages to your metaphor in helping Church members deal with turbulence, or to see turbulence as something other than malevolent?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Benjamin Orchard</title>
		<link>http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/#comment-4030</link>
		<dc:creator>Benjamin Orchard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 19:26:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mormonmatters.org/2008/02/04/the-church-is-a-what/#comment-4030</guid>
		<description>I think that may be one of the more insightful metaphors I&#039;ve read in a while.  I&#039;ll probably use it frequently with absolute shameless plagiarism.  I&#039;ll be sure to say that I read it somewhere. :)

Thank you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that may be one of the more insightful metaphors I&#8217;ve read in a while.  I&#8217;ll probably use it frequently with absolute shameless plagiarism.  I&#8217;ll be sure to say that I read it somewhere. <img src='http://mormonmatters.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Thank you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

