I think that is critically important.

I wish you well.

With that, a sister in our ward stood up in gospel doctrine (the class I teach) during the weekly prop 8 request for action and talked about the “subtle, deceitful people” doing “that TV ad”. She added that “we need to remember what they are really all about.”

The assigned topic for my wife’s Relief Society lesson this week is about ministering “to the one”. She has decided to talk about herself, as the mother of a gay LDS son during this prop 8 campaign, as “the one” in need of nurturing, not in need of hateful prejudice. 98% of the class does not our son is gay and that her sister (also in our ward) has a gay son.

Anybody want to buy a ticket?

I think this can be true, but American religious data from the 08 Pew Forum study doesn’t bear that out. All Christian denominations including the Latter-day Saints are declining in market share percentages save a few segments such as non-denominational Christianity and charismatic christianity. You get some Prosperity Gospel types in the mix, but they are not the norm. Certainly the “megachurch” phenomena accounts for a good chunk of growth, as is the “Emerging Church” movement. These segments consider doctrine as very important, though not to fundamentalist levels. They have other values emphasized more. “Emerging” churches are often less “stuffy” and more casual and consensual atmospheres, emphasizing worship, celebration, evangelicalism, and some “bells and smells” aspects of liturgy — though not “high” liturgy by any means. Many are engaging postmodern culture head on, and while postmodern in the decentralized, non-authoritarian, counter-institutional, cultural community sense, they are, on the whole, strongly NOT postmodern in doctrine. Guiding paradigms that are favored and pursued are relational ministry, community outreach, content-richness, pursuit of discipleship. Charismatic churches are also generally quite doctrinally centered to the point that worship becomes very “works and manifestation of the Spirit” oriented. Charismatic churches often seem very intense for those in the mainstream.

While prospering Christian church movements don’t all have the same structure, are not without faults, shortcomings or criticism, nor are they the only churches in Christendom doing positive things, they should give us pause to inquire why they are growing so strongly while Christendom in the total American market share mix is declining. Save a few very quickly growing segments, like I’ve mentioned, what is growing at a tremendous rate compared to the many Christian denominations in decline are those adults who consider themselves unaffiliated — yet 40% of whom still self-describe as religious. Those who firmly self describe as athiest or agnostic are about a quarter of the unaffiliated, and that percentage is not what is accounting for Unaffiliated growth. It is those who are institutionally alienated, but still self identify as “spiritual” or “religious”. And also those who are skeptical of the whole religious system, yet non-committal on questions like God’s existence.

There is a more complex explanation to the general decline of Christianity than doctrine being sacrificed — though it may be a fair criticism at times. I think it is more a reflection of changing American culture fundamentally shaped by institutional skepticism and postmodern worldviews. 45% of adults change affiliations to something different than which they were raised. More and more are suspicious of dogmatic and divisionary approaches. More and more are suspicious of institutional religion while a huge percentage still consider belief in God, faith and scripture as foundational personal values. A huge chunk of adults are surprisingly open toward others and do not consider their faith the only way to heaven, even as about 50% of adults say they don’t want their church to “modernize”. Many adults want to appear very open and tolerant toward differing viewpoints than their own tradition while at the same time there is a strong personal, tradition-oriented, emotional counter pull defining the faith experience many individuals are seeking.

Matthew 10:34-39 predicts this outcome and worse. It is a warning to the Apostles of what they will face as they spread the Gospel.

Just like the old saying used to go in computing, “no one got fired for buying IBM.” In the LDS sense, no one will get any criticism for trying to do it all.

One of the reasons modern Christian denominations have trouble retaining members is that they are willing to sacrifice doctrine for attendance.

I’m frankly amazed at the permutations sometimes, though once you understand the logic, it becomes easy to understand.

The other strain of neo-Calvinism happens to bring back a doctrinal set.

I’m referring to the first strain. Just as members of the Calvinist communities hid bad fortune from each other, so those who subscribe to the rebirth hide lack of money from each other.

If anyone has a way to distinguish the two strains of neo-Calvinism from each other, I’m more than open to a different set of terms.

As for Christ, he was being clear that sometimes he created division. Think of what Paul did when his name was Saul. He divided families, tore people from their houses, etc. I’ve seen divisions caused merely because someone believed in Christ and others could not accept that.

I agree that distinguishing characteristics needn’t divide. The Word of Wisdom is a great example. Who cares if some believers drink and others don’t? As long as those who do either don’t go to the extreme of insisting the others follow suit – or as long as the drinkers (in this example) don’t get so drunk as to be obnoxious, there needn’t be clear division because of the “distinguishers”. Unfortunately, there are people who drink AND those who don’t who just can’t let the others worship “how they may” – and that truly is sad, since the subsequent division simply needs not be.

I think there are very few issues worth dividing over, but they can be valid reasons. When division happens it should be done with charity and fellowship despite Christendom’s poor track record in this regard. There are issues where we can debate and disagree over interpretation but should find ways for unity to prevail. And there are some issues that, as Paul said, are disputable matters (Romans 14). To elevate these to points of division and discord is to undermine Christian liberty and propagate legalism. I actually think there is a great deal of these latter issues that divide, when they really should not, yet do because they are frequently distinguishing characteristics, practices or preferences of holiness standards in differing faith cultures / communities.

As an aside, while neither of the Calvinist nor Reformed traditions myself, I think the characterization of Neo-calvinists as materialistic, worldly and petty is uncharitable. Maybe I misread the intent tho…

I can see how this causes trouble for people who believe these to be the words of God. The scriptures really need a good editor, some of this stuff should be on the cutting room floor. (imo)

It doesn’t seem to be inspiring or becoming. Maybe there’s some fear value but beyond that I don’t see it.

Do passages like these add value to anyone’s lives?

Thanks for posting the link.

Matt. 10: 34-39
34 Think not that I am come to send apeace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
36 And a man’s afoes shall be they of his own bhousehold.
37 He that aloveth father or mother bmore than me is not worthy of me: and he that cloveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
38 And he that taketh not his across, and followeth after me, is not bworthy of me.
39 aHe that findeth his life shall blose it: and he that closeth his dlife for my sake shall find it.

Ray,

You make some good points.

Mormonism itself has struggled with how to balance acceptance of divine command to accept certain standards of action and how to allow grace to work when those actions cannot be performed. If there is one thing that causes real angst and division, it is this tension between grace and works – what we are allowed to let go and what we must continue to hold inviolable.

Fwiw, I dream of some kind of comprehensive unity, but I don’t want the elimination of individuality. I actually have a post coming out on this on Tuesday, but it’s something with which I believe nearly all struggle to some degree or another.

Who did Christ say this to, and when?