User:InProgress/Website reviews/Kitchen1

Website review: Staylds.com

Don't think of it as God's one and only true and perfect church while all others as abominations. If you think that way, the church will always fall short. Instead, think of it as a bunch of men (and a few women -- in terms of leadership) who are just trying their best to fulfill their callings while balancing work, family, and personal stuff -- and stumbling a great deal along the way. Don't think of its leaders as having a direct, telephone-like communication line with God. They probably don't.
—The author of Staylds.com (http://staylds.com/docs/HowToStay.html)

I have now served in the general councils of this Church for 45 years. I have served as an Assistant to the Twelve, as a member of the Twelve, as a Counselor in the First Presidency, and now for eight years as President. I want to give you my testimony that although I have sat in literally thousands of meetings where Church policies and programs have been discussed, I have never been in one where the guidance of the Lord was not sought nor where there was any desire on the part of anyone present to advocate or do anything which would be injurious or coercive to anyone. The book of Revelation declares: “I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. “So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth” (Revelations 3꞉15–16)....This is His work. He established it. He has revealed its doctrine. He has outlined its practices. He created its government. It is His work and His kingdom, and He has said, “They who are not for me are against me” (2 Nephi 10꞉16).
—Gordon B. Hinckley, “Loyalty,” Ensign, May 2003, 58

∗       ∗       ∗

Overview

FAIR's evaluation of the web site Staylds.com

I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
—Rev. 3: 15-16

∗       ∗       ∗

The website is a study in how to be a lukewarm member of the Church. We agree with the web site's evaluation of how some members are shaken as a result of their fundamentalist views. We do not agree with the formula presented for dealing with it.

The "Brethren's dilemma"

The site discusses what it calls the "the situation of LDS General Authorities," and implies that they are lying. It portrays General Authorities as remaining in the Church for the following reasons:

• The site claims that General Authorities are from multi-generational LDS families.
• The site claims that General Authorities' "social status" is inextricably tied to the "church's exclusive truthfulness."
• The site claims that General Authorities are too busy to study "controversial LDS Church history."
• They state that the Church "once made a sincere attempt at openness and full disclosure" of Church history, and then gave up because of "decreased activity and commitment."
• The site claims that General Authorities do not dispute anything taught by past Church leaders because they do not want to "erode their own basis of power and influence."
• The site casts doubt upon the Brethren's sincerity by stating "Assuming that the brethren are sincere believers in both the truthfulness of the church, and in its goodness," that they play a balancing game of member retention by deliberately avoiding tough questions.

It is significant to note that nothing in the list above credits the Brethren for being committed to the Church because they sincerely have testimonies of Jesus Christ and the work that they are performing. Consider Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf's definition of a testimony. Elder Uchtdorf notes that,

The testimony of the truthfulness of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ is the most powerful motivating force in our lives. Jesus repeatedly emphasized the power of good thoughts and proper motives: “Look unto me in every thought; doubt not, fear not” (DC 6꞉36)....a testimony of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ will always include these clear and simple truths

• God lives. He is our loving Father in Heaven, and we are His children.
• Jesus Christ is the Son of the living God and the Savior of the world.
• Joseph Smith is the prophet of God through whom the gospel of Jesus Christ was restored in the latter days.
• The Book of Mormon is the word of God.
• President Gordon B. Hinckley, his counselors, and the members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles are the prophets, seers, and revelators in our day.
  

—Dieter F. Uchtdorf, “The Power of a Personal Testimony,” Ensign, Nov 2006, 37–39 (emphasis added)

The "Brethren's dilemma" presented by the web site completely ignores the Brethren's own stated motivations for the work that they do, and therefore implies that they are lying. Elder Uchtdorf's description of his own motivations is quite at odds with that presented by the web site.

The Brethren have "little, if any time for deep study of controversial LDS Church history?"

"StayLDS" believes that the General Authorities are "simply not aware" of things that the site's authors are aware of,

In the end, we are quite convinced that a majority of [the General Authorities] are simply not aware of peep stones, polyandry, Adam/God theory, blood atonement, the Danites, etc. Of course they have heard these terms throughout their lives, but they would have no real impetus, and most importantly, no time to study them deeply. They are super-busy men, and in their minds, the church is true -- so why dig much deeper?
—StayLDS.com

Why, then, has a Church magazine taught our children that Joseph translated using a "brown rock" called a "seer stone?"

To help him with the translation, Joseph found with the gold plates “a curious instrument which the ancients called Urim and Thummim, which consisted of two transparent stones set in a rim of a bow fastened to a breastplate.” Joseph also used an egg-shaped, brown rock for translating called a seer stone.
— “A Peaceful Heart,” Friend, Sep 1974, 7 off-site

Why did a Church magazine teach our children that there was a group of Mormons called the "Danites" who attacked non-members?

One Mormon, Sampson Avard, formed a group, called the Danites, to seek revenge on the Missourians. But when the Danites attacked the nonmembers, it only gave them more reason to distrust the Saints.
—Sherrie Johnson, “Persecutions in Missouri,” Friend, Jul 1993, 47 off-site

Why did a Church magazine talk about the use of the "blood atonement" and polygamy in early anti-Mormon fiction?

Furthermore, what people heard about the Mormons as they gossiped over the back fence or sat in the barbershop was often twisted and shaped to appeal to the popular appetite for the lurid and sensational: secret rites, priestly orders, blood atonement, polygamy, and white slavery.
—Neal E. Lambert and Richard H. Cracroft, “Through Gentile Eyes: A Hundred Years of the Mormon in Fiction,” New Era, Mar 1972, 14 off-site

Why did a Church magazine publish Spencer W. Kimball's repudiation of the Adam-God theory?

We hope that you who teach in the various organizations, whether on the campuses or in our chapels, will always teach the orthodox truth. We warn you against the dissemination of doctrines which are not according to the scriptures and which are alleged to have been taught by some of the General Authorities of past generations. Such, for instance, is the Adam-God theory. We denounce that theory and hope that everyone will be cautioned against this and other kinds of false doctrine.
—Spencer W. Kimball, “Our Own Liahona,” Ensign, Nov 1976, 77 off-site

In fact, the only one of the items listed that does not come up in a search on lds.org is "polyandry," yet there are plenty of references to polygamy. So why is polyandry or polygamy not a commonly discussed subject in the Church? To answer that question, we go once again refer to an official Church publication:

Teachings for Our Day

This book deals with teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith that have application to our day. For example, this book does not discuss such topics as the Prophet’s teachings regarding the law of consecration as applied to stewardship of property. The Lord withdrew this law from the Church because the Saints were not prepared to live it (see D&C 119, section heading). This book also does not discuss plural marriage. The doctrines and principles relating to plural marriage were revealed to Joseph Smith as early as 1831. The Prophet taught the doctrine of plural marriage, and a number of such marriages were performed during his lifetime. Over the next several decades, under the direction of the Church Presidents who succeeded Joseph Smith, a significant number of Church members entered into plural marriages. In 1890, President Wilford Woodruff issued the Manifesto, which discontinued plural marriage in the Church (see Official Declaration 1). The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints no longer practices plural marriage.
—Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, (2007), pages vii–xiii

Yet, "StayLDS" insists that the General Authorities are "simply not aware of peep stones," the Danites, the Adam-God theory, polyandry/polygamy or "blood atonement." The leaders of the Church have apparently "heard these terms throughout their lives," yet they are assumed to be unaware of their meaning? The approach taken to this subject by the "StayLDS" website is absolutely absurd. So, are we to believe that the Church places these things in the official children's magazine, yet those leading the Church are unaware of its history?

Emphasizing the church's 'one trueness' is simply "an essential component of survival?"

According to "StayLDS"

LDS Church leaders believe that emphasizing the church's "one trueness" is an essential component of survival....
Finally, what in the heck does it mean to call a church "true"? What an odd usage of the word. To us, it's like calling a ham sandwich "true." It just doesn't mean anything.
—Staylds.com

No, LDS Church leaders believe that this is the only true and living church of Jesus Christ. Period.

• "My testimony that this is the true Church began in my childhood. But I received a powerful, certain witness before I was eight, even before I was baptized, that I was hearing a servant of God in the true Church of Jesus Christ." (Henry B. Eyring, “The True Church,” Friend, Mar 2009, 2–3)
• "You will be given opportunities, such as through the inspired messages of this conference, to find the one and only true Church of Jesus Christ, and you will recognize that Church." (Richard G. Scott, “Happiness Now and Forever,” Ensign, Nov 1979, 70)
• "The position that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only true church upon the face of the earth is fundamental." (Boyd K. Packer, “The Only True and Living Church,” Ensign, Dec 1971, 40)
• "My intent is to assert with testimony and persuasion of scripture the reasons there can be only one Lord, one acceptable faith, one baptism, and one true church." (Delbert L. Stapley, “What Constitutes the True Church,” Ensign, May 1977, 21)
• "I testify to you that the Father and the Son appeared to Joseph Smith, and that he thereafter received revelations, powers, and keys, and was commanded to organize again on earth the Lord’s one true church." (Joseph Fielding Smith, “A Call to Serve,” New Era, Nov 1971, 5)
• "And so we have to be sure and prepare ourselves and know that we have found that one and only true church that Paul spoke about." (LeGrand Richards, “One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism,” Ensign, May 1975, 95)

There is simply no ambiguity here. The leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints most firmly believe and teach that it is the one true Church of Jesus Christ. We teach this. We believe this. It does not mean that we ought to disrespect others' beliefs, but we believe in the uniqueness of the Church nonetheless. This will not evolve or change in the future—it is a fundamental concept upon which the Church is built.

The "buffet Mormon"

The web site encourages members to choose which Church teachings they wish to accept and reject the rest. Take, for example, the way the site redefines the law of tithing,

[I]f you're not comfortable giving 10%, consider giving 5%. If you can't muster 5%, give what you feel the church is worth to you in your life. And if you do drop your tithing to 5% or 1%, we strongly recommend (from experience) that you continue trying to obeying the law, and instead divert the other X% to really worthwhile charitable organizations. There are lots of good causes out there: cleft palate repair, children with AIDS, homeless shelters, the Red Cross, environmental movements, NPR and PBS, or other forums, publications, or programs that are important to your spiritual development. The LDS Church Humanitarian fund and the Perpetual Education Fund also seem like very worthwhile places to contribute, if you are comfortable doing so.
So while we're not in any way encouraging a decrease in tithing to the church, we are all big believers in the law of the tithe, and are quite confident that "God" will appreciate any contribution you make to any organization that seeks to relieve suffering. We're also relatively sure that the church would warmly accept 5% rather than 0% (if it comes to this).
—StayLDS.com

So, essentially, we are told that a full and honest tithe, as we are asked in the temple recommend interview, is apparently so undefined that we don't really need to pay all 10% to the Church! Instead, just about anything goes, including, oddly enough, diverting tithing to the Church's own Humanitarian Fund! Finally, we are told that the Church will "warmly" accept our money regardless of how much we actually decide to contribute. Any spiritual element to tithing has been removed—it is simply a matter of paying money to an organization as far as "StayLDS" is concerned. Again, "StayLDS" contradicts what the General Authorities say.

• "Tithing is so simple and straightforward a thing. Tithing is paid by faith more than it is by money." (Gordon B. Hinckley, “The Sacred Law of Tithing,” Ensign, Dec 1989, 2)
• "If you are one who has doubted the blessings of tithing, I encourage you to accept the Lord’s invitation to “prove [Him] now herewith.” Pay your tithing." (Robert D. Hales, “Tithing: A Test of Faith with Eternal Blessings,” Liahona, Nov 2002, 26–29)
• "If I did not pay my tithing, I should expect the Lord to withhold His blessings from me. I pay my tithing, not only because it is a law of God, but because I expect a blessing by doing it." (Jeffrey R. Holland, “‘Like a Watered Garden’,” Liahona, Jan 2002, 37–39)

So once again, where "StayLDS" advocates ambiguity, the Brethren show no ambiguity whatsoever.

Conclusion

• We object to the site's characterization of the Brethren as being primarily motivated to remain in the Church due to social status, without acknowledgment or regard for their frequently expressed testimonies of the Savior and the work that they are doing.
• We reject the idea that Church leaders are unaware of elements of Church history, while Church magazines include such items.
• We reject the idea that Church leaders only claim that this is the "one true Church" as a means to encourage growth.