• Articles
• Constitution

America- Traditional or Progressive?

Rian Nelson

-

January 11, 2022

0

Is BYU getting too liberal? Here’s why some, amazingly, say it is.

By Peggy Fletcher Stack March 2021, SL Tribune

“There is “a wave of faculty” hired who “really do view the restored gospel as their secondary allegiance.” And that, he says, is a problem for a school trying to educate while building faith.

Think how many recent BYU students, he says, grew up watching the popular TV show “Modern Family,” which highlights a gay couple as a “healthy, happy, normal family.” (The series also was a favorite of the most famous Latter-day Saint politician, Utah Sen. Mitt Romney.)…

They come to BYU, where there are “quite a few faculty and students who do not believe in the principles in the proclamation on the family,” Ellsworth says. “Instead of having those views challenged and having the proclamation being articulated and explained and defended, they are having views contrary to the proclamation affirmed on campus…

Graduating senior Sam Crofts has definitely seen the school shift toward being “too liberal.”

In his major, political science, Crofts says, “I don’t know that I have had a single conservative professor, and that wasn’t my expectation coming to BYU.”

The Pleasant Grove resident wished there could be “a little more diversity of thought among the faculty. It is valuable for any educational experience to avoid the echo chamber.” Source

“Korihor is alive and well at Mormon Stories Podcast. It seems that modern-day apostasy has found a new home at a well funded website dubbed “Mormon Stories Podcast.” As Hugh Nibley once said, if you want to write an anti-Mormon book, just get an old one, dust it off and take a bit of a different slant and republish it under a new name. Now hiding in plain site, the website pretends to be faith-affirming, but then all of the old charges that the Book of Abraham was a ruse or that Joseph Smith dabbled in the occult surface without even an effort to show both sides of an argument. Several of our guests on LATTER DAY RADIO answered all those phony charges as did our host, Martin Tanner, but the website ignores all that. Yes, Korihor is alive and well and now has a website. The ironic thing is that it is a fulfillment of prophecy that “calumny will defame…” But, we know how it ends. In the meantime, “Mormon Stories” continues its deception after the order of Korihor. And, it is well funded. Unfortunately, money talks.” Greg Jerrod

Mormon Stories is WRONG. They are selling you you a bill of goods. This gospel is true and you need to follow President Russell M. Nelson who speaks for the Lord Jesus Christ!

How do you answer the voice of critics? Are you a conservative or liberal? Are you a traditionalist or a progressive? Do you love the history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or do you constantly seek to change it’s history? Is your testimony of the Lord growing or remaining neutral? Are you green and growing or ripe and rotten? Do you need to get a check up from the neck up to get rid of stinkin’ thinkin’? Remember, if you do what you’ve always done, you will get what you’ve always got! I know if you read and pray to the Lord for help, He will answer you. don’t get caught up in all this negative revisionist history. Stick to the Lord’s word in scripture and prayer!

Read my blog here to see how I answer the critics and skeptics.

Revelation: Traditionalists vs. Progressives

From the Book “FAITH CRISIS, VOLUME 1: WE WERE NOT BETRAYED!” by James and Hannah Stoddard

“The essential difference separating traditionalists and progressives—and dividing traditional history from New Mormon History—is revelation from God. For traditionalists, the revelations in the scriptures, and those received by Joseph Smith, represent pure revelation from God. The Book of Mormon is one such revelation, as are the Doctrine and Covenants, the Book of Moses, and the Book of Abraham. Furthermore, many of the Prophet Joseph Smith’s teachings constitute revelation from God. 

The progressive places God’s revelations on a spectrum, assigning ‘weight’ or credibility based on particular academic fields of study, and built upon a framework of their particular discipline. 

Traditionalists reject the notion that revelation and history should be interpreted through a particular discipline of worldly learning; they recognize that man’s ideas are in a fluid state—a whirlwind—of change, and subject to the influence of an enemy whose goal is man’s destruction. “Theories which once invoked great authority are abandoned and given the most derisive of treatment by a later generation only to be revived by a subsequent generation.”(20) Thus we can see the wisdom offered two thousand years ago, that when we accept the worldly approach, we are “ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.”(21)

After interpreting revelation based on the scholar’s academic training, the progressive categorizes the revelations under various interpretations: myth, allegory, folklore, and sometimes inspiration—or perhaps attributing them to the historical environment of the receiving prophet. However, the progressive worldview does not accept the revelations as literal revelation from God in a concrete sense. Leonard Arrington related his belief that faiths that take the scriptures as divine revelation are inconsistent and illogical:

A big mistake is always made when one attempts to interpret the Scriptures literally . . . The Scriptures are contradictory, and inconsistent and any theology based upon them cannot help but be inconsistent and illogical. . . . It comes back to the fact that people must use their reason as well as their faith.”(22)

The Prophet Joseph Smith, a true traditionalist—perhaps one could even say, the father of traditionalism—entertained angels and witnessed firsthand, God the Father and His Son. The Prophet described engaging in literal combat with the adversary and his dominion; he spoke of receiving the pure word and will of God—directly from God. For the Prophet Joseph, this was not mere inspiration—and it certainly was not mythological, allegorical, nor the subject of folklore; it constituted an actual, literal, personal experience. The Prophet warned:

. . . whatever we may think of revelation, that without it we can neither know, nor understand any thing of God, or the devil; and however unwilling the world may be to acknowledge this principle, it is evident from the multifarious creeds and notions concerning this matter, that they understand nothing of this principle, and it is equally as plain that without a divine communication they must remain in ignorance.

Traditionalists believe that progressives are destined to inherit ‘unenlightenment’ because they reject revelation. Progressives believe that traditionalists are mired in ignorance because they do not fully accept and embrace the philosophies and teachings of the ‘learned.’ Regardless of which position one takes, nearly all agree—an unbridgeable gulf separates the two.” FAITH CRISIS, VOLUME 1: WE WERE NOT BETRAYED! By James and Hannah Stoddard Page 9-10

Notes:
20- David E. Bohn, “No Higher Ground: Objective History is an Illusive Chimera,” Sunstone Magazine 8 (May-June 1983): 30.
21- 2 Timothy 3:7.
22- Gregory A. Prince, “Faith and Doubt as Partners in Mormon History,” Leonard J. Arrington Mormon History Lecture Series, no. 19, 3.:

---

Is Our Dominant Narrative True? 

From the Book “FAITH CRISIS, VOLUME 1: WE WERE NOT BETRAYED!” by James and Hannah Stoddard

“On April 21, 2017, a Salt Lake Tribune headline announced, “’Trust gap’ hounds the Mormon church, research shows.” The article showcased a 2016 study completed by Dr. Jana Riess, a Latter-day Saint author and editor, who demonstrated that the unprecedented faith crisis among Latter-day Saint members was stemming not so much from history, politics, or unpopular doctrines—but from a trust gap: 

Riess has been conducting a large-scale survey, called The Next Mormons, and has been “struck by the fact that among former Mormons, particular historical problems or doctrines don’t emerge as the primary reasons for leaving the church,” she writes. “. . . Book of Mormon historicity ranks ninth, and the other specific historical issues barely register at all.”

Instead, the “third most common reason overall (and tied for first among millennials),” Riess reports, was “I did not trust the church leadership to tell the truth surrounding controversial or historical issues.” (1)

Many have suspected seer stones, polygamy, the Book of Abraham, Mountain Meadows Massacre, and other sensitive issues as the driving force behind the growing exodus away from the Church; but surprisingly, this may not be the case. Peggy Fletcher Stack reported:

Some Latter-day Saints may leave the fold after finding out aspects of their history that don’t match the Sunday school version — like the fact founder Joseph Smith peered at a “seer stone” in a hat to help him produce the Book of Mormon — but such discoveries are not what drive away most former believers.

It’s the realization that they didn’t hear those stories first from their church.(2)

As one former Latter-day Saint lamented, 

I was sold a “one true church” gospel, and it’s just not true so I can’t bring myself to support something so full of lies. . . . I was very faithful to the church for 43 years. My dad was a mission president in South America when I was 9. I have a son on a mission in Russia. I did not lose my faith lightly or because I wanted to sin. I felt completely betrayed, like I had been told lies my whole life. It hurt a lot. (Becky Berger, Richmond) (3)

Over the years, the authors have spoken with many hundreds of members who were either experiencing a crisis of faith of their own—or had a friend, relative, or family member who had abandoned the Church. The pain, the tears, the fear, and the doubt we have witnessed prompted us to address some of these issues, and to write this series, Faith Crisis.

Notes:
1- Peggy Fletcher Stack, “’Trust Gap’ Hounds the Mormon Church, Research Shows,” The Salt Lake Tribune, 2017, https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=5196148&itype=CMSID.
2- Peggy Fletcher Stack, “’Trust Gap’ Hounds the Mormon Church, Research Shows,” The Salt Lake Tribune, 2017, https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=5196148&itype=CMSID.
3- Peggy Fletcher Stack, “’Trust Gap’ Hounds the Mormon Church, Research Shows,” The Salt Lake Tribune, 2017, https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=5196148&itype=CMSID.

FAITH CRISIS, VOLUME 2:
BEHIND CLOSED DOORS—LEONARD ARRINGTON & THE PROGRESSIVE REWRITING OF MORMON HISTORY

Description By Joseph Smith Foundation
During the 20th century, an organized objective to rewrite Latter-day Saint history from within, unbeknownst to the general Church membership, went head to head behind the scenes with traditional leaders of the Church. Meet the main players of this conflict: Leonard Arrington—progressive “Father of New Mormon History,” Ezra Taft Benson—traditionalist defender, and many other advocates of traditionalist and progressive Latter-day Saint history.

As traditionalists and progressives sparred during the 1970s-1980s, a covert cold war commenced in Salt Lake City, Utah, with the progressives spying on the traditionalists, and the traditionalists spying on the progressives. Secret informants, leaked documents, falsified reports, and even employed pseudonyms—all were part of this struggle to dominate Latter-day Saint history. But how did, and does, this secret conflict affect you? Progressives, working in the Church History Department and at Brigham Young University, claimed 40 years ago that it would take a generation to re-educate the Church. Where are we now in that re-education?

The USA, only Land where His Work could be Commenced

“…in culmination of the grand scheme of schemes, this great nation, the Republic of the United States, might be established upon this land as an asylum for the oppressed; a resting place, it might be said, for the Ark of the covenant, where the temple of our God might be built; where the plan of salvation might be introduced and practiced in freedom, and not a dog would wag his tongue in opposition to the purposes of the Almighty. We believe that this was His object in creating the Republic of the United States; the only land where his work could be commenced or the feet of his people find rest. No other land had such liberal institutions, had adopted so broad a platform upon which all men might stand. We give glory to those patriots for the noble work they did; but we give the first glory to God, our Father and their Father, who inspired them. We take them by the hand as brothers. We believe they did nobly their work, even as we would fain do ours, faithfully and well, that we might not be recreant in the eyes of God, for failing to perform the mission to which He has appointed us.” Bishop Orson F. Whitney, delivered in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, Sunday Afternoon, April 19, 1885. Reported by John Irvine. Journal Discourses Volume 26 Page 201