A Mormon at Harvard Divinity School

[Moksha]

If we are honest with ourselves, we have to admit that the luxury of moral absolutes is something that we rarely enjoy. This is not to say that there is no such thing as good and evil, only that the boundaries are not as clearly marked as we sometimes like to think.

For more about his thoughts on An Uncomfortable Mormon.

Harvard Divinity Bulletin - Taylor Petrey - An Uncomfortable Mormon

[NeuroTypical]

The year 2008 was a terrible one for Mormons.

Maybe for those who have chosen to ensconse themselves in the Harvard Divinity School, but I saw 2008 as a great year.

His reasoning: Pres. Hinckley died, and we caught flack for our Prop 8 efforts.

My response: My experience in a year really isn't impacted much when God shuffles the earthly leadership of his church. And for every single person spouting bile and flack at us, there were a couple dozen people supporting us from the sidelines, occasionally up front.

LM

[OmahaLDS]

Very good article.

Edit: I am also very jealous, I would love to attend HDS.

[Prodigal_Son]

Pssshhhht. Wouldn't have even guessed the author was LDS until the last paragraph.

If we are honest with ourselves, we have to admit that the luxury of moral absolutes is something that we rarely enjoy. This is not to say that there is no such thing as good and evil, only that the boundaries are not as clearly marked as we sometimes like to think.

While standing alone, this sounds like a logical statement, cushioned within the author's rhetoric I sense an apologetic tone for the fact that the church (on occasion) stands up and calls a spade a spade when it comes to this world's ever-devolving moral behavior.

Though outsiders cannot comprehend it, the Church is not in a popularity contest. And, though it certainly doesn't set out to alienate or offend ANYONE - it is also completely unapologetic in its unequivocal declarations of Truth - which is EXACTLY as it should be.

[OmahaLDS]

Pssshhhht. Wouldn't have even guessed the author was LDS until the last paragraph.

I would have thought that the title "An Uncomfortable Mormon" would have given this away.

While standing alone, this sounds like a logical statement, cushioned within the author's rhetoric I sense an apologetic tone for the fact that the church (on occasion) stands up and calls a spade a spade when it comes to this world's ever-devolving moral behavior.

Though outsiders cannot comprehend it, the Church is not in a popularity contest. And, though it certainly doesn't set out to alienate or offend ANYONE - it is also completely unapologetic in its unequivocal declarations of Truth - which is EXACTLY as it should be.

I think you miss the point of the article. The LDS Church membership is widely varied, and as such contains varied viewpoints that all fall within the parameters proscribed by gospel standards.

[Prodigal_Son]

I would have thought that the title "An Uncomfortable Mormon" would have given this away.

Ya think? I was referencing his feeble apologetics.

I think you miss the point of the article. The LDS Church membership is widely varied, and as such contains varied viewpoints that all fall within the parameters proscribed by gospel standards.

Weird, because you seem to have missed the point of my post. Revelation 3:15-16.

[OmahaLDS]

Ya think? I was referencing his feeble apologetics.

I am sorry, that is not what you said. You said "Wouldn't have even guessed the author was LDS until the last paragraph." Based on that I assumed that you did not know the author was LDS until you had read the entire article, including the Title, until you read the last paragraph.

Weird, because you seem to have missed the point of my post. Revelation 3:15-16.

No. You took umbrage with the author's comment, "This is not to say that there is no such thing as good and evil, only that the boundaries are not as clearly marked as we sometimes like to think." You specifically bolded the quote, then commented, "I sense an apologetic tone for the fact that the church (on occasion) stands up and calls a spade a spade when it comes to this world's ever-devolving moral behavior."

Many Church members would disagree. I personally agree with the statement, that there is rarely a case where things are straight black and white and navigating the gray areas, with the Gospel as a guide, leads me to many different conclusions that you might have for example.

It is the judgmental attitude of many Saints, as exemplified in your Revelations scripture, that causes significant problem in many cases.

[Hemidakota]

Maybe for those who have chosen to ensconse themselves in the Harvard Divinity School, but I saw 2008 as a great year.

His reasoning: Pres. Hinckley died, and we caught flack for our Prop 8 efforts.

My response: My experience in a year really isn't impacted much when God shuffles the earthly leadership of his church. And for every single person spouting bile and flack at us, there were a couple dozen people supporting us from the sidelines, occasionally up front.

LM

It was a grand year for the church but will not be the end of this issue. In order to save this land from falling into depravity, it will take those who love GOD from all walks of life to save it from those who wish not to serve GOD from a fallen union.

When that happens, the Lord stated to the gentiles in 3rd Nephi, He will again honor His own house.

[dazed-and-confused]

i have to admit...i read only a few of the posts here........

i just cant get past the feeling that some people think of this church as some kind of team sport....

our team won...or our team lost.....

is the truth of our HF a team sport?

[OmahaLDS]

Maybe for those who have chosen to ensconse themselves in the Harvard Divinity School, but I saw 2008 as a great year.

His reasoning: Pres. Hinckley died, and we caught flack for our Prop 8 efforts.

Why would you make a snide comment about attending HDS? It is a good school, and all education is positive. The author's comments are also a little more complex than "Pres. Hinckley died, and we caught flack for our Prop 8 efforts".

Edit: I would add that one of the reasons LDS apologetics has become so good, is that LDS members sought higher education from schools like Harvard.

Edited December 28, 2009 by OmahaLDS

[Prodigal_Son]

I am sorry, that is not what you said. You said "Wouldn't have even guessed the author was LDS until the last paragraph." Based on that I assumed that you did not know the author was LDS until you had read the entire article, including the Title, until you read the last paragraph.

You sure are fiesty. You're insisting that your interpretation of MY words is the way this is to be played out... but then take exception to my interpretation of the author's work. Hmmm...

No. You took umbrage with the author's comment, "This is not to say that there is no such thing as good and evil, only that the boundaries are not as clearly marked as we sometimes like to think." You specifically bolded the quote, then commented, "I sense an apologetic tone for the fact that the church (on occasion) stands up and calls a spade a spade when it comes to this world's ever-devolving moral behavior."

And if you'd bothered to finish my quote, a referenced the fact that this statement COMING AFTER ALL HIS OTHER MATERIAL is what I "took umbridge" with.

It is the judgmental attitude of many Saints, as exemplified in your Revelations scripture, that causes significant problem in many cases.

Why is it that YOU are taking umbridge with the fact that I didn't just post another "great article" at the end of this thread? Why is it that I am judgmental FOR HAVING AN OPINION? Why is it that the fact that I see this article from a different paradigm than you do - is somehow offensive to you or grounds for debate?

Are you having a tough winter in Nebraska? I know how bitter and dreary they can be, but still... :) Sure sounds like YOU are the one who's intolerant of other's opinions. Post after post your countering others' thoughts and ideas. Did you write this article, or something?

I'm not at all looking to fight, but I'm not gonna roll over, either.

[NeuroTypical]

Why would you make a snide comment about attending HDS? It is a good school, and all education is positive.

Sorry - it wasn't meant to be taken as snide. Of course the comment "all education is positive" is false on it's face, but I'm sure the Harvard Divinity Schoool is a fine and high-quality institution.

I meant that he's probably one of the only LDS folks there, surrounded by scholars constantly putting his faith under a microscope. 2008 probably was very different for him than other years. Not really different for me, and I bet not incredibly different for the majority of LDS in this country and across the globe.

Make sense?

LM

[OmahaLDS]

You sure are fiesty. You're insisting that your interpretation of MY words is the way this is to be played out... but then take exception to my interpretation of the author's work. Hmmm...

I am not really insisting on anything. You said you did not realize the author was LDS, when he says in the Title of his article he is LDS. I simply pointed that out.

And if you'd bothered to finish my quote, a referenced the fact that this statement COMING AFTER ALL HIS OTHER MATERIAL is what I "took umbridge" with.

His statement supported his conclusion. You are not required to like his conclusion.

Why is it that YOU are taking umbridge with the fact that I didn't just post another "great article" at the end of this thread? Why is it that I am judgmental FOR HAVING AN OPINION? Why is it that the fact that I see this article from a different paradigm than you do - is somehow offensive to you or grounds for debate?

You took offense at the fact that the author has a different opinion than you have, but get upset when someone might disagree with your opinion? Why?

Are you having a tough winter in Nebraska? I know how bitter and dreary they can be, but still... :)

It's sunny outside right now. Given the snow and the reflective properties of snow, the bright sunlight is being multiplied considerably. It is anything but dreary.

Sure sounds like YOU are the one who's intolerant of other's opinions.

How have I been intolerant?

Post after post your countering others' thoughts and ideas. Did you write this article, or something?

If people are wrong, they are wrong.

I'm not at all looking to fight, but I'm not gonna roll over, either.

Who is fighting?

[Wingnut]

You're both fighting. Get over it.

[OmahaLDS]

Of course the comment "all education is positive" is false on it's face

I cannot think of any education that would not be useful in some fashion. I suppose learning how to make vacuum tubes would be kind of pointless, but it would still be good mental discipline.

I meant that he's probably one of the only LDS folks there, surrounded by scholars constantly putting his faith under a microscope.

He's probably one of a group, and I do not think his faith is really as important to those around him as you might think. I suspect most of his classes have little to nothing to do or say about the Church. Studying the Greek of NT texts, for example, has no real relationship to LDS theology one way or another. He might be an oddity, but no more than say a Buddhist taking a class on NT Greek manuscripts.

I think his article indicates that for some LDS it was a difficult year, because of issues that were forced to the forefront with a predetermined spin.

[Dravin]

I cannot think of any education that would not be useful in some fashion. I suppose learning how to make vacuum tubes would be kind of pointless, but it would still be good mental discipline.

I'll agree with you that generally speaking we can make the statement that education is a good thing. But absolutes have a way of coming back and biting us in the butt, it only takes one counter example to destroy an absolute statement. What is the value of an education that consists of Pi = 14? And if we start going on about how, well, you learned cursive when they taught you that, we're stretching. Cursive might have been useful, but that doesn't change the value of learning Pi = 14, and what happens when that education doesn't include learning cursive? Education has value when what it teaches is true or needful, but if that isn't the case it is pretty much without positive benefit and can be the opposite. Learning that smoking is healthy is definitely not positive, well for the person learning it, I suppose the guys at Marlboro might see a positive result from such an education.

Education, generally positive, not universally so.

Edited December 28, 2009 by Dravin

[OmahaLDS]

My first thought was a re-education camp, it is generally not considered a good thing. Though I suppose that might be more about how the education is gain as opposed to the information itself, as I'm sure the West paid attention to Russian propaganda during the cold war and what have you as knowing how a country portrays you to its citizens is a worthwhile thing to know for some people. In the vein of propaganda false information portrayed as correct isn't a very useful or good education though and saying, "Well, at least you learned cursive while they taught you that birds are mammals" is a little bit of a stretch, they taught you cursive and it was useful education, they taught you birds were mammals, that was not a useful education. Also, depending on how you render positive, a KKK education consisting of a clan rally is anything but positive.

I'll agree with you that generally speaking we can make the statement that education is a good thing. But absolutes have a way of coming back and biting us in the butt, it only takes one counter example to destroy an absolute statement.

I guess I would not consider propaganda or prejudice to be education, or to include false (birds=mammals) ideas. I would limit the definition of education to exclude these sorts of ideas.

[Dravin]

I guess I would not consider propaganda or prejudice to be education, or to include false (birds=mammals) ideas. I would limit the definition of education to exclude these sorts of ideas.

Sounds like no true Scotsman to me. If you limit education to be only that which is positive then of course all education is positive.

Edit: And of course, those of us who include that which is negative under the umbrella of education are gonna disagree.

Edited December 28, 2009 by Dravin

[OmahaLDS]

Sounds like no true Scotsman to me. If you limit education to be only that which is positive then of course all education is positive.

Edit: And of course, those of us who include that which is negative under the umbrella of education are gonna disagree.

I see the point, but is teaching something false really education? I could teach my kids that birds are mammals, but would that really be education?

[Dravin]

I see the point, but is teaching something false really education? I could teach my kids that birds are mammals, but would that really be education?

Yes. It'd be a horribly flawed one but it'd be an education. What is an education at its core but learning or teaching? There is no requirement that what is learned or taught be correct for it to be learning and teaching.

[Guest]

I'm pretty sure those kids learning in the Jihadist schools consider it an education...

[Prodigal_Son]

If people are wrong, they are wrong.

Well, that says it all, now doesn't it? Welcome, mighty arbiter.

[OmahaLDS]

I'm pretty sure those kids learning in the Jihadist schools consider it an education...

It really depends on what is considered a Jihadist school. If you are referring to a Madrassa, those are educational institutions. If you mean training camps, maybe. If you mean schools that teach prejudice and intolerance, I would not say so, but I do not consider those legitimate forms of knowledge. It depends on how we define education.

[OmahaLDS]

Well, that says it all, now doesn't it? Welcome, mighty arbiter.

Some facts are facts. Julius Caesar lived in Rome, not China. Force is the product of mass and acceleration. Etc...

[OmahaLDS]

I think it is important to consider the author's conclusion about his (her?, Taylor could be a woman's name as well) year,

For me, the experience of being a Mormon in the United States in 2008 contained within it a powerful spiritual lesson. I learned how to be more comfortable with being uncomfortable in the ambiguity and ambivalence of the world. Above all, I came to see the great, gaping need for love and understanding if we are to move forward.

Many issues that the author discusses are very vague and ambiguous, and there is little care or consideration for those within or without the faith who take a minority stance.