Sign in to follow this  
Grunt

Radical Orthodoxy

Recommended Posts

There is nothing in the brief write-up that I find reason to dispute. However, I will not follow such a movement, even if I agree with its stated principles. I will follow our leaders. If and when they embrace or extol the idea of "radical orthodoxy", then I will, too. Until then, I will follow the path I see before me, and the name I will give it will be simply "the gospel".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Vort said:

There is nothing in the brief write-up that I find reason to dispute. However, I will not follow such a movement, even if I agree with its stated principles. I will follow our leaders. If and when they embrace or extol the idea of "radical orthodoxy", then I will, too. Until then, I will follow the path I see before me, and the name I will give it will be simply "the gospel".

I think that is the part that I just didn't get.  The "movement" is to be doing what we're all supposed to be doing anyway?  I just don't understand what the point is, I suppose.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Grunt said:

The "movement" is to be doing what we're all supposed to be doing anyway?

I think every "movement" is an idea of "what we're all supposed to be doing anyway". "The Oxford Movement" maintained the Church had become too worldly, and Christians needed to get sacred again. The "Abolitionist Movement" thought that people (not just people who wore the "abolitionist" badge) shouldn't keep slaves, and ought therefore to free them. The Nazi movement thought that Aryans were the "Master Race" and should expand and that other races should make "lebensraum" for them. I guess if you agree with "radical orthodoxy" you're "in the movement".

Edited by Jamie123

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scriptures tell us to be 'Anxiously engaged in a good cause and to bring to pass much righteousness'

If such a page is what they feel they should be doing (aka what the Lord would have them do) then more power to them.

However nothing requires me as a third party capable of getting my own guidance and direction from the Lord to agree with them or follow them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an interesting document. The main thing that has stood out to me is this idea

the path of discipleship takes us through a narrow course between two spiritual monsters: unbridled progressivism and obstinate fundamentalism.

It is an interesting idea. I kind of roll my eyes at the language ("spiritual monsters -- really?"), but I find the overall idea compelling. I'm not sure how narrow (or wide) this path really is (and we all know what scripture says about wide and narrow paths). The idea seems somewhat vague, because the basic ideas are (intentionally?) poorly defined. What do they really mean by fundamentalism or progressivism? I agree with them that it is often a difficult path -- perhaps because of the vagueness of the definitions.

In some ways it feels like a document by academics for academics, so maybe it won't amount to much among those of us "lay" members of the Church. If so, maybe it's much ado about nothing, because it will only be something academics take seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Just_A_Guy That may be true -- I'm not saying you're wrong. It seems to me an interesting commentary on the polarization of our times when people like Ralph Hancock or Dan Peterson or the Givens might feel a need for a document that declares them to be "orthodox LDS".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get it, or see the point, but whatever.   Folks start adopting descriptors like "radical" and "orthodox", and publishing manifestos, when they figure there's an enemy to fight, and I'm not sure what these folks' enemy is.

Authors of this thing:

Quote

Nathaniel Givens is a data scientist and entrepreneur with degrees in math, systems engineering, and economics. He is a Contributing Editor for Expand and has also written for Real Clear Religion, First Things, and Square Two. He also maintains his own blog—Difficult Run—and blogs regularly at Times and Seasons. Nathaniel lives in Williamsburg with his wife, who is a doctoral student in computer science, and their two small children. He serves as a Gospel Doctrine teacher.

Quote

Dr. Jeffrey Thayne graduated from BYU with a bachelor’s and master’s degree in psychology. He completed his doctorate in Instructional Technology and Learning Sciences at Utah State University. He runs the popular Latter-day Saint Philosopher blog, and spends time engaging in worldview apologetics (articulating and exploring the worldview assumptions that inform our faith). He currently resides in Washington state with his wife and two children.

J. Max Wilson's outdated Facebook page says: "I’m a dedicated Mormon family man with wide ranging interests in religion, politics, history, science, nature, technology, education, language, and art.  An experienced web application engineer by profession, I’m formally educated in English literature and literary criticism with additional studies in physics and electronics.  I have been blogging since 2004 and started Sixteen Small Stones in November of 2005. I often write about Mormon related subjects and sometimes post original poetry."

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This honestly just looks like someone’s attempt to fight against the the hundreds of other progressive movements within the church today. I am not comfortable flying a flag like this, but I appreciate the attempt and the effort given... even it it may have missed the mark by a little

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this