New Nauvoo Forum

Church and Gospel => News of the Church => Topic started by: JLM on December 11, 2020, 09:34:52 am

Title: The Manifesto
Post by: JLM on December 11, 2020, 09:34:52 am
Anybody else been following the brouhaha on the bloggernacle regarding the Radical Orthodoxy manifesto by the Givenses?  Fascinating stuff... any thought from the Navoodles?
Title: Re: The Manifesto
Post by: Palmon on December 11, 2020, 01:16:06 pm
I've read other works by the Givenes and have enjoyed them, but have no idea what you are referring to. A link, please?
Title: Re: The Manifesto
Post by: Sparky on December 11, 2020, 07:14:55 pm
I think that this is the manifesto: https://latterdayorthodoxy.org/ (https://latterdayorthodoxy.org/)
Title: Re: The Manifesto
Post by: Roper on December 11, 2020, 10:17:16 pm
I haven't read anything on the Bloggernacle about it, yet. I just read the Manifesto. I recognize many of the names of the signatories. I guess my response is that it pretty much describes how my own discipleship has grown over the last 15 years. I didn't know there was a trendy new label for it. That, and...what's the point? I mean, what does the manifesto do to help bring people closer to Christ? The language circumscribes and promotes a "middle way" of discipleship for members of the in-group while saints with convictions which are are "too fundamental" or "too progressive" are members of the out-group. The family of God is not so exclusionary, and there are not Rameumptoms in our houses of worship.

I'll stick with the actual words of Christ, like the Sermon on the Mount, and our Articles of Faith, instead of signing on to Manifesto which has the stated goal to influence the culture of the church. I can better influence the culture of the church by ministering to others. Which I haven't been so good at these past several months. Maybe I should just sign the manifesto so that I can be a slacker and still feel good about myself.
Title: Re: The Manifesto
Post by: Jason on December 11, 2020, 11:00:43 pm
It sounds decent enough. They addressed some of my concerns in their explanatory articles, such as will this devolve into
 their own version of fundamentalism and how to avoid falling into political tribes and viewing the church through the narratives of the left or the right.

I wonder what Orson Scott Card's take on this is, as he used the term radically orthodox Mormon in a 1981 piece (according to Salt Lake Tribune).

I also learned a new term, #DezNat (Deseret Nation).
Title: Re: The Manifesto
Post by: Taalcon on December 12, 2020, 08:35:40 pm
Really not a fan of third-party creeds taking 'border maintenance' into their own hand, no matter who it is who is doing them.
Title: Re: The Manifesto
Post by: Jason on December 13, 2020, 02:06:53 pm
My first response to this, once I saw a pretty agreeable outline, was to question what narrative/borders they were coming from. Then I could know what they REALLY meant and could judge whether or not I agreed. What dogma are they forcing me into? But after reading some other discussion groups, I see this as a desire to not be defined by borders. What borders? Well, the ones I immediately tried to see if belonged to.

The ironic thing is, by not wanting to be defined by other's borders, they must necessarily set up borders, if only to say they are not part of preexisting borders.

I have seen how quickly established power groups try and usurp various movements, so perhaps publicly setting up their own guidelines and framework will prevent them from being usurped.
Title: Re: The Manifesto
Post by: Roper on December 13, 2020, 09:02:48 pm
From the manifesto:

Quote
The goal we have for the Latter-day Saint Radical Orthodoxy Manifesto is similar: A public statement meant to influence the culture of the Church. It is a statement of principles that can be adopted by individual members of the Church, or Church-adjacent organizations, to encourage intellectual engagement with the Church and the Restored Gospel in ways that are faithful and flexible instead of either rigidly dogmatic or heretical and doubting.

There are so many things wrong with this.

A public statement meant to influence the culture of the Church

What is the culture of the church? How does this statement influence it? Without clear definitions and a operational purpose, the manifesto is meaningless.

It is a statement of principles that can be adopted by individual members of the Church

Isn't that the job of Prophets, Seers, and Revelators? Why do I need a secondary source when I can so easily and reliably access a primary source?

to encourage intellectual engagement with the Church and the Restored Gospel

Isn't that what the entire education function of the Church does? What does the manifesto add which is not addressed by the Church Educational System, Sunday School, etc.

in ways that are faithful and flexible instead of either rigidly dogmatic or heretical and doubting.

If you're going to differentiate from something, you have to define that something and show how you're different. What (or who), exactly, are you labeling as rigidly dogmatic or heretical and doubting? What are the "faithful and flexible ways" which we should consider instead?

So far, the manifesto is all fluff and no substance. I wonder if that will change.


Title: Re: The Manifesto
Post by: JLM on December 13, 2020, 10:43:15 pm
And I think the responses from Jason, Taalcon and Roper well summarize the general response to the manifesto. The orthodox  hardliners reject the need for thoughtful engagement with the gospel, the more progressive members donít like being excluded from the discussion table, and the middle of the roadsters are wondering why they even bothered.  By trying to draw a box around what is permissible engagement and what is unacceptable dogmatism, the vast majority of the church either feel like they are being excluded from the club or that the club itself is a direct attack on the church. It is a no win situation and I think the Givenses lost cred with a huge chunk of members who had previously considered them allies.  Iím stunned at such a gross tactical error by such smart people. Live and learn I suppose....
Title: Re: The Manifesto
Post by: Roper on December 28, 2020, 10:59:13 pm
The three authors of the manifesto are Nathaniel Givens, Jeffrey Thayne, and J. Max Wilson. They each published an additional blog article (liked from the manifesto page) expanding on their reasoning for the manifesto. So, I went to their blogs to ask a question about what they mean when they refer to LDS culture. Wilson isn't engaging in any further discussion on his blog because he's working on his book. Thayne turned off commenting after I posted my question. Givens posted my question, but didn't reply. It's been a couple of weeks. He hasn't replied to any comments on that article. Hmm... The lack of responses from any of the authors makes me wonder how committed they are to their manifesto. Or, maybe they're actively answering questions in a different forum.
Title: Re: The Manifesto
Post by: JLM on December 29, 2020, 09:15:57 am
Perhaps theg have each come to the conclusion that the manifesto has hurt their reputations and that trying to defend it will only dig the hole deeper.
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2021, SimplePortal