Reflections about Standards
Here’s a half-baked line of inquiry.
Before we do, we might want to say where this blog is at with respect to the gospel. The normal run of LDS online presence is either faith-promoting, faith-doubting, or for the rare neutralish account, faith-debating.
Faith promoting is selling the gospel and sharing testimony. Sometimes, though less often, apologetics.
Faith-doubting is often the opposite. At best airing grievances and trying to sell alterations to the gospel and at worst just anti.
Faith debating means pros and cons. These kinds of accounts are rare because most people don’t have the temperament for it in the first place and those who do don’t long halt between two opinions. Sooner or later they come down on one side of the debate.
The Junior Ganymede is usually faith promoting. Our readers don’t always realize it because we aren’t the normal run of faith promoting blog. We don’t sell. We don’t try hard to mimic the focus tested output of the PR department because we don’t have to. We don’t have a world wide audience of millions of ordinary people where everything we say is put under a microscope by unfriendly media, thank goodness. Ordinary faith promoting material doesn’t often come in the guise of comic light poetry. Our sweetness material is faith promoting, though that’s not exactly why we do it. Sometimes we find areas where some members have got themselves into knots, or areas of gospel conundrums, and find out how resolving those can bring us back to the abundant beauty the gospel was meant to be. Sometimes we explore the gospel, trying to recast or recapture it so people an experience the awe as if for the first time.
Which brings us to the last and most unusual thing this blog is. We are faith exploring and faith compatible. We start with the gospel as a premise and then work out from there. We take secular concepts and see where they intersect the gospel. What if we look at this doctrine from a new angle? What if brainstorm the way these two different experienced truths can both be true? Instead of trying to get you to believe, here we take it for granted that you already do and then try to advance the ball. We try to avoid arid intellectual theories. We are exploring implications of the gospel that should be deeply meaningful and life changing. At the same time, we are not the gurus on the mountain top. We are at best the gurus who are climbing the mountain ourselves. We aren’t delivering final revelations. You must approach these explorations like you do when reading the best books like Jospeh Smith said. Be discerning, follow the spirit, pick and choose what is appropriate for you where you are at, notice when your spirit soars in delight, notice when the voice within says, “well reasoned, fellas, plausible, but it just ain’t so.” Sometimes you might say, rightly, what the heck.
Today’s actual post is going to seem like a comically tiny afterthought in comparison to all this prologue. We thought the prologue here was worthwhile because one of the half-baked idle speculations assumes that the Church has some of the limits of ordinary human institutions. We think this assumption is compatible with the gospel and with our belief that the Church is true. Just like spirits and revelations can come to frail mortal bodies with diseases and weaknesses, truths and priesthood are housed in mortal institutions that have, sometimes, some of the same challenges and capacities ordinary institutions do.
Here’s our promise to you.
First, feel free to rebuke us at any time. All corrections gratefully accepted. When we see good saints and others concerned for our welfare, it makes us love them and it makes us feel loved.
Second, if you want to know how something or other is compatible with our belief in the gospel and the church, ask us. We will be happy to answer.
THE ACTUAL POST
Let’s create a reflection index which measures people’s ability to ponder stuff. To reflect. It would be a composite of something like education levels, intelligence, and freedom from distraction.
To me its pretty clear that the membership on average scores lower on the reflection index than decades ago. That’s not a criticism, just a change. For example, the increasingly digitized world of social media can have a number of advantages, but it indisputable increases distraction and reduces reflection a lot. It just is what it is.
To me, its also pretty clear that standards are more helpful than principles where reflection is lower. The further down the reflection scale the more bright line rules become more useful even if they are kind of clumsy in application.
Yet the Church has been moving opposite the expected direction. We have been reducing and abolishing standards and emphasizing principles.
Why?
I can see two explanations. Bright line rules depend on where you are. ‘No r-rated movies’ probably makes less sense in foreign places with their own movie industry. So maybe the institutional church is incapable of creating healthy sets of localized standards or there are reasons why localized standards would be undesirable.
The other explanation is that standards are attack surface.
Thoughts?
E.C.
May 22, 2023
Localized standards might end up fragmenting the Church as it localizes to the point it becomes unrecognizable to someone coming in from, say, Church headquarters. This is the way that the Catholic church broke off from the Orthodox faiths. Also, that way lies apostacy, as locals become fixated on custom to the point of ignoring Christ’s law.
There needs to be some kind of universal standard, and the Church has the commandments and covenants of Christ as its standard. ‘Hedging’ those with further commandments is a Pharisaic move that may alienate humble seekers of Christ. He himself told the Nephites that whoever tries to do more or less than what He has said will come to evil.
The other consideration is that we’re supposed to different from the world, and thus our leaders may be creating space for pondering and reflection. They do give general guidelines – the most recent being Elder Oaks’ devotional last night to YSA about balancing between Love and Law on gender issues – but they can’t prescribe for every single situation in the church. It’s logistically impossible. Therefore, members need to do their own thinking about how to live Christ’s teachings, and learn to follow the Spirit’s guidance on what that looks like for their own life.
Hobart Floyt
May 22, 2023
Standards are definitely an attack surface.
From the user guide of a curated forum:
There is no official set of granular rules for using SocialGalactic, which is by design. Past experience has shown that such rules, once posted, quickly become an attack vector for troublemakers looking to use the letter of the law to pervert the spirit of the law, thereby ruining the site for everyone else.
At SocialGalactic, admins enforce two general common-sense policies, which are adjudicated at their discretion and which are not subject to debate. These are basic, sane dicta which should prove easy to both interpret and follow for anyone not predisposed to social autism. They are Clean Speech and Good Manners.
G.
May 22, 2023
E.C.
you are on to something, but your arguments both prove too much. That there needs to be some kind of universal standard does not demonstrate that all standards have to be universal. And the hedging stuff runs up against the fact that in the past we have had standards and we still continue to have standards. The right answer is likely a less absolute version of your argument.
@Hobart, I can see the logic.
Zen
May 22, 2023
Standards work when we have access to Church Leadership.
Principles work regardless of whether we have access to Church Leadership.
E.C.
May 22, 2023
@ G,
I do realize the answer probably lies between the two extremes. I guess my point was that we can go too far in either direction, and thus cause confusion instead of simplicity.
@ Zen,
I think you’re absolutely right. That was kind of what I was going for, but you said it way more concisely. 😀
[]
May 22, 2023
It’s our responsibility to develop formal standards and hold ourselves to them, not even necessarily as individuals. Nothing’s stopping the creation of the Jr Ganymede Guide to Latter-day Saint Conduct and Etiquette – imagine the benefits of splinter sects without the drawbacks.
Zen
May 22, 2023
Interesting…
Can we also get Fashion Police?
Ugly Mahana
May 22, 2023
A few months ago, the Stake YW Pres. spoke in our ward about the For the Strength of Youth guidelines. Prior to her talk, I had some concerns about standards being relaxed- Her talk allayed my concerns. Of course individuals can fool themselves, but, if we can teach people to know how to get answers from God; then they will be just fine. After all, any rule or standard that we would promote would only be an approximation of God’s actual standard.
The proof of this is rather personal. A few weeks ago I was listening to a conference talk, not Elder Uchtdorf’s talk on the strength of youth, but one with similar ideas (probably one of Pres. Nelson’s talks) where the speaker stated that, if we will truly seek to follow. Grist, then we will know how to dress and groom ourselves. And then I just knew that I need to shave off a beard that I have been wearing for 8+ years. Don”t want to do it, but I know I should. And I know that the lack of specifics need not be a stumbling block. Rather we have got to learn ourselves, and we have got to teach our children, to hear God’s voice. Even in relatively simple matters of dress and grooming.
G.
May 22, 2023
Beards are mandatory in the JG Splinter Sect Guide to Conduct and Etiquette, unless you can satisfy our extremely stringent standards for mandible breadth and maxillary development.
Each guide comes with a convenient set of calipers.
Eric
May 23, 2023
A couple things come to mind.
First is an older statement from Elder Oaks, when he said, “Well-taught doctrines and principles have a more powerful influence on behavior than rules.” Considering how often he and the other Church leaders talk about principles, I don’t foresee them moving away from that any time soon.
Next, Elder Ballard once told about a man he knew of who had met the missionaries and started taking lessons from them. After two or three visits he had gotten a haircut, started dressing more neatly, and made some other changes to his lifestyle. The missionaries hadn’t asked him to do any of those things, but he just felt like they were the right thing to do.
John Mansfield
May 23, 2023
It could be a Jacob 5 matter. “What have I not tried yet to save these trees and get them to produce good fruit?” Most things don’t work, and when something is working, the next time you look it won’t be working anymore. There was time to deploy standards; now it’s time focus on principles.
It could also be a matter of Who needs saving now? As noted above standards work better than principles for people less prone to cognition. “How do the movies I stream reflect my feelings for the Savior?” is a more useful question for those drawn to deep thoughts. In contrast, the educated “grad school Mormon” has a tendency to turn useful standards into stumbling blocks that he can have fun arguing about. Maybe it is better for him if his arguments about his habits can be made more internal, less part of staking out his ground with others, by the church ceasing to be a sparring partner regarding practices.
sute
May 23, 2023
The worldly approach says you’re always fighting the last battle.
Could be the modern church leaders are finally (belatedly) pushing back from the claim that things are too rigid one size fits all — right exactly at the time when one size fits all is needed.
I don’t think that though.
I do wonder though if (some?) church leaders actually like the church they inherited sometimes though. We’re not Mormons anymore. We don’t do home teaching. We don’t do high priests. No more boy scouts, no more cub scouts. We cut time in church by 33%. We even shut down all church and singing for months at a time. No more priesthood session of conference, no more duty to God, no more personal progress, no more faith in God, no more mottos, young mens leaders are discontinued and bishoprics are supposed to replace them, with EQ and RS replacing bishoprics in many areas, but what happens is bishoprics become less effective at bishoping and they still call ym advisors and they are all less effective at advising or leading ym, camps are scaled back or eliminated, events and pageants are eliminated, the temple changed and made shorter, covenants changed-but-not-changed, temple made longer and changed and added to and so on.
You might say it’s making things more efficient and streamlining to be more effect at focusing on what really matters, but it really feels like we’re spending the same doing the same things only doing less of them… which seems contradictory, but we don’t *feel* more efficient and effective do we?
That’s a dramatic series of cancelations that all happened rather quickly, and I’m sure there are more we could list.
I could articulate an upside to all of these. I could suggest these dramatic changes are the will of the Lord because he knows the beginning from the end. I think my feeling on many of them is simply that the Lord honors, ratifies, and authorizes the leadership choices of his called servants and he gives them leeway to make these decisions and we all hope the changes work out.
Oh, and do we still do Family Home Evening? Zero mentions in 2023 conference, 2 in 2022, 2 in 2021, 1 in 2020. Meanwhile 4 in 1993, 10 in 1994, 6 in 1995, 4 in 1983, 10 in 2003, 9 in 2004, 7 in 2005. Just randomly grabbing some dates, but it *feels* a lot less of a thing than it was. (come follow me likely replaced it to some degree in terms of references, which is understandable, but a different thing)
There’s one thing that’s clear though — someone(s) was frustrated at how things were going in the church and wanted to make a lot of changes that appear to be mostly mixed or ineffective.
This comment might sound pretty negative, but that’s not how I feel. Maybe these changes are setting the stage for the next generation.
Except, when my children are called to be in various presidencies, the kids are being allowed or taught to lead less than ever by the adults who are supposed to be training them.
I don’t know what to think. I don’t think the programs and changes are bad. They are likely just a reflection of us, the members and where we are at. It’s probably more a reflection of a generational decline, hinted at in this post.
No conclusion, just observations…
John Mansfield
May 24, 2023
My impression is that Russell Nelson feels the church failed to serve him as a child and youth, and that even though he grew up in Salt Lake City he mostly had to discover the gospel on his own, buying himself a copy of the Book of Mormon and being baptized at 16. So he has none of the emotional attachment to the past and its arrangements or sense of having been nurtured that Hinckley and Monson communicated regarding their boyhoods in Salt Lake City. Considering the stories of his life Russell Nelson shares, it seems that the past he values began after he graduated from medical school and left Utah for a residency as a newly minted doctor. Maybe that’s why he seems younger than his very advanced age: For him life began in 1947.
Zen
May 24, 2023
Following Sute’s comment, it feels like we are aboard a ship and the officers are making changes quickly – evacuating the outer rooms and corridors, reinforcing the defenses, taking power from every non-essential service, and even the less essential services, preparing crew assignments for presently unseen dangers.
From that, it sounds like turbulent times are ahead.
Sute
May 24, 2023
Adding a bit. Just talked with a nice sister who has faithfully manned her station as asked for years at the family history library. Waiting. Waiting for people to come in and “do family history”. Almost no one comes in. She tells herself every week not to bother. Just stay home, no one is coming. But she comes out of duty and love for the work.
They’ve tried contests, invites, trainings, etc. It always results in one person coming and then never coming again.
I see this as symptomatic of so many things. The church has virtually unlimited resources to develop programs. The stagnation is not for lack of innovation.
We’ve got libraries, computers, indexing, apps, memories, photos, and so much more. The church is flooding effort into this and saying, somebody care. Someone use this.
And we don’t. There are reasons why I’d say. Similar to the circles app, the walled, closed garden that sections off control and access is probably problematic.
Its amazingly bewildering that the church is so cutting edge on one hand and so behind the times in the other.
We’ve been broadcasting audio talks longer than any organization in the world, and yet podcasting and Ted talks pass us right by.
Does anyone think two hours with an apostle 2x a week like a Joe Rogan interview wouldn’t be tremendously fascinating? Joe has more reach than the church or any media company because he’s consistent, not scripted and not afraid of a little controversy.
I’d love to have that. Anyway… scattered thoughts. Just a little sad after talking to this sister on the way home from the library that we try so many things and none of them are quite there.
G.
May 24, 2023
This is one of those threads where I get a lot out of the comments.
Zen
May 24, 2023
Joe Rogan… That deserves some real thought. Pres. Nelson is 100 in a year and a half. And it isn’t like the Pope has been on. So why not a Prophet?
We should really think about how to do this.
Zen
May 25, 2023
Pres Nelson turns 100 on September
9, 2024.
I don’t have much of a social media presence myself, because, like Vader, I work at Death Star, Inc. But perhaps you guys have ideas.
The only criteria I see to be on his show, is for it to be someone Joe would be interested in talking to.
G.
May 25, 2023
The problem with taking a lot of risks is a lot of failure. A podcast Rogan style would not be safe. There would be misspeaks, misstatements, and fails.
I don’t like change by temperament but a big part of my reaction to all the changes that Sute listed is that they are mostly safe changes.
I want high risk high reward. Moonshots. Guerilla BYU. I want to be the kind of church that, like that story where Elder Holland prayed and went down the wrong path, can get revelation by failure and going down the wrong path. It is the only way to succeed greatly.
But I really don’t think we are ready for that as a people. Even me who has spent more time working out a doctrine of risk and failure and the body in mortality than most still get all emotionally tizzied when I see the Church doing something that might be a mistake. I think risk and failure are inevitable and necessary and important and even holy, but I still get in a tizzy. So I don’t think we as a people are prepared for this.
Maybe the only solution is to rip off the bandaid, I don’t know. But it would hurt.
Zen
May 25, 2023
I don’t know, but I am a big believer in how we got the Gospel of Mark. Mark wasn’t an apostle or even fulfilling an assignment that we know of. He just sat down and wrote what he knew. Luke followed his lead, and expanded to the ministry or Acts of the Apostles. Matthew likewise, is based on Mark.
Waiting for the Apostles and leadership to do everything and not doing anything until we are commanded, would make us slothful servants.
26 For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward. 27 Verily I say, men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness; 28 For the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves. And inasmuch as men do good they shall in nowise lose their reward. 29 But he that doeth not anything until he is commanded, and receiveth a commandment with doubtful heart, and keepeth it with slothfulness, the same is damned.
Sute – I have worked in callings where I felt just like that sister you have mentioned.
Jacob G.
May 25, 2023
My take is that explicit standards would help the church in the world, but his kingdom is not of this world. He wants his own particular people to be a holy nation of priests.
The question that the retreat from standards asks is – are you just doing the bare minimum to stay in the church and “be good” or are you actively seeking the Lord in your life. “I would thou wert cold or hot.”
G.
May 25, 2023
OK, but the implication is that we were doing it wrong before. Don’t know if I think that is true.
My view is that principles without standards are dead and vice versa though what the precise mix is in any given time will vary because my view is a principle and not a standard
Jacob G.
May 26, 2023
“We were doing it wrong before” Do you mean as members, or as church policy?
I don’t see that Joseph Smith published a lot of precise standards as how members were to act. I do get the impression though, that they would convene disciplinary councils for what we would see as minor stuff.
Look, what we are wrestling with here, in this post and others like it is what appears to be a retreat of the church – less priesthoods, less church activity, our leaders saying less, only implying things are bad that would have been outright condemned over the pulpit 20 yrs ago, and so forth.
Options as I see it:
1. This is not a scaling back, despite appearances, but really a step forward. We are in the early days of the restoration. As to your comment – those tasked with framing are not under condemnation for not putting in the adornments.
2. This is mere tactical maneuvering, necessary for the church to avoid its enemies both internal and external.
3. The church is in fact being diminished in a pattern similar to what we see from Acts 2 to Rev 2-3.
I submit that with God, all three may be simultaneously true. He can and does use our sins and transgressions to maneuver us to where he wants us to go, without abolishing the consequences of our acts.
Consider the church in Helamen and the first chapters of 3 Nephi. Miracles became a lot more miraculous and public. Prophecies become a lot more specific, and many are fulfilled quickly and undeniably. Those sent by God begin to exercise demi-godlike powers as a matter of course. Yet at the same time, the church falls apart and is only put back together with strenuous effort – only to fall apart again. And is the church qua church completely collapsed when the savior came?
I think we may have the unexamined assumption that the church is destined to go forth boldly, nobly, and independent, ascending from strength to strength, always increasing both in numbers and in righteousness.
G.
May 26, 2023
Insightful. I don’t know for sure that you are right but it gives me a lot to chew on
IAW
May 26, 2023
RE: “I would thou wert cold or hot.”
One of the most misused, misunderstood scriptures. God does not prefer you to be actively evil vs. passively good. This is not “good or evil but not in between.: Both “cold” and “hot” in that verse are “good”:
“Ancient sources complain that Laodicea’s water was full of sediment. (Their nicest comment was simply that it was not as bad as that of Hierapolis; Strabo, Geography 13.4.14.) . . . The water was also lukewarm by the time it arrived in Laodicea, though lukewarm water could always be heated. Mildly hot water was useful for bathing, and waters at hot springs such as those at nearby Hierapolis were considered helpful for relieving ailments. Cold water was useful for drinking, and available in nearby locations like Colossae. Most people preferred cold drinks, but hot drinks were also common at banquets. When speaking of water, both hot and cold are thus useful and pleasant. The point of lukewarm water, by contrast, is simply that it was unpleasant, useless, and disgusting— thus Jesus spits it out”
Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible (p. 11115).
Jacob G.
May 26, 2023
@ G. Yeah, I’m not sure either. I have had a lot of hard thinking these past few years, and what I am sure of, what the spirit has told me is:
1. Nelson is a prophet and the Lord chosen him because he is exactly the type of man to lead the church where the Lord wants it to go right now. The Lord will and does correct him as he see fits, I don’t need to worry about that.
2. I and my family must stay in the church, and do our best to get with the program, so to speak. This is not the only thing we are to do, though.
@IAW I’m not sure I see the distinction that that makes. I see hot/cold not lukwarm as saying you must choose and stick with your choice, same as the two masters saying. No middle ground, nor compromise position will be long tenable.
William James Tychonievich
May 27, 2023
The progression from standards to principles is to be expected. We see it in the change from the Law of Moses to the Gospel, and in the ongoing transition from church-centered to family-centered Christianity.
Why is this change coinciding with a decline in intelligence and an increase in distraction? Well, the ongoing decline seems to be affecting institutions even more seriously than individuals — that is, institutions seem to be getting much stupider much faster than individuals. Scaling back the role of the institutional church and encouraging people to think and discern for themselves (even as it becomes more difficult for them to do so) makes a certain sense.
Sute
May 27, 2023
When I return back to the standards argument, I think the reason is simple whether we realize it or not.
We have a mob mentality against standards. If society supported the idea of right, wrong, black, white, male, female, it wouldn’t be an issue. As is, we can’t even draw clear lines between male and female any more without a mob mentality.
Tell me how you can have any counsel against tattoos and R rated movies in that argue-everything environment.
Other things I expect to see fall away: garments.
We’ve already hidden them away in the temple from a doctrinal stand point they can become even more symbolic.
The pandemic and supply chain exposed massive weaknesses in the church bizarrely taking on the role of the world’s largest underwear supplier. Literally, have you considered that? Is there any underwear supplier that has a foot print in virtually every nation? Funny to think about. But in Simplifying things, it’s a little bizarre to imagine the focus on manufacturing underwear and other white garments continuing. Think of all the comexities that comes with material and country of origin tarrifs etc. The modern world will likely destroy that standard as well. Likely not in my lifetime though, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see it happen.
Who knew Brigham, who preached the importance of making our own clothes was a prophet…
IAW
May 27, 2023
Jacob G. –
It’s this”: God wants you to be useful, not useless. Both bit and cold are useful. Lukewarm is useless. None of the temperatures in those verses map onto good vs. evil.
Your framing would be that God wants you to go all in for the Satan rather than dither between. But since the Terrestial and Telestial kingdoms are not Perdition, that is a clearly false framing.
IAW
May 27, 2023
In fact, if “lukewarm” maps onto good and evil and at all, it stands for deciding on the Satan’s side, since that makes you totally useless to God like lukewarm water.
God isn’t saying “I wish you’d just decide already” – he’s saying “I wish you were useful in some way. I can use hot water. I can use cold water. Both are good and useful.”
Sute
May 27, 2023
When it comes to my water pic, I prefer lukewarm. Cold hurts and hot I spew out if my mouth. Just saying
Zen
May 27, 2023
Regarding lukewarm water – I am going to really have to look into this. Just a quick perusal in https://scriptures.byu.edu/ just points out the Brethren condemning being lukewarm
But regarding standards – call this more than a prediction, but perhaps less than a prophecy – I suspect that at some point we will not have the benefit hearing directly from the Brethren. Like Elijah, they will be in hiding.
In which case, we must learn how to apply standards by ourselves. Heber Kimball’s prophecy regarding borrowed light will be fully fulfilled.
Jacob G.
May 31, 2023
@IAW
So what was the message to the church in Laodicea? What would being ‘hot’ mean and ‘cold’ mean in practical terms. Are you arguing there are two different ways to live the gospel, participate in the church, and please God?
I would think hot = want to follow God. Cold = want to follow the world. Satan and evil is not on this map because those who want to fight against God and creation are not going to be taking advice from scripture.