Mosaic: Church of the Loaves and Fishes, Tabgha (Heptapegon) Israel
Photo by hoyasmeg
The Truth of Immutability
"The belief that Christ was married has never been official church doctrine. It is neither sanctioned nor taught by the church. While it is true that a few church leaders in the mid-1800s expressed their opinions on the matter, it was not then, and is not now, church doctrine."
Official Statement
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Dr. Robert L. Millett is the Richard L. Evans Professor of Religious Understanding at Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah. He is also a professor of ancient scripture and emeritus Dean of Religious Education. For the past 30 years, inter-faith dialog has been a focus for Dr. Millett. He takes a rather pragmatic view of LDS doctrine. Back in January of 2008, I had the opportunity to hear him speak.
Dr. Millett was the invited guest on the Peabody Award winning national public radio program Speaking of Faith. The 2008 presidential debates had fallen into a sort of dogmatic quagmire as largely misunderstood and misrepresented concerns of Mormon culture and belief dominated the political discussion. Dr. Millett was called on to help frame that discussion by sharing some of his thoughts on Mormonism. During the course of the conversation one rather unassuming question led to a startling and even evocative response:
"I wonder, you know, is revelation still happening and are there teachings that stop making sense at times or are there new ideas that arise?"
Dr. Millett framed his answer in a then recent controversy surrounding author Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code. He paraphrased the official church response to the debate regarding the san greal (holy grail) or the mythical cup used to capture some of the blood spilled at Jesus' crucifixion and the sang real (royal blood) or the inference that Jesus married, had children, and established a holy or royal line of progeny.
"The scriptures are silent as to whether Jesus was married. It is true that early church leaders may have offered their opinion on this matter, but those opinions did not then, nor do they now, constitute the doctrine of the church."
"And so we — as we, as we move into the 21st century now, and as we begin having a greater focus upon Christ and Christianity and Christian principles, I think there is a tendency to look back and say, 'All right, what are the central saving doctrines? And what are some other things we, A, don't know much about, B, just don't seem to be in harmony with what, with what — and where we are now?' And I think that's taking place more and more."
"Compared to the Christian church, which has been at this for a couple of millennia, we're about halfway to Nicaea. And so... cut us a little slack, will you? Give us a little time. We're in the religion-making business, and this takes time. It takes centuries. And trying to explain the faith and articulate the faith, that doesn't come over night. We've really only been about that for 20 or 30 years."
Now I realize Dr. Millett tailored his presentation to non-Mormons. He used language unfamiliar to most anyone who's sat through Mormon services. But Dr. Millett represents a growing trend within Mormon intellectual circles to tone down religious rhetoric and to finally speak more pragmatically about the evident changes in LDS culture and theology. He is still one of the church's foremost experts on the gospel and is tremendously influential in preparing the next generation of LDS theologic thinkers.
The Information Age has had an extraordinary effect on not just Mormonism but religion in general. Information and resources that were once difficult to access are now just a few key strokes away. Research that was once obscure now only requires a simple internet search engine to discover. The free flow of information requires a new approach to theological conversation. A new tone of inclusion and respect of difference is required to reach a more informed populace.
In a way, Dr. Millett has summed up my personal journey... looking back and identifying central doctrines I find helpful and moving on from those ideas that are not in harmony with what and where I am today. Traditional Mormon doctrine has tried to present itself as static and immutable. Dr. Millett has given us a rare glimpse into the mechanisms for refining understanding if not out right change evident within the faith. For this I am grateful and, in some small measure, feel more connected to the tradition of my forefathers.
I'm LDS and this isn't true. The Church is based on doctrine not theology. We are not in the "religion making business!" If anyone "made" this religion, it was God and the first law in heaven is Obedience!
ReplyDeleteTruth is always relative to ones perspective, I suppose. I'm not too clear on how you're defining "doctrine" and "theology." My dictionary says doctrine is a collection of beliefs taught by a church and theology is the study of that collection. Using those definitions, you message would imply blind obedience without study. I'm sure that is a misunderstanding on my part.
ReplyDeleteOH SNAP!
ReplyDelete