I know that some people cannot imagine how one could be both liberal and LDS, and yes, it's unusual, especially here in Texas, but when I read something like this, I feel grateful that the church (though it may be largely conservative) still respects a wide variety of political views. I am appreciative of this Mormon ethic of civility and I hope I display it in my speech and discussion, despite the occasional steam-releasing teasing or FB post. I too have a healthy regard for a system of checks and balances, and I see the need for a multiplicity of views.
I am not saying this in a bashing way at all (no, seriously, I'm not), but I think that with this statement perhaps church leaders are trying to distance themselves from Glenn Beck. (Tell me what you think about this theory ...) He is, arguably, the most famous LDS *entertainer* out there, and his shock-jock persona may not be the public image the church wants. I'm not suggesting that this is censure, but it doesn't seem far-fetched that our General Authorities want to remind us that Latter-day Saints should not stand for hate or vitriol or contention. Steve Young, during his tenure as the Face of Mormonism, at least stood for the all-American past-time of football and he was a direct (and polite) descendant of Brigham Young.
In a diary kept by Richard Bushman during his book tour for Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (so far, Dad, Andrew and I have all read this published and very humble diary - On the Road with Joseph Smith - and enjoyed it), Brother Bushman notes that a book release for his biography, planned at the Joseph Smith Memorial Building, was downsized, and decided that church leaders were probably hesitant to give what might seem like an official endorsement of his book. Brother Bushman was not offended, however, and understood their position. He recognized that it would be inappropriate for someone NOT a General Authority to appear to give official positions or pronouncements.
Now ... if Brother Bushman was right, and church leaders, in fact, did not want to give an official endorsement of his impressive book for the reasons Brother Bushman listed, then it seems very reasonable to infer that they would have even greater issues with the tone of and response to Mr. Beck's programs.
6 comments:
G.B. is precisely who came to mind when I read that announcement. We should all chip in and buy him a filter for Christmas or something. Seriously.
Bishop Burton's talk at General Conference was excellent, and the world would sure be a nice place if everyone lived by the "ity"s.
When I listened to President Monson's talk on Anger from the Priesthood Session, I thought of Beck and his hate-radio cronies and spiritually damaging that can be.
Mom - I think you're right! I'm not trying to say members shouldn't listen to Beck or that GAs are "banning" him... only that it seems that church leadership is trying to create a little distance.
I do not think name calling is ever effective, and to my family members who do listen to GB, well, carry on ... we'll have lively discussions at Christmas!
I agree. My Grandfather just visited us and he is a wonderful man. But whenever he watches fox news or checks his emails it is almost like he changes. He becomes angry and upset. It is really sad to see such a change in someone.
Specific people didn't come to mind when these two talks were mentioned. Further, Elder Oaks recently gave a talk that we shouldn't be compelled into being silent on religious beliefs when it's not 'popular' to talk about them. So, to me the church wants all members to be civil but firm in their convictions, whatever they may be. Their main focus is our spirituality and protecting religious freedom.
Regarding Civility: The overall tone of political debate has become about the messenger rather than the message. So whether the 'targets' were Harry Reid (Mormon Democrat, leader of the Senate) or Glen Beck (who considers himself an unlikely Mormon and wrote about it), that's hard to say. Especially since there are 13 million Mormons, and all of us should be civil in the arena of public discourse.
I believe you can be Mormon and liberal and there are many VERY PUBLIC examples of such. I can be civil about my disagreements politically, but I just wish we wouldn't point fingers to those we don't like and say this church leader's message was about them. Shouldn't we liken their messages to us and see how we specifically need to change?
Being a Mormon and a liberal or Democrat is not unusual (especially once one is outside of Utah). Harry Reid is an active temple attending Mormon, the Udall's from Colorado and New Mexico are Mormon, Rep. Faleomavaega from American Samoa is Mormon. Even if a General Authority says that you can't be a Democrat and a good Mormon, guess what? He is wrong. General Authorities are human too, and allowed to have their own opinions, and make their own mistakes. Everything they say is not doctrine of the Church. If it was, there would be no need for personal revelation beyond knowing that so-and-so was called of God.
As to the General Authorities comments being caused by Glenn Beck, I think you give him way too much influence. I would guess that the comments are more because of the overwhelming Mormon Republican population in Utah, and their politics/discussions/arguments spilling over into church meetings.
The audience/influence of any single entertainer is far overblown. Beck has a radio audience of maybe 15 million, and a TV audience of 3 million (probably 90% of the TV audience falls into the radio audience as well). So, in a country of 300 million, 5% of people actually listen to Glenn Beck (note not all of these are supporters - every talk radio host has attracted a significant listening audience of those that disagree with them). Probably another 5 to 10 million "hate" him without ever having listened to him. Which leaves 275 million who don't care one way or the other for him.
While some population of Mormons may listen to him because he is Mormon, probably the majority in the US have never heard of him or don't even know that he is Mormon. Beck rose to prominence out of Philadelphia or Pittsburg (somewhere in Pennsylvania), not Utah. Frankly, I don't think that any GAs are involved enough in politics to concern themselves with Glenn Beck. Certainly when Harry Reid publicly tells groups that the Church he belongs to shouldn't have gotten involved in Prop 8 and that it was a waste of Church resources, that would give them more consternation than Glenn Beck raving about the latest conspiracy (without mentioning that he is a Mormon).
So given the two options here (1) Glenn Beck is the "cause" of the GA announcement or (2) overly boisterous Utah Republicans (who may believe that Jesus endorses the GOP and have been adamant about pushing their opinions on others far longer than Beck has been around) are the cause, I would have to lean towards #2.
Why would Church leaders be hesitant to give anything that appeared to be an official endorsement of a book that was not commissioned by the Church? Because too many members already glom on to whatever the latest Mormon fiction/non-fiction is and elevate it to levels just under (or sometimes over) the Standard Works. When "Tennis Shoes Among the Nephites" comes up in Gospel Doctrine as the support for some principle, there is a serious problem with where people's testimonies are based. (I can't wait until "Twilight" comes up in Gospel Doctrine, because it was written by a Mormon, so it must be worth reading along with the scriptures).
Post a Comment