19th Century Mormons vs. 21st Century Mormons

[Tokyo Ute]

I'm finally getting around to reading Rough Stone Rolling. I've asked the following question in my mind over and over...could I really hang with the 19th century version of this church? I don't know the answer to that question...but the whole speaking in tongues thing weirds me out a bit.

So what do you all think...are you 21st century Mormons only? Or could you do the 19th century version of the church as well?

[wuapinmon]

I'm finally getting around to reading Rough Stone Rolling. I've asked the following question in my mind over and over...could I really hang with the 19th century version of this church? I don't know the answer to that question...but the whole speaking in tongues thing weirds me out a bit.

So what do you all think...are you 21st century Mormons only? Or could you do the 19th century version of the church as well?

I speak in tongues every day. Few people understand me, but I press on.

[San Juan Sun]

So what do you all think...are you 21st century Mormons only? Or could you do the 19th century version of the church as well?

Today's totally obvious prediction: this thread will have a lot of complaining about 21st century Mormons.

[Tokyo Ute]

Today's totally obvious prediction: this thread will have a lot of complaining about 21st century Mormons.

For me it's quite the opposite. I enjoy the subdued and relatively pragmatic approach the church takes today. Granted that can be seen as boring, but in reading what church meetings were like in the early days makes me think that perhaps it was a bit too much for the likes of me!

[Jarid in Cedar]

Today's totally obvious prediction: this thread will have a lot of complaining about 21st century Mormons.

No it will be 21st century mormons complaining about 19th century mormons.

[All-American]

I suspect that part of the reason we might be more comfortable with 21st Century Mormonism is that it is familiar to us. SU has long noted the tendency of Mormonism to mimic its sources, and to an under-appreciated extent, it is true. Many of the behaviors of the 19th century church would have been recognizable and familiar to its membership and to outsiders alike. Much ink has been spilt tracing the origins of this ideology or that paradigm which many believe is unique to Mormonism and may very well be influenced by some other source.

One of Mormonism's unique characteristics is its tendency to believe in a sort of divine infusion in its practices. Much of what we do, we do because it's the way we've always done things. It isn't always easy to tell the difference between that which we do out of habit and that which we do because God wants us to do it; as such, many practices develop a cloak of divine authority which may trace their origins less from revelation and more from habit. That isn't to say that it's all wrong, of course-- just that we should feel free to bring up the questions.

[CardiacCoug]

For me it's quite the opposite. I enjoy the subdued and relatively pragmatic approach the church takes today. Granted that can be seen as boring, but in reading what church meetings were like in the early days makes me think that perhaps it was a bit too much for the likes of me!

I agree completely.

Does today's Church member have to accept or can he totally reject the fanatical aspects of the 19th century Church and its members?

I have come to the conclusion that you only have to live with the Church the way it is right now. There is no obligation to "buy in" to the entirety of Church history, especially polygamy and institutional racism.

[SeattleUte]

All due respect to my fellow Ute, but this is kind of a nonsensical question. The Nineteenth Century Mormons were the Jews of the Exodus and of Dueteromic Jerusalem who finally forged an indomitable Jewish identity establishing the Deuteromic code, Pentateuch and sayings of the Prophets as handed down to us today, and the Temple institution--combined. This is like a Greek speaking Sadducee pronouncing how much more civilized and enlightened is the Judaism of his epoch than in the epochs of Elijah, Isaiah and before. Mormonism will finally be destroyed by assimilation.

[Viking]

The 21st century church bears little to no resemblance to the 19th century version other than name, general leadership structure, and the book of mormon. that's about it.

at least the "living" part about "true and living" is accurate.

[SeattleUte]

The 21st century church bears little to no resemblance to the 19th century version other than name, general leadership structure, and the book of mormon. that's about it.

at least the "living" part about "true and living" is accurate.

[Viking]

it evolves. that's the "living" part

the lds church has evolved into one that apparently has a leader that no longer communes with god and shares those meetings via revelation (except when it decides god is no longer a racist), no longer allows its male members to use their members on wives 2-30+, no longer lives in communal bliss...i could go on (and of course i'm being somewhat tic but you get the point).

[Viking]

Also, I think it's a fair question to ask TSM when the last time he saw either god or jesus was. If i was still paying 10% of my pre-tax income (thus paying more like 12-13% of my real income), I actually think i could demand to know.

old time religion is what the mo'mon church was and it's precisely what it currently is not.

[SeattleUte]

Also, I think it's a fair question to ask TSM when the last time he saw either god or jesus was.

I can answer that for you. Will that satisfy you?

[Viking]

I can answer that for you. Will that satisfy you?

never is the answer.

[SeattleUte]

never is the answer.

lol You have a deft touch, my friend. Like a sledgehammer.