- Jonathan Green on 15 Thoughts on The Thing This Week: “John, I think they are two separate issues. Should the Church make exclusive truth claims? I mean, I think it should, but some people disagree. Should other people accept that members of the Church are Christians? Again, I think they should. But when outsiders disagree, I’ve never seen them bring up the Church’s truth claims – it’s always the Trinity, new scripture, prophets, etc. As far as I can tell, it’s only in intramural discussion where the two issues get linked. And I think the linkage is illogical. Claiming exclusive authority is entirely unrelated to the question of who is and isn’t a Christian. I don’t mean to defend DezNat. It was a stupid group doing stupid things, with the mistaken idea that it’s okay to be jerks online. But I can’t tell that they ever promoted any actual Christian Nationalist ideas (although that may have changed at some point), and I suspect their name was patterned on sports fandoms – like “Badger Nation” or “Schooner Nation.” Lots of things I don’t know, though, so please let me know if I’m mistaken about this. RLD, the tension between creedal conformity and inner religious experience is one of those things that bounces back and forth in Christianity over the centuries, and I can see the value in both sides. Orthodoxy without personal conversion is sterile, while spiritual experience without doctrinal guidance can quickly go off the rails. So I don’t object to creeds as statements of belief, and their actual content is often compatible with our own doctrine – not accepting a creed often gets interpreted as rejecting the content of a creed, when the situation actually requires much more careful parsing. It’s logical to decide that we’re not good Catholics or Presbyterians because of failure to accept various creeds as authoritative, but as you suggest, the logic of making our status as Christians dependent on that isn’t working for me.” Jun 13, 20:41
- on 15 Thoughts on The Thing This Week: “We need to acknowledge that the creeds are important to other churches. Our Articles of Faith are descriptive (“we believe”) and we encourage our young people to memorize them so they learn about their faith. The creeds are confessional (“I believe”) and to recite them means something. My wife is a convert and had to memorize “all the creeds” (her words) for her Methodist confirmation. The implication was that she was welcome to join the congregation because she believed those things. That’s not to agree that they should be so important. When the Lord told Joseph Smith that the creeds were an abomination, I doubt he meant the content of the creeds, but rather the undue focus Christianity put on them, even killing over them at times. I also blame them for reducing “faith” to “willingness to agree with particular truth claims,” something we haven’t entirely overcome in the Church. I have no interest in being accepted into the club of “Christian Churches.” If they’d say we’re not “Creedal Christians” I’d cheerfully agree. But “Christian” has a plain English meaning that has nothing to do with creeds, and to insist that I’m not a Christian denies my relationship with my Savior. The label “Christian Nationalism” generates more heat than light, but a lot of Church members are just fine with what the Trump administration has done to weaken the separation between church and state. I wish it were true that “Mormons are finally discovering that they’ll get left out in the cold under Christian Nationalism.” But I completely agree that the Church as an institution and its leadership are fighting against it (I especially loved 14a). I don’t believe for a moment that having a constitutional scholar as prophet in the present moment is a coincidence, any more than having a doctor as prophet during the pandemic was a coincidence. Side note: if you don’t want to fight wars in the Middle East, the time to object is when someone who literally has “Deus Vult” tattooed on his body is appointed as “Secretary of War.”” Jun 13, 19:44
- on 15 Thoughts on The Thing This Week: ““DezNat” was based on sports fandom, not Christian Nationalism.” I cannot find anything to back up this claim. Here are a couple of news articles that give a different point of view. They were the closest to neutral descriptions I could find. Which is not at all close to positive or complimentary. . https://www.abc4.com/news/local-news/deseret-nation-alt-right-mormon-militants-or-twitter-truth-defenders/ https://kutv.com/news/2news-investigates/deznat-users-say-theyre-defending-the-church-those-they-target-say-its-not-christ-like Other than this silliness, I very much appreciated the post.” Jun 13, 17:02
- on 15 Thoughts on The Thing This Week: “Jonathan, I’m not going to post a link, but check out the Wikipedia article on DezNat. I think you are mistaken.” Jun 13, 16:51
- on 15 Thoughts on The Thing This Week: “Agree with the point that Christians have been calling each other apostate and denying each other’s validity for centuries. But our claim is exclusive restoration: not just “we’re right and you are wrong” but “we alone hold the keys and authority that make our ordinances the only valid ordinances.” I think this is a much stronger claim than most intramural Christian disputes, and it does create some awkwardness in the Church now asking to be welcomed into a tent it has historically said it alone was authorized to pitch.” Jun 13, 15:39
- on 15 Thoughts on The Thing This Week: “E., “DezNat” was based on sports fandom, not Christian Nationalism, and doesn’t seem to be a thing anymore. They are not missed. As far as the surveys, a lot of that research is, frankly, garbage. A lot of it is based on survey questions that amount to people wanting to vote for politicians who share their values, or want the their values to be more influential on a national scale. The actually concerning stuff, like limiting voting rights or citizenship, is much less common. John, other Christian denominations are able to reject one another’s authority and key doctrines without denying their Christian belonging. I think they can manage it with us, too. Last L., thanks, I hadn’t heard of Kai Schwimmer. I hope he enjoyed having two apostles tell every member of the Church in the U.S. during weekly meetings that his views are totally wrong. It can be repeated as necessary.” Jun 13, 13:16
- on 15 Thoughts on The Thing This Week: “You’ve got three critiques so far, each valid in its own way, but overall the post is sound. So thank you for sharing these thoughts.” Jun 13, 09:58
- on 15 Thoughts on The Thing This Week: “There is no interest whatsoever in any form of Christian Nationalism among Church leaders or any member of note. Consider Kai Schwimmer, who I would love to be able to dismiss as a member of no note, but no longer can. Since March, he has been the political director of College Republicans of America and, as of this week, a deputy clerk in the Utah County Clerk’s office with the specific assignment of bringing first-time voters to the polls. He has publicly refuted the notion that “Christian nationalism isn’t Christian” and supports a “one family, one vote” model of voting–in direct contravention of the 19th amendment, which Elders Cook and Christofferson explicitly endorsed in their recent video. Four months ago, he was a member of no note–now, he is gaining influence and making the news on a regular basis. You have been very consistent in sounding the warning up until now. Don’t start dismissing real threats now.” Jun 13, 07:53
- on 15 Thoughts on The Thing This Week: “I think this controversy would land differently if we hadn’t spent most of our history teaching that every other Christian denomination is in a state of apostasy and lacks divine authority. I see the current complaint here as essentially “why won’t you include us” from an institution whose foundational claim is that inclusion in their own community is the only one that ultimately matters. Our recent pivot away from this has not been well received.” Jun 13, 07:44
- on 15 Thoughts on The Thing This Week: “Regarding point 15, you may be right, but I remember seeing some kind of poll showing that an unfortunately high percentage of LDS people in the Trump era endorse views that align with Christian nationalism. There was also “Deseret nationalism”. Not sure if that is still a thing.” Jun 13, 05:44
