Why the insistence on no apology offered?

[_Trevor]

I see uncommon humanity in members who, every day, serve others and each other at the local level. The higher up the food chain I look, the more I see individual egos playing larger and larger parts, less and less service, less and less personal responsibility. The church is not a democracy; it's not even a theocracy. It's a tightly run organization headed by a few families of Mormon royalty with little if any direct communication with the nominal head. Lay the blame for this miserable debacle where it belongs, not where it doesn't.

The church is not God. The church is not the leaders. The church is the body of members, none of which have any power to make changes.

I am sure you are right about the humanity you see in wards. I have seen it too. My words were not designed to be a blanket condemnation of the entire organization. At the same time, the Church is not only its members, it is the whole deal. It is also its past, its present, and its potential futures.

You seem to think I have placed blame where it does not belong. You have misread me. I see the *decision* not to apologize as a wrong committed by the leaders of the LDS Church, or, at the very least, a squandered opportunity to heal old wounds. Still, I think that the members of the LDS Church have a duty to disagree with their leaders when their leaders do something wrong or fail to play the part of moral leaders as they should.

And yet I tend not to feel so negatively toward the average LDS member, since they are conditioned from a young age to consent to just about everything their leaders do and not openly challenge those things they do not agree with. For most of my life I was right there with them. It was not until I got into my graduate education that I really started to imagine disagreeing with the leaders of the LDS Church and not just keeping it to myself forever.

I am pretty comfortable with where I would see the blame resting. I am not comfortable with your interpretation of my words.

[_KimberlyAnn]

The church is absolutely comprised of it's leaders, members, and it's past and present. And the church was partially responsible for the MMM because it was a combination of the actions or words of it's leaders and members which set the whole thing in motion. The Church owes a real apology, though I've come to accept the fact that the Mormon Church will never apologize for anything. To do so would mean it wasn't guided by prophets with a direct line to the God of the universe. God does no wrong and he never apologizes, though He does seem change his mind a lot.

KA

[_harmony]

I see uncommon humanity in members who, every day, serve others and each other at the local level. The higher up the food chain I look, the more I see individual egos playing larger and larger parts, less and less service, less and less personal responsibility. The church is not a democracy; it's not even a theocracy. It's a tightly run organization headed by a few families of Mormon royalty with little if any direct communication with the nominal head. Lay the blame for this miserable debacle where it belongs, not where it doesn't.

The church is not God. The church is not the leaders. The church is the body of members, none of which have any power to make changes.

I am sure you are right about the humanity you see in wards. I have seen it too. My words were not designed to be a blanket condemnation of the entire organization. At the same time, the Church is not only its members, it is the whole deal. It is also its past, its present, and its potential futures.

You seem to think I have placed blame where it does not belong. You have misread me. I see the *decision* not to apologize as a wrong committed by the leaders of the LDS Church, or, at the very least, a squandered opportunity to heal old wounds. Still, I think that the members of the LDS Church have a duty to disagree with their leaders when their leaders do something wrong or fail to play the part of moral leaders as they should.

And yet I tend not to feel so negatively toward the average LDS member, since they are conditioned from a young age to consent to just about everything their leaders do and not openly challenge those things they do not agree with. For most of my life I was right there with them. It was not until I got into my graduate education that I really started to imagine disagreeing with the leaders of the LDS Church and not just keeping it to myself forever.

I am pretty comfortable with where I would see the blame resting. I am not comfortable with your interpretation of my words.

I would tend to agree with you. My point is that the blame lays at the feet of specific people, not "the church". Put the blame where it belongs, not on the shoulders of those who had nothing to do with ancient wrongs.

[_Infymus]

I would tend to agree with you. My point is that the blame lays at the feet of specific people, not "the church". Put the blame where it belongs, not on the shoulders of those who had nothing to do with ancient wrongs.

Ah yes, Harmony wants us to absolve the LDS Corporation of any wrong doing in the MMM, considering that those who are currently alive didn't have anything to do with it.

The LDS Corporation is very much responsible and owes an apology for the MMM. It's 2nd leader in command, one Brigham Young, ordered the MMM. The current corporation while not legally culpable is most assuredly just as guilty for trying so hard to bury it.

[_harmony]

I would tend to agree with you. My point is that the blame lays at the feet of specific people, not "the church". Put the blame where it belongs, not on the shoulders of those who had nothing to do with ancient wrongs.

Ah yes, Harmony wants us to absolve the LDS Corporation of any wrong doing in the MMM, considering that those who are currently alive didn't have anything to do with it.

The LDS Corporation is very much responsible and owes an apology for the MMM. It's 2nd leader in command, one Brigham Young, ordered the MMM. The current corporation while not legally culpable is most assuredly just as guilty for trying so hard to bury it.

*sigh* How you distort what I say, Infymus. Deliberately, I have no doubt.

Perhaps if you knew me better, you'd know how to interpret this sentence: Put the blame where it belongs (on the shoulders of the leaders, both past and present), not on the shoulders of those who had nothing to do with ancient wrongs (the members, both past and present, who had nothing to do with it... and likely knew/know nothing about it).

Chill, Infymus. Your hate is showing, like a black bra under a white dress.

[_Infymus]

Chill, Infymus. Your hate is showing, like a black bra under a white dress.

How did you know what I was... Oh... Nevermind...

[_karl61]

I think Nephi still has a bench warrant from six hundred BC for murder.

[_Trevor]

I would tend to agree with you. My point is that the blame lays at the feet of specific people, not "the church". Put the blame where it belongs, not on the shoulders of those who had nothing to do with ancient wrongs.

I hate to repeat myself, but I guess I need to. I am not talking about ancient wrongs, I am talking about the present decision not to apologize and to emphasize the not apologizing.

I would recommend you visit Main Street Plaza and read Hellmut's discussion of the non-apology. You can navigate there by clicking this link: http://latterdaymainstreet.com/?p=142

The best part is toward the end where he discusses Willy Brandt, a vociferous opponent of Hitler who nonetheless went down on his knees before a Polish war monument in an act of symbolic contrition for the atrocities Germans committed in WWII. This is the way to do it, folks. This is moral leadership.

How much more powerful is an act like Willy Brandt's when compared to the "mistakes were made, but not by me or anyone else above the local screw-up level of church government, and we regret that they screwed up, but we are not responsible" approach.

More later....

[_KimberlyAnn]

Thanks, Trevor, for the link to Hellmut's essay. It was wonderful and I second your recommendation for Harmony to read it, but would expand that recommendation to include everyone. Hellmut hit that one out of the park.

KA

[_Trevor]

Thanks, Trevor, for the link to Hellmut's essay. It was wonderful and I second your recommendation for Harmony to read it, but would expand that recommendation to include everyone. Hellmut hit that one out of the park.

KA

Yup. I am glad that Hellmut added that much needed perspective. In this country it is often more difficult to accept the relationship between a certain identity and the baggage that goes with it. In our culture of hyper-individualism, the notion of group responsibility, especially across time, can seem utterly alien.

Here's the thing: if the persecutions of Mormons in the 19th century still mean something to Mormon identity today, even to those who have no blood relationship with persecuted, then you can bet that the descendants of the MMM victims could feel strongly too--to this day. LDS people hardly think to question the former, but the latter seems a little more difficult for people to understand.

Perhaps its the whole "suffering for your own sins and not Adam's transgression" thing. And surely it would be worse if Mormons believed that their God was punishing them across time because their ancestors screwed things up. But, this is quite different from healing the longstanding hurts that exist between groups. If apologizing on behalf of the group, even if the offense occurred long ago and you did not personally commit the offense, is what it takes to end hatred and bring people together, I'd say it is worth doing.

I would also say that when you participate in a community and experience its benefits and liabilities, to think that you can simply avoid implication in its problems, even problems buried in the far past, is unrealistic. Those problems don't simply disappear when the people who were involved in them directly die. The community needs to find a healthy way of grappling with them. Denying any responsibility for the problem on behalf of the group can constitute a kind of group denial of the reality of the problem. This denial is not healthy for the group.

In my experience as a Mormon, I felt there were far too many of these skeletons, and I began to see how they affected the community in the here and now. Mormons may not have multiple wives or believe that Adam is God, but they live with the effects of these things today. Denying them will not make them go away.