Can anyone start a Mormon congregation?

[_SatanWasSetUp]

It recently occurred to me how strange it was that extended families can't attend the same Mormon congregation if they live in different ward bounderies. This led me to another thought. Can anyone buy a building, call it a Mormon church and have Mormon meetings in it? For example, let's say that I believe the gospel is perfect but the people aren't. I'm not impressed with the local wards and the standard way the church does things. So I buy up a building and send out flyers advertising my church services. Service starts at 10:00 AM on Sundays and ends at 11 AM because I figure one hour is more than enough time. We would teach from the scriptures, have prayer, sing hymns, and sustain the general authorities in Salt Lake City as prophets, BUT we would proclaim our independence from their procedural rules. Basically it would be an independent Mormon congregation, like a franchise model compared to the current corporate model. Do you think it would be successful and members would join the independent congregations, or would the typical TBM be blown away by this concept?

[_Mister Scratch]

It recently occurred to me how strange it was that extended families can't attend the same Mormon congregation if they live in different ward bounderies. This led me to another thought. Can anyone buy a building, call it a Mormon church and have Mormon meetings in it? For example, let's say that I believe the gospel is perfect but the people aren't. I'm not impressed with the standard way the church does things. So I buy up a building and send out flyers advertising my church services. It starts at 10:00 Am and ends at 11 because I figure one hour is more than enough time. We would teach from the scriptures, have prayer, sing hymns, and sustain the general authorities in Salt Lake City as prophets, BUT we would proclaim our independence from their procedural rules. Basically it would be an independent Mormon congregation, like a franchise model compared to the current corporate model. Do you think it would be successful and members would join the independent congregations, or would the typical TBM be blown away by this concept?

I think that the typical TBM would be blown away, and the project would be dismissed as a sign of apostasy. In fact, I would imagine that any member who tried to do such a thing would be promptly hauled into a disciplinary court and either disfellowshipped or ex'ed. The problem with this scenario lies in the fact that the LDS Church is a top-down sort of hierarchy, and thus any tinkering with *any* aspect of the Church is seen as an effrontery to the Brethren. TBMs normally refer to these types of suggestions as "ark steadying."

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

I think they'd sue you quicker than you can say jack robinson.

Would you be sending tithing to SLC or use it for your building expenses?

[Jersey Girl]

TBMs normally refer to these types of suggestions as "ark steadying."

While in other areas of their life they would call it ingenuity.

[_Gazelam]

Arent they already doing this in colorado city?

[_Inconceivable]

Just cause someone slaps a Boeing sticker on an experimental aircraft doesn't make it one.

It just makes it another knock off.


But that's why there are so many AmWays by as many different names - different but same.

[_Jason Bourne]

It recently occurred to me how strange it was that extended families can't attend the same Mormon congregation if they live in different ward bounderies. This led me to another thought. Can anyone buy a building, call it a Mormon church and have Mormon meetings in it? For example, let's say that I believe the gospel is perfect but the people aren't. I'm not impressed with the standard way the church does things. So I buy up a building and send out flyers advertising my church services. It starts at 10:00 Am and ends at 11 because I figure one hour is more than enough time. We would teach from the scriptures, have prayer, sing hymns, and sustain the general authorities in Salt Lake City as prophets, BUT we would proclaim our independence from their procedural rules. Basically it would be an independent Mormon congregation, like a franchise model compared to the current corporate model. Do you think it would be successful and members would join the independent congregations, or would the typical TBM be blown away by this concept?

I think that the typical TBM would be blown away, and the project would be dismissed as a sign of apostasy. In fact, I would imagine that any member who tried to do such a thing would be promptly hauled into a disciplinary court and either disfellowshipped or ex'ed. The problem with this scenario lies in the fact that the LDS Church is a top-down sort of hierarchy, and thus any tinkering with *any* aspect of the Church is seen as an effrontery to the Brethren. TBMs normally refer to these types of suggestions as "ark steadying."

No you could not do it and if you tried and persisted my guess is it would lead to formal Church discipline.

[_Some Schmo]

The church is just like McDonald's. Everything must be the same no matter where you go. Other ways McDonald's and the church are similar:

- Really unhealthful product / it seems palatable, but it isn't really.
- Regular use has been shown to lead to obesity.
- If you tried to survive on it alone, you'd be dead in a couple months.
- Their advertising is misleading.
- They pay their employees nothing.
- The buildings are all pretty much the same, and the seats are too damn hard.
- They target innocent children.
- You really have to wonder where all the money goes.
- The spokesman is a clown.
- The guy who started it was a kroc.

[Guest]

It recently occurred to me how strange it was that extended families can't attend the same Mormon congregation if they live in different ward bounderies. This led me to another thought. Can anyone buy a building, call it a Mormon church and have Mormon meetings in it? For example, let's say that I believe the gospel is perfect but the people aren't. I'm not impressed with the standard way the church does things. So I buy up a building and send out flyers advertising my church services. It starts at 10:00 Am and ends at 11 because I figure one hour is more than enough time. We would teach from the scriptures, have prayer, sing hymns, and sustain the general authorities in Salt Lake City as prophets, BUT we would proclaim our independence from their procedural rules. Basically it would be an independent Mormon congregation, like a franchise model compared to the current corporate model. Do you think it would be successful and members would join the independent congregations, or would the typical TBM be blown away by this concept?

I think that the typical TBM would be blown away, and the project would be dismissed as a sign of apostasy. In fact, I would imagine that any member who tried to do such a thing would be promptly hauled into a disciplinary court and either disfellowshipped or ex'ed. The problem with this scenario lies in the fact that the LDS Church is a top-down sort of hierarchy, and thus any tinkering with *any* aspect of the Church is seen as an effrontery to the Brethren. TBMs normally refer to these types of suggestions as "ark steadying."

No you could not do it and if you tried and persisted my guess is it would lead to formal Church discipline.

But I'm not talking about an apostate splinter group, like in Colorado City. I'm just talking about an independent congregation that taught "official church doctrine." Really, how hard could it be? The church only has a handful of official lessons that it recycles every couple years. If this independent church sustained the leaders in SLC and taught official church doctrine from official church sources what could anyone be disciplined for? The church should encourage people to spread the word even if it meant independent ministers starting up their own congregations. If the fullness of the gospel is contained in the standard works and freely available to the public, why would the church be opposed to people teaching the gospel on their own to their own followers?

Of course I'm playing Devil's advocate, I agree that anyone who did this would be disciplined by the church, but it's interesting to think about what charges the church could bring? Insubordination? Against who? The local leaders? Since the gospel is true but the people are imperfect, anyone should be able to teach the gospel from approved sources. Salt Lake City could refuse to recognize you, but who cares. You can compete with the local wards for members and claim to have better lessons, meeting times, etc. As long as you are following the one and only true gospel as contained in the Standard Works it doesn't matter what the local leaders say because their opinions aren't doctrine. As far as legal issues, I don't see anything illegal about it. The Book of Mormon, Bible, and most of the D&C is in the pulbic domain, so anyone should be able to teach from them in their private church.

Anyway, it's a silly issue, but just something I thought was fun to think about.

[_Jason Bourne]

But I'm not talking about an apostate splinter group, like in Colorado City.

I know.

I'm just talking about an independent congregation that taught "official church doctrine." Really, how hard could it be?

To start a new ward or branch a SP must get approval from the top leadership. One just does not start their own LD congregation.

The church only has a handful of official lessons that it recycles every couple years. If this independent church sustained the leaders in SLC and taught official church doctrine from official church sources what could anyone be disciplined for?

The LDS Church is highly organized and regimented by geography. Wards and branches make up stakes, stakes make up areas. Each ward has a bishop, each stake had an SP and areas have Area Authority Seventies. Each area also has a full time GA that is usually a seventy that is called and an area president and he has two counselors. Then the Twelve supervise area presidents. Leadership is called by those in authority. One of the articles of faith requires that a man be called by revelation by one in authority. One just does not start a congregation on their own. They have no authority to do so. Such a congregation would not be recognized and if a member in good standing started one they would be asked to stop. If not they would be disciplined. One does not call ones self to be a bishop or any calling in the LDS Church.

Of course I'm playing Devil's advocate, I agree that anyone who did this would be disciplined by the church, but it's interesting to think about what charges the church could bring? Insubordination? Against who? The local leaders?

yes

Anyway, it's a silly issue, but just something I thought was fun to think about

This is no different then what independent locally supported evangelical churches do currently.