skippy the dead wrote:
But a temple recommend and temple attendance is not required as part of church membership. I think that this gets to the core of part of the discussion that's been going on here. You have essentially stated that members are obligated to believe what the leaders believe as part of sustaining those leaders (although you haven't responded to my request for references on that). However, I have yet to see that the church requires either this, conforming to the WoW (as it is currently defined), or holding a temple recommend in order to be a member of the church. I believe that this is related to the "big tent" theory of membership. The church seems willing to accept members that cover a spectrum of belief and behavior, so long as certain areas (related to sexual restrictions and criminal acts, preaching against church principles, etc) are avoided.
You can read the requirements for being baptized on page 206 of ""Preach My Gospel." There are requirements.
1. Affirm belief in God, the Father, and in Jesus as the Redeemer of the World.
2. Affirm belief in the restoration of the Gospel through Joseph Smith.
3. Affirm belief in the past and present prophets as the Lord's annointed servants.
4. If serious sin has been committed, a person has participated in an abortion, or had a homosexual relationship, their request must be handled by a higher level authority.
5. Committ to living the law of chastity, the Word of Wisdom, the law of tithing, attending Church every week, and serving their fellow man.
6. Committ to following the Savior and keeping the commandments throughout life.
skippy the dead wrote:This is distinct from the upper echelon of church belief and participation, which would be a temple recommend and attendance. You seem to be conflating the two, by suggesting that the only "good" member is one that holds a recommend and marches in lockstep with the leaders. I am suggesting that until the church clears its rolls of all non-temple recommend holding adults, this is a mistaken perception. As illustrated by the church's aggressive baptism methods, it is willing to take virtually all comers.
There is no "upper echelon." All that is required to get a temple recommend is to keep the baptismal covenant. Do you believe that people make those baptismal promises without meaning it?
skippy the dead wrote:Perhaps it goes under the precept of "It is not requisite that a man should run faster than he has strength." But it seems quite harsh to condemn a member's limited participation rather than appreciate that there is some spark there that compels that person to be a member in the first place.
I said it is probably better to keep the person in church at what ever level they wish and hope they will repent and recommitt themselves to keep their baptismal promises.