When I compare the Mormon church meetings of my youth in East Lansing, Michigan, with contemporary meetings in Orem, Utah, the differences are depressing. These differences are probably caused by several factors: (1) the locations of the individual wards; (2) point in time each occurred (the experiences are separated by nearly 50 years and the church has evolved); (3) the Mormon church’s correlation program; and (4) perhaps my over idealized images of the past.
I wrote in my father’s autobiography (1998) the following: “Our ward in East Lansing was always filled with very intelligent graduate students. They tended to end up as our Priesthood and Sunday School teachers. Many encouraged freewheeling discussions on a variety of issues ranging from evolution, to nudity in art, to the existence of a devil, to blacks and the priesthood, to polygamy, etc. Discussion was encouraged, and there were few pat answers. They taught us to think about our religion.” Church, at times, was challenging. Today’s overscripted lessons and almost canned dialogue are depressing and, even worse, . . . boring.
I have a feeling that this lack of meaningful discussions — and perhaps candor — at every level within Christianity is, in part, what is driving the Da Vinci Code phenomena, the success of the Passion of the Christ movie, the interest in early Christian groups, the growing enthusiasm for home churching, etc. Some of the issues currently being fueled by the above are:
Christ Married: This issue, elevated by Dan Brown (D.B.), is aparently a threat to Catholic celibacy and fundamentist literalism. But I can see no compelling reason why he couldn’t have been. Once Christ took human form, why is it so hard to believe that he was capable of physical love. In fact that image is very comforting, not threatening.
Biblical Infalibility: Another issue currently being debated is the origin of the New Testament. D.B.’s history may be flawed, but the issue is real. Joseph Smith was right when he stated: “as far as it is translated correctly.” But he could have added, “as far as it was assembled correctly.”
Crucifiction: To me, Mel Gibson’s glimpse of Christ is misguided and, despite noble intensions, his film is little more than a slasher movie. Mel, it’s not the bloodbath that is important. . . it’s the teachings of Christ that are important. And I personally don’t understand the need for an atonement.
Judas Iscariot: According to a recently published gospel, Judas is a hero and not a villian. The case is logical at some level and interesting, but the discussion is little more than an intellectual exercise. But is that bad?
Churches and Clergy: Why spend 75 percent of a church’s budget on a building and clergy? Most church buildings are used only a few hours a week. Couldn’t this investment be put to better use? Do we need a clergy to tell us what to believe? Let’s give a lot more of the budget to more humanitarian outlets.
Forget Priory of Sion, Opus Dei, Merovingians, Knight’s Templar, et al., it’s the discussions of Christianity’s origins and meanings that are driving much of the interest in pop culture phenomena like the Da Vinci Code. We need fewer pat answers and more thoughtful discussion.
