Word on the street is that at a recent meeting with some members of the Quorum of the Twelve, BYU professor Robert Millet was told by Elder Bednar that he must cease his participation in the interfaith roadshows that he and Greg Johnson of Standing Together have been conducting on a regular basis for the last several years. Apparently some of the Brethren were concerned that Dr. Millet might be seen as an official spokesperson for the Church.
From what I understand, the end of the roadshows puts Johnson in an especially tough spot, since this has been his primary ministry for some time now. Granted, the end of the roadshows doesn't mean the end of interfaith dialogue in general, and I'm sure that both Millet and Johnson will find other venues to carry on their work. But it's still sad to see such an important and visible symbol of interfaith cooperation come to an end.
10 comments:
This kind of rumor has come and gone in various forms, so I'm cautious over it.
I will say this: the Mormon neo-orthodoxy movement sure seems to be fostering a flippant attitude toward Mormon leadership (in favor of a kind of Mormon sola or prima scriptura approach). I doubt the brethren like that.
I heard this from someone who was directly involved, so I don't doubt the accuracy.
We just can't allow God's one true church to be mingling with false faiths right?
Any idea why Bednar specifically had a problem with it? What about Monson, Uchtdorf and Eyring?
My guess is that Packer was the major mover behind this. I was a little surprised that Elder Holland would let this happen, though.
Have you ever noticed that a lot of pro-mormon websites (even blogs) have a disclaimer on them saying that they are not official? It seems like a very big deal.
That makes sense.
There needs to be some sort of age that these guys get released instead of allowing them to remain in their positions until they die. Some of them seem to get a little loopy as they get close to the end.
That's a shame. I think both men did a great service for the public by modeling respectful discourse.
Indeed they did!
Is there a particular reason that anything unpleasant in LDS policy is automatically attributed to Boyd K. Packer?
I said "my guess", but actually the supposition of Elder Packer's involvement came from my source. I'm not really in a position to know one way or another, but I assume my source's guess is a fairly educated one.
But fair enough. Packer has perhaps unjustly become something of the liberal bogeyman of the Q12. I'm sure there must be more than one right-field conservative enforcer in the quorum. ;-)
Post a Comment