God does not Micro-manage

There is a common belief in mainstream Mormon culture that once the church was restored, God would never allow his church to stray. This is an interesting idea that I would like to explore in detail with respect to our attitudes toward church leadership and specifically the Church’s chosen strategy regarding Proposition 8 and other anti-gay rights legislation. First of all if we believed this doctrine, we would all be Catholics. If God never allowed his/her church to stray it would have never drifted from the earth and back again in the many incarnations it has had throughout history. But even if we assume that this belief only applies to the post-restoration Church, the argument still troubles me.

In my discussions with Mormons, I have never heard anyone assert that the men who govern this church are perfect. Yet, somehow we believe that in matters of church governance they manage to make perfect decisions, free of cultural or political bias, or personal foibles. In the many, and often dizzyingly circular discussions I have had over prop 8; I have asserted the opinion that the church was tactically amiss in involving itself in opposition to a civil rights campaign, rather than insisting on being a stakeholder in a wider discussion on protecting our religious freedom in whatever legislation was achieved by the gay-rights movement.

Besides, what would be wrong with supporting the right of minority groups to define their marriage-relationships in ways that corresponds to their experience and deeply held convictions (sound familiar)? But as a religious institution that believes in the divinity of male-female marriage relationships, the church could have saved itself a lot of bad press by affirming the rights of others while voicing our strong convictions be protected in any new legislation passed. The point of bringing up an abbreviated version of this argument is that there should be room in Mormonism to voice constructive criticism of Church policy without being labeled unfaithful or apostate. It does not create a crisis of faith for me to assert the error of church leader’s tactics. They are imperfect men in an imperfect world. But somehow, when the church makes statements on a complex political issue such as gay marriage, which merit at least preliminary discussion, thought and debate, our brains shut down and group-think takes over.

Here is another example. I believe that the principle that we are all equal before God is an eternal principle. Therefore it causes me no mental anguish to assert as I often do that the Mormon Church was simply racist for excluding members of African descent from the priesthood. I simply do not believe in a God that would contradict himself and the scriptures so obliviously. But don’t panic, this assertion does not necessarily negate the truthfulness of the Mormon Gospel, the inspired qualities that church leaders attain, or God’s hand in our lives or history. What it does affirm for me is that God allows us, and yes even the church as an institution to learn from our mistakes. The church made a historical mistake that many of that era were guilty of, namely rationalizing a strongly held cultural belief in terms of God’s mysterious will; denying responsibility for our own hurtful behavior. The myriad folk-beliefs that arose around blacks and the priesthood are testament to members and leaders desperate attempts to shift responsibility for a sinful practice to God him/her self.

Both the more distant issue of blacks and the priesthood, and the very current gay-rights movement show that the church is part of a complex world. Learning from our mistakes is an essential part of what it means to be human, indeed it is our privilege. Let us not deny this opportunity to our leaders by assuming that imperfect people can somehow implement perfect policy. God does not micro-manage he lets us stray, fumble, fail, and correct. He trusts us perhaps more than we trust ourselves.

PARECON

US Solidarity Economy Forum

Hey Mormon Workers! I just got back from the US Forum on Solidarity Economy; hosted at the Center for Popular Economics at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. The conference was four days of wonderful talks, tours, and workshops on all the inner workings of the Solidarity Economy Concept. Though an exact definition remains uncomfortably nebulous; everyone can pretty much agree that imagining a more just, compassionate and equitable economy should not be too difficult. A Solidarity Economy seeks to build on the values of cooperation, equity, justice, and compassion and tame the utility maximizing behemoth of Global Capitalism. Though the alternatives were pragmatic, the theoretical critique is sophisticated and has been developed over the past several decades in France, Quebec, and Latin America. The participants represented a broad range of political affiliations, economic ideology, and institutional strategy. Worker-Owned Cooperatives, Community Land Trusts, Credit Unions, and building a strong social and environmental movement were at the forefront of proposed actions and alternatives; but there is much debate about what the endpoint might look like. Can a Solidarity Economy be achieved by reform, and if so, would it take the shape of a repentant form of Capitalism? Or is capitalism so fundamentally flawed that an entirely new economy must be invented to replace the old one through? There was vibrant and passionate discussion about all of these issues and many wonderful current alternatives were articulated and highlighted.
In addition, many members of Hugo Chavez' so-called Bolivarian Revolutionary Socialist Movement were present, highlighting the virtues of what is being called "Socialism for the 21st Century." Despite criticism of Chavez' increasingly heavy political hand, much praise has been given to the government’s efforts to promote worker-owned cooperatives which have received lavish funding under Chavez. Another element of the Chavez model which seems to differ from state socialist models is the concept of “Popular Power” through empowering Communal Councils to participate in municipal budgeting. Participatory budgeting, though not immune form political intrigue and party sectarianism, has allowed Communal Councils (neighborhood size districts of 200-300 families) to apply for federal funding for community-based enterprise and infrastructure projects. However, besides the Venezuelan model of state heavy socialism, there was little in the way of political alternatives proposed. Much praise was given to the above mentioned institutions, Latin American Populism and Social Movements such as Brazil’s Movimento Sem Terra (MST) and the Argentine Recuperated Factory Movement.
The mood at the conference was very optimistic with the recent regime change in the US, and the potential for the economic crisis to shake things loose enough to actually allow some of these proposed institutions to flourish.
Below are some of the resources that I picked up at the conference.
www.berkshares.org Local Currency
www.cdi.coop Cooperative Development Center, MA
www.cdsus.coop –Cooperative Development Services
www.clcr.org –Center for Labor and Community Research
www.commongoodbanks.com –Common Good Banks
www.conservationeconomy.net –Conservation Economy (part of Eco-Trust)
www.coopfund.coop Cooperative Fund of New England
www.coophousing.org –National Association of Housing Cooperatives
www.cooplife.coop –Cooperative Life (New England)
www.cooppower.coop –Coop Power
www.equalexchange.com –Equal Exchange F.T. Co-op
www.ethicalmarkets.com –Ethical Markets
www.fabricasrecuperadas.org.ar –Fabricas Recuperadas Argentina
www.foodfarmsjobs.org Illinois Organic Food Task Force
www.gaiauniveristy.org Gaia University
www.geo.coop –Grassroots Economic Organizing
www.globaljusticecenter.org, www.justiciaglobal.net Center for Global Justice (PAR)
www.greenworker.coop –Green Worker Cooperatives (NYC)
www.highlandercenter.org –Highlander Research and Education Center
www.ica.coop – International Cooperative Alliance
www.jubilee4justice.org –Jubilee Economics Ministries
www.livingeconomies.org –BALLE Business Alliance for local living economies
www.mondragon.mcc.es –Mondragon Cooperative
www.nasco.coop –North American Students of Cooperation
www.natfed.org – National Federation of Community Development Credit Unions
www.ncba.coop –National Cooperative Business Alliance
www.ncdf.coop –North Country Cooperative Development Fund
www.ncfc.org –National Council of Farmer Cooperatives
www.nwcdc.coop –Northwest Cooperative Development Center
www.onthecommons.org The Tomales Bay Institute
www.parecon.org –Participatory Economics
www.populareconomics.org –Center for Popular Economics
www.priven.org Prout Research Institute of Venezuela
www.prout.org
www.proutinstitute.org Prout Institute
www.ripessla.net , www.lux09.lu RIPESS International organization of Social Solidarity Economies
www.sabbatheconomics.org –The Sabbath Economics Collaborative
www.thetake.org –The Take Documentary and resources
www.ussen.org –US Solidarity Economy Network
www.usworker.coop –US Federation of Worker-owned Cooperatives
www.uwcc.wisc.edu –University of Wisconsin Center for Cooperatives
www.valleyworker.org Valley alliance of Worker Cooperatives, MA
www.vclt.org The Valley Community Land Trust Greenfield, MA