Can Mormonism enrich itself?

[Sleeping in EQ]

Can Mormonism enrich itself through dialogue with other religions or traditions?

[MikeWaters]

No. I hate the ecumenical movement. It seeks to devalue everything in Mormonism that is unique.

[Indy Coug]

Define "enrich itself". I don't think the meaning of that term is necessarily self-evident.

[Jeff Lebowski]

This question can be interpreted in lots of ways. But I am always embarrassed at how badly we misrepresent the teachings and beliefs of other religions.

[Indy Coug]

There is undoubtedly value in members individually educating themselves on what others believe. The benefits are

1. To identify shared beliefs and values, which might increase our respect of other faiths
2. Dispell false assumptions about another faith's doctrines
3. Derive a deeper appreciation for the richness of LDS theology which possesses more answers than other faiths provide

If what SIEQ means by 'enriching' is a ecumenical process of synthesizing our beliefs with other faiths, then I think that is completely going down the wrong path.

I enjoyed my World Religion class at BYU more than just about any other religion class I took there.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

This question can be interpreted in lots of ways. But I am always embarrassed at how badly we misrepresent the teachings and beliefs of other religions.

Can you give an example? Frankly, I don't recall many (or any) of the 12 or the 70 lecturing on other religions' teachings and beliefs. The closest I can think of was Holland's discussion of the Godhead last year, which I think was generally thought to be an excellent exposition.

And please don't say McConkie and the "great and abominable" Catholics.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Tex

Can you give an example? Frankly, I don't recall many (or any) of the 12 or the 70 lecturing on other religions' teachings and beliefs. The closest I can think of was Holland's discussion of the Godhead last year, which I think was generally thought to be an excellent exposition.

And please don't say McConkie and the "great and abominable" Catholics.

I took Leb's "we" as the masses not the leadership. Nearly every week in Gospel Doctrine someone butchers another religion's doctrine in an attempt to show how we're better.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by jay santos

I took Leb's "we" as the masses not the leadership. Nearly every week in Gospel Doctrine someone butchers another religion's doctrine in an attempt to show how we're better.

Exactly. Drives me nuts.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by jay santos

I took Leb's "we" as the masses not the leadership. Nearly every week in Gospel Doctrine someone butchers another religion's doctrine in an attempt to show how we're better.

I'm trying to figure how you guys seem to corner the market on out of control Gospel Doctrine teachers. I've been in a lot of different wards and just never see the kind of things most of you relate as true experiences.

[Archaea]

I don't gather that is what SEIQ means. It seems he's asking if we can't fully define ourselves, expand our definitions of our theology by comparing, contrasting and examining the beliefs of other faiths. Can we add and augment our understanding of the cosmos?

I'm not certain but, and although I'm not a big fan, one of our instructors enjoys using some of the more obscure CS Lewis passages to hypothesize what possibilities are concerning awareness.

So overall, depending upon usage I believe other faiths can enrich us, but not through the ecumenical process but through the comparative and reflective process.