Joanna Brooks (Mormon Girl) put up a post over at Mormon Matters a few days ago where she linked to the daily Gallup tracking poll summary for all of 2009 (published on January 10, 2010. The link is “http://www.gallup.com/poll/125021/mormons-conservative-major-religious-group.aspx” if you’d like to read the whole Gallup piece on the religious/political party/political philosophy of various religious classifications.

It has some surprises about how the political spectrum breaks down by religions, but probably demonstrates much about why America is a center-right country.

I took the data in the first Gallup table and computed a “net conservative %” score by ignoring the self-identified moderates among the 7 religious classifications listed by Gallup. The results:

Mormons +41%
Protestants +30%
Catholics +20%
Islam -7%
Non-Abrahamic Faiths -19%
Non-Religious -21%
Jedaism -23%

American Chrisitianity is mainstream America, and American Christianity self-identifies as much more conservative than liberal.

Interestingly, American Jews are more liberal than any other faith groups, and Islam lies at the middle of the spectrum. Although Mormons are the most conservative major religion (i.e., large enough to show up even in the large Gallup aggregated data) they are more like the other Christians than the other Christians are like any non-Christian group.

I suppose it’s a matter of defining the label of Western conservatives, but I think that Western religious conservatives, with their notions of the afterlife, salvation, Christology, scripture, are far more aligned with the Community of Christ now, than when we were touting communal living, Book of Mormon, multi-tierd glories, etc.

As our theology becomes more “mainstream” I believe that mainstream reflects more of the Western conservative theology.

Your choice is certainly understandable to me. I would disagree only with the phrase “becoming” more aligned with Western conservatives. To me it seems less aligned with Western conservatives than at any point in its history, though perhaps more conservative when Western and third world conservatives are added together.

You’ve said things from time to time that suggest your early church experiences were outside America. Is that so? If so, you may be experiencing deep surprised at how conservative a country America actually is compared to Canada or Western Europe, for example.

Good or bad, Americans are majority-conservative.

And does God think that Christianity is the only important part of His community, when Christianity might be less than 1/3 of the planetary population (with a generous definition of being involved in Christianity)?

If we think God’s work centers in us, we ought to be able to give reasons. What does this denomination offer the planetary civilization that will become Zion? After all, we were formed from people who LEFT other denominations in the first place. Those denominations could (and probably DID) also argue that people should stay in the denominations despite their differences.

We need to constantly check ourselves to be sure we are focused on Christ, not denomination, in order to build the Kingdom.

I appreciate that unity in diversity is not that we all think the same. It is, as you say, valuing one another because of our difference, not in spite of them. I feel the Community of Christ is not a place where that occurs, at least not at the policy level where it counts. This is one of the basic tenants, for me, that drives me to seek out a faith community that does value diversity for diversity’s sake.

Spouses don’t, and shouldn’t always agree and always get along, however, they should have common goals, common basic understandings on important issues. At the same time, we shouldn’t believe our personal relationship, family, way of living, is the ideal. That other families live in our community and, while different and in some cases at odds, are of equal worth and value.

Similarly, a denomination, while necessarily having conflict and struggles, should also support and encourage its membership, and have a common mission and basic beliefs. If it does not, for whatever reason, then the individual should find a new denomination rather than trying to squeeze into a bad fit – just as I believe one needs to get out of an abusive relationship, or one that does not nurture both participants.

Personally, I have moved on (or am in the process of moving on) from the Community of Christ, as I see it as a denomination, becoming far more aligned with “western conservatives”. While I am ok with differences, the notions that God is “against” certain things and “for” certain things and we need to react to that by rejecting/excluding some and elevating others, is so contrary to my understanding of the Gospel message, that the relationship has become irreconcilable.

What was difficult was achieving the recognition that Zion is not made up of one denomination, all believing alike, but of many people, in many denominations, following their own faith paths in peace.

It has helped me, because I am less invested in what the “church” does. If the Community of Christ opens itself to LGBT and rejects the remnants of the “one-true-church” theology, then I will rejoice. If it does not, then it will still be a haven for those who share that theological structure, wrong as I believe it is.

Fortunately, there are others with whom we may align ourselves that can feed us as we need to be fed. And that’s ok.

I think that you are on to something with the notion of the changing church as the New Testament of the RLDS, but I would invite you to consider it in the context of the New Testament of the Restoration. There are many from outside our denomination who are also the “beloved children of the Restoration” to whom the closing portions of the Proposed Section 164 can truthfully be addressed by a loving God.