From Mormon Times:
An attorney for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints predicts secularism will be one of the most significant obstacles facing the LDS Church over the coming decade.
William F. Atkin, associate general counsel for the LDS Church, made the prognostication Saturday during an address at the 2010 J. Reuben Clark Law Society Conference on the University of Utah campus.
“When governments become neutral towards religion, we see less and less protection of religion and religious activities,” he said. “Secularism in the world is neutral at best towards religions and hostile at worst. We’re seeing more and more that it is hostile, not just neutral, towards religion.”
In the United States, secularism could result in changing how the tax code treats nonprofit religious organizations.
“We think there’s going to be a tightening now of what kind of entities get tax-exempt status,” Atkin said. “Maybe churches are no longer going to be viewed as such a positive influence in society — therefore (maybe) they’re not going to be granted tax-exempt status.”
Mwahahahaha!* 
*Actually, I don’t have a definite opinion about religion’s tax-exempt status. More generally, I think religions are due many of the legal protections their afforded. Why, then, did I take this article as good news?
Since Mormonism’s inception, its most vocal detractors have been evangelical Christians. This is lamentable, because their arguments against Mormonism are weighed down by religious baggage. You can’t appeal to scientific evidences against Mormonism, for example, when you maintain that the Earth is only 6,000 years old. The pot shouldn’t call the kettle black.
So that the church now recognizes secularism as a growing threat signals what I think is a welcome development: atheists are reclaiming the debate about Mormonism away from evangelicals. And if the church expects that we will make for an easier opponent, it will be sorely disappointed.
Ah, the days when only the strange few “intellectualized” themselves out of the mormon church.
I honestly wonder how much of this stems from a combination of increased information about the foundations of the mormon church, easy-to-access documentation of changes in fundamental doctrine, a rise in secularism AND a trend towards more hands-off religion in terms of lifestyle commitment or affiliation with a particular religion.
As far as the tax-exempt status goes, I’m fine with it, but I’d like to see a ban on religious involvement in politics actually -enforced- instead of just given lip service. If religions wish to remain entirely out of politics I am perfectly happy to let them be tax exempt. However, if they insist on attempting to legislate their version of morality, I think they should not be able to enjoy exemption from taxes. If they think that interfering with the legal process is that important, they need to prove that by paying their share of taxes.
“atheists are reclaiming the debate about Mormonism away from evangelicals.”
Meh. I honestly don’t think most atheists care — atheists not in Utah, that is. I once wondered why Catholics don’t launch the same number of attacks against Mormonism that Evangelical Christians do. To a Catholic, I think the answer would be simple: Who are you guys again?
But as a student of religion, I think secular opposition is precisely what the Mormon church needs right now. It’s moving into a world tradition (according to Jan Shipps, it’s already there) and simply won’t be viewed as credible without it (to the ten of you who just about took a dump in your pants, follow me for a second). Secular opposition may, in fact, be the very bonding agent to other faiths Mormonism seems to be so earnestly seeking. I suppose I don’t need to explain the unifying power of a common enemy to a blog full of atheists, but I’m personally sold on its extraordinary power. Prop. 8 seems to validate this view. Varied religious viewpoints working together and fighting side by side. The chasm that exists between secularists and religionists on social issues is going to explode in the next ten years, and the utility of having a little brother with deep pockets won’t be lost on my evangelical friends. To be sure the “internal” opposition will never subside entirely, but the increase in secular attacks would take the conversation in a new and exciting direction. The Catholic ambassador who presented at BYU last week spoke of, among other things, religious unity and finding commonality. If this can’t be achieved via religious positioning, perhaps a good old fashioned fox hunt will do the trick.
If I’m running the Mormon church, I’m all for this one. But again, that’s just me.
Yeah, good points all. But when I said that atheists wouldn’t make “easy opponents,” I meant that their arguments would be harder to deal with. This may be because many Mormons (well, many of the Mormons I know) are more sympathetic to atheism than evangelical Christianity. I often hear things like, “If Mormonism isn’t true, no religion is.” But maybe these sympathies will erode, as atheism/secularism is increasingly identified as a threat by the church.
All good points. I think the church will continue to grow, but its relevance will slip with time. Kind of like an American version of the Catholic church.
But this article makes it seem like the church is actually SEEKING an enemy, as if to suggest that they’re bored of their usual enemies.
But whatever – the Morg will always be happy to have an enemy to vilify.
Um, why is the gov’t being ‘neutral’ to religion a bad thing? Should the not be neutral? What am I missing here?
Churches like gov’t neutral on religion when their particular religion is in the minority in that nation and they think they might suffer from a gov that promotes an opposing religion. They like gov’t pro-religion when their religion is in the majority.