Jump to content

Chapel Mormons


Tainted_Elements

Recommended Posts

Ive just come across this term from reading another thread and it has intrigued me.

I have realised I was probably a 'chapel' mormon as I had never heard about any of the contraversial things in the church such as the MMM etc etc. Finding out these things really dented my testimony and faith in the church and I still have confused feelings on this now.

So...Why do some people know about these things and others dont?

Why does it bother some people and others accept it?

Why are these things not taught in church? Surely we should have meaningful discussion about the misunderstood and contraversial aspects of the church?

Link to comment

So...Why do some people know about these things and others dont?

Why does it bother some people and others accept it?

Why are these things not taught in church? Surely we should have meaningful discussion about the misunderstood and contraversial aspects of the church?

Because some people don't wait to be spoonfed and actually study on their own as we are encouraged to do.

Because some people understand the records are incomplete and we accept that if the things we know are true are really true than we have to accept some things on faith until our understanding is more complete, or the complete facts are in. MMM for example was a few people who got out of control; it had nothing to do with the church.

Surprise surprise many of these things have been discussed even in the church magazines but it just shows that people don't read them or when they do they pass over those things because at the time they weren't controversial to them and didn't become controversial until they started reading anti-Mormon websites.

Link to comment

Some questions we should all ask ourselves:

How relevant are the "things" you mentioned to salvation?

What is your responsibility in learning on your own rather than expecting it to be handed to you in the chapel?

What is the motivation for learning some things versus others? Do we wish other testimonies to grow or become as "dented" as our own?

How do we discern the clutter of history from the gems?

Finally:

If some of these things "dented" you testimony, then how strong was your testimony in the first place? Is your testimony based on Christ or on the interpretation of church history? I have seen a number of people misinterpret history and put their own spin on it, and other accept such history as fact rather than fact checking and considering all options and alternatives.

Just some things to think about.

Link to comment

Tainted,

I agree with the above posters who responded (Deb and Jeff). Focus on Christ as the Church insists and the rest will fall in order. I do understand the dismay and shock you probably went through, but understand that culture is one thing and the Gospel is another thing. Separate the two and then examine.

We have to understand that all mortals will sin, interpret things wrong, and do many other things that we can all look back on and play Monday morning quarterback. What was best for one situation may make zero sense a day or two later. Remember to see the trees through the forest. The Gospel is basic and contrary to what others think we do have simple basic beliefs.

Link to comment

Ive just come across this term from reading another thread and it has intrigued me.

I have realised I was probably a 'chapel' mormon as I had never heard about any of the contraversial things in the church such as the MMM etc etc. Finding out these things really dented my testimony and faith in the church and I still have confused feelings on this now.

So...Why do some people know about these things and others dont?

Why does it bother some people and others accept it?

Why are these things not taught in church? Surely we should have meaningful discussion about the misunderstood and contraversial aspects of the church?

I reject both terms, chapel mormon and internet mormon. There are mormons who want to learn and expand their understanding of the things around them. There are those that don't, who only seem to be interested in what they can glean on Sundays in classes. These people are usually the same in all aspects of their lives and don't delve into any not very much beyond their day to day lives. It has been my experience that those who want to expand their knowledge are also active in expanding in other areas besides religion. It is also my experience that this extends to people other than LDS.

Its a people thing, not an LDS thing.

Link to comment

Ive just come across this term from reading another thread and it has intrigued me.

I have realised I was probably a 'chapel' mormon as I had never heard about any of the contraversial things in the church such as the MMM etc etc. Finding out these things really dented my testimony and faith in the church and I still have confused feelings on this now.

So...Why do some people know about these things and others dont?

As one of the people who didn't know these things..for me it was because I didn't do as we are taught. Didn't study, apart from scripture reading..for a number of reasons, that felt valid at the time. So it was my fault.

Those who know these things, studied or found out via someone else, or via the internet..ie sometimes by accident, then looked further. The internet opened my eyes.

Why does it bother some people and others accept it?

It probably depends on what they base their testimonies on. God led me to this church, prepared me years in advance. When I met the missionaries, and did what they said, over night stopped drinking, smoking, tea etc. Prayed and had an answer, which I'll never be able to deny.

How many people join a church, because of it's history anyway?

My own children started their testimonies based on their parents..they had to be taught to find their own. The HG witnesses the truth, not history, written by man.

Some history has perplexed me for a short while, but then I figure, it'll sort it's self out, as I search further, as I KNOW the church is what it purports to be. Every bit of troubling history, has soon been found to be false, mis directed, mis quoted or explained to my satisfaction, not that it felt troubling, more of, just not understood (by me).

Why are these things not taught in church?

We are taught what we need, to make it back to our HF. For our benifit, for the benifit of our families etc. What we need for our eternal progress.

Tell me, what church teaches it's history on a Sunday?

A lot is actually taught via the Ensign and our manuels, a lot of which appears to go unseen. People keep saying 'it's hidden'.....yet they can ALL find it. Not hidden very well, then is it?

Surely we should have meaningful discussion about the misunderstood and contraversial aspects of the church?

Why should we?

While I'd love this and would find it fascinating, I can't see how it would, help us get to the Celestial Kingdom. We are taught, what we need to do, how we need to live (charity,love, forgiveness...)

If you want a history lesson, go to Uni.

When we the members are 'doing' what we are taught on a Sunday, then they can stop teaching it.

We are told to study, to ask God, to keep furthering our education....so why do so many members want to be spoon fed and then blame the church, when they are not?

This Church even encourages us to look at, study and appreciate other religions, it has no fear of us studying other religions or even of us getting off our derri

Link to comment

Some people follow politics really closely. Many Americans can't even name the vice president or identify either one of their senators.

Some people can rattle off the batting averages or pass completion stats of their sports heroes. Some don't follow sports at all.

Some people watch soap operas religiously. Some have never watched a single episode.

Some subscribe to People magazine and care very, very deeply about the latest news regarding Brangelina, Jennifer Aniston, and George Clooney. Others couldn't possibly care less.

Some read voraciously about the Civil War. Some, if asked, couldn't put it in the right century.

Link to comment

Some people follow politics really closely. Many Americans can't even name the vice president or identify either one of their senators.

Some people can rattle off the batting averages or pass completion stats of their sports heroes. Some don't follow sports at all.

Some people watch soap operas religiously. Some have never watched a single episode.

Some subscribe to People magazine and care very, very deeply about the latest news regarding Brangelina, Jennifer Aniston, and George Clooney. Others couldn't possibly care less.

Some read voraciously about the Civil War. Some, if asked, couldn't put it in the right century.

Wasn't the war in the 16th century? Thats what I heard.

Link to comment

Ive just come across this term from reading another thread and it has intrigued me.

I have realised I was probably a 'chapel' mormon as I had never heard about any of the contraversial things in the church such as the MMM etc etc. Finding out these things really dented my testimony and faith in the church and I still have confused feelings on this now.

So...Why do some people know about these things and others dont?

Why does it bother some people and others accept it?

Why are these things not taught in church? Surely we should have meaningful discussion about the misunderstood and contraversial aspects of the church?

Well, using your example of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, it's not that it's not taught by the church. I mean, here's a massive article about it on none other than lds.org!!!

http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?locale=0&sourceId=1c234dc029133110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD

It was in the Ensign a couple of years ago. Any mormon that reads the Ensign in depth, should know about the MMM tragedy. And it's probably not the only instance of it being mentioned in such an open place for mormons to read (it's just the only one that I remember from recently).

Some people claim that the church hides this information, but if so, they're not doing a very good job of hiding it if it's on their website!

However, you're very correct in that there is this divide in the church. I see it very much most Sundays. Chapel mormons and Internet mormons see their religion through different eyes. Internet mormons, knowing all the 'dark' facts about Joseph Smith won't be insisting that he's perfect. If you say "The prophet isn't always right" to a chapel mormon, they'll most likely gasp, in utter shock, and reply "You can't say that!", while an Internet mormon will probably nod along. Chapel mormons have no reason to believe Joseph Smith isn't perfect, because they're very rarely told anything bad about him. If you go on the Internet, you have an endless stream of 'bad press' about Joseph Smith put infront of you, so you can't possibly believe he was perfect.

I wouldn't say the church is neccessarily 'divided' because of this, however.

Link to comment

As one of the people who didn't know these things..for me it was because I didn't do as we are taught. Didn't study, apart from scripture reading..for a number of reasons, that felt valid at the time. So it was my fault.

Those who know these things, studied or found out via someone else, or via the internet..ie sometimes by accident, then looked further. The internet opened my eyes.

It probably depends on what they base their testimonies on. God led me to this church, prepared me years in advance. When I met the missionaries, and did what they said, over night stopped drinking, smoking, tea etc. Prayed and had an answer, which I'll never be able to deny.

How many people join a church, because of it's history anyway?

My own children started their testimonies based on their parents..they had to be taught to find their own. The HG witnesses the truth, not history, written by man.

Some history has perplexed me for a short while, but then I figure, it'll sort it's self out, as I search further, as I KNOW the church is what it purports to be. Every bit of troubling history, has soon been found to be false, mis directed, mis quoted or explained to my satisfaction, not that it felt troubling, more of, just not understood (by me).

We are taught what we need, to make it back to our HF. For our benifit, for the benifit of our families etc. What we need for our eternal progress.

Tell me, what church teaches it's history on a Sunday?

A lot is actually taught via the Ensign and our manuels, a lot of which appears to go unseen. People keep saying 'it's hidden'.....yet they can ALL find it. Not hidden very well, then is it?

Why should we?

While I'd love this and would find it fascinating, I can't see how it would, help us get to the Celestial Kingdom. We are taught, what we need to do, how we need to live (charity,love, forgiveness...)

If you want a history lesson, go to Uni.

When we the members are 'doing' what we are taught on a Sunday, then they can stop teaching it.

We are told to study, to ask God, to keep furthering our education....so why do so many members want to be spoon fed and then blame the church, when they are not?

This Church even encourages us to look at, study and appreciate other religions, it has no fear of us studying other religions or even of us getting off our derri

Link to comment

However, you're very correct in that there is this divide in the church. I see it very much most Sundays. Chapel mormons and Internet mormons see their religion through different eyes. Internet mormons, knowing all the 'dark' facts about Joseph Smith won't be insisting that he's perfect. If you say "The prophet isn't always right" to a chapel mormon, they'll most likely gasp, in utter shock, and reply "You can't say that!", while an Internet mormon will probably nod along. Chapel mormons have no reason to believe Joseph Smith isn't perfect, because they're very rarely told anything bad about him. If you go on the Internet, you have an endless stream of 'bad press' about Joseph Smith put infront of you, so you can't possibly believe he was perfect.

I wouldn't say the church is neccessarily 'divided' because of this, however.

I disagree with this. Before the internet I knew that the prophets were not infaliable. I knew that they could even make mistakes as they told us that they were men, men of God. Men make mistaktes. I also knew that a Prophet is only a prophet when acting as such. As Jeff said it isn't a matter if internet vs chapel but of informed or not infomred.

Link to comment

I disagree with this. Before the internet I knew that the prophets were not infaliable. I knew that they could even make mistakes as they told us that they were men, men of God. Men make mistaktes. I also knew that a Prophet is only a prophet when acting as such. As Jeff said it isn't a matter if internet vs chapel but of informed or not infomred.

Perhaps the church should focus on "informing" its members then because the exmormon community is singing a different song then is heard here on this forum, so if it is because they were just "uninformed", then the church could help the sheep before they are lost.

Link to comment

As Jeff said it isn't a matter if internet vs chapel but of informed or not infomred.

To this, I would add that the word "divide" as used in this thread topic is misleading and unhelpful in comprehending reality. It implies a conflict between the informed and the less-informed. Generally, I see no such conflict. Both kinds of Mormons embrace the divinity of the faith and the reality of the Restoration. Those who become informed over process of time, generally see no tension; they go on believing in the divinity of the restored gospel.

Moreover, I see the alleged chapel/Internet dichotomy as being fundamentally fictional. As a Will Rogers said, "Everybody is ignorant only on different subjects."

Link to comment

I disagree with this. Before the internet I knew that the prophets were not infaliable. I knew that they could even make mistakes as they told us that they were men, men of God. Men make mistaktes. I also knew that a Prophet is only a prophet when acting as such. As Jeff said it isn't a matter if internet vs chapel but of informed or not infomred.

Yeah, I guess that's true. There probably are some people like those that I referred to though. It's not the church's fault these people exist, necessarily, it's just people making incorrect presumptions.

This is a huge generalization and exaggeration, but I find chapel mormons deify prophets, and Internet mormons personify prophets. It's not as clear cut as this, obviously.

Link to comment

Perhaps the church should focus on "informing" its members then because the exmormon community is singing a different song then is heard here on this forum, so if it is because they were just "uninformed", then the church could help the sheep before they are lost.

Whaaa? Ex-mormons disagree with us? I am shocked, SHOCKED I say!

:P

No one leaves the Church because they were "uninformed". That's just a convenient excuse.

As has been pointed out, if the Church is trying to hide its history, it's doing a very poor job.

Link to comment

Perhaps the church should focus on "informing" its members then because the exmormon community is singing a different song then is heard here on this forum, so if it is because they were just "uninformed", then the church could help the sheep before they are lost.

The "ex-Mormon community" is all about self-validation. And its credibility is near the bottom of the scale.

Link to comment

Perhaps the church should focus on "informing" its members then because the exmormon community is singing a different song then is heard here on this forum, so if it is because they were just "uninformed", then the church could help the sheep before they are lost.

Informed is a good word, Redifined, I was reading in here somewhere someone was telling posters that our Prophet condons what one called "Illegal Aliens, the other undocumented immigrants, to serve Missions and others to Work in the Temples as Ordinance Workers who came here Illegally, have lived here by obtaining fraudulent Identification and that our Prophet looks the other way and instructs our Church leaders to look away and not to get involved in Immigration enforcement. HUH? I tried to find the thread and paste it here but I couldn't find it. I wasn't aware of this, and perhaps the members aren't likely to be told soon by our Church leader that people who are essentially criminals and Felon's are serving Missions and Temple workers. But now I'm informed. I discussed this with my Home Teacher Sunday.

Link to comment

Perhaps the church should focus on "informing" its members then because the exmormon community is singing a different song then is heard here on this forum, so if it is because they were just "uninformed", then the church could help the sheep before they are lost.

Nope, the exmormon community is mostly made up of people who insist they found out some piece of information, and left. Instead of coming to grips with the idea that they chose to be ignorant they blame the Church for repressing this from them. To back this up, they find a few poor sods in the Church who don't read or study Church history and point a finger at them as proof.

Not sure why this supposedly works with religion while ignorance in other fields is ascribed to a lack of interest, lack of time, or laziness.

Link to comment

Whaaa? Ex-mormons disagree with us? I am shocked, SHOCKED I say!

wink.gif

No one leaves the Church because they were "uninformed". That's just a convenient excuse.

As has been pointed out, if the Church is trying to hide its history, it's doing a very poor job.

I don't think exmormons feel they are uninformed. . . in fact they feel quite the opposite. Now in regards to the church's involvement as to their being informed, I think most would say in the least the church tried to block them from the information, by convincing them that it is all anti propaganda. Being exmormon doesn't make someone automatically inclined to lie about his/her experiences. It is what it is.

Link to comment

Informed is a good word, Redifined, I was reading in here somewhere someone was telling posters that our Prophet condons what one called "Illegal Aliens, the other undocumented immigrants, to serve Missions and others to Work in the Temples as Ordinance Workers who came here Illegally, have lived here by obtaining fraudulent Identification and that our Prophet looks the other way and instructs our Church leaders to look away and not to get involved in Immigration enforcement. HUH? I tried to find the thread and paste it here but I couldn't find it. I wasn't aware of this, and perhaps the members aren't likely to be told soon by our Church leader that people who are essentially criminals and Felon's are serving Missions and Temple workers. But now I'm informed. I discussed this with my Home Teacher Sunday.

I've never even heard about this. I bet this was probably an isolated situation. I wouldn't even know.

Link to comment

Nope, the exmormon community is mostly made up of people who insist they found out some piece of information, and left. Instead of coming to grips with the idea that they chose to be ignorant they blame the Church for repressing this from them. To back this up, they find a few poor sods in the Church who don't read or study Church history and point a finger at them as proof.

Not sure why this supposedly works with religion while ignorance in other fields is ascribed to a lack of interest, lack of time, or laziness.

I feel like you have a very low opinion of exmormons. Might I classify you as anti-exmormon?

Link to comment

I've never even heard about this. I bet this was probably an isolated situation. I wouldn't even know.

Point given-Point taken. It is true, my home teacher confirmed it Sunday night. (I hadn't heard either, as I'm sure millions of member haven't either)

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...