Struggling Mormons

[phaedrus ut]

When a Mormon is out on a ledge, should we:

A. Try to coax him back in?

B. Yell, "Jump"?

Sorry Consig all I could think about is how poorly timed your choice of metaphor is.

Phaedrus

[Mark Beesley]

When a Mormon is out on a ledge, should we:

A. Try to coax him back in?

B. Yell, "Jump"?

Any thoughts?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

C. Set up the safety net. Oh, sorry, Jesus already did that. Never mind.

[MorningStar]

You're just saying that because I save my comments about Brigham's preemptive-genealogical prowess for Ward Potlucks.

Hahahaha!!!!

[emeliza]

Sorry Consig all I could think about is how poorly timed your choice of metaphor is.

Phaedrus

I so didn't see the connection until this......

[consiglieri]

Sorry Consig all I could think about is how poorly timed your choice of metaphor is.

Phaedrus

Oh, crud!

It took me a second before I realized what you were talking about.

But sometimes I think "bad timing" is my middle name.

Okay, my middle two names.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Doug the Hutt]

I think Zak hit-nail-on-head == love them back. It would be the thing I'd call "True Religion". There's way too little of this in the world generally, and sadly way too little of it even among the LDS people/Jesus' restored church. Most members I talk to have a persecution complex and are just itching to flog some apostate ***. I suppose your #B could be ammended to "Yell 'jump' or wail upon them with a golf ball retriever until they deservingly plummet into Hell for becoming stiff-necked unbelievers!!! *sigh* Seriously though, most of the time the first reaction a true believer has when confronted with a person who shares their doubts of the LDS Church and supplies details is to circle the wagons, take aim and defend against this newly identified ravenous wolf. But I somehow don't think it's what Christ had in mind....unless it IS what he had in mind....I dunno.

It depends. There are struggling members who are respectful and there are struggling members who try to provoke people. We had a friend who was the latter and we dealt with him by loving him, but we also messed with him when he acted like a turd. Example: We invited him to our ward picnic. He was wanting to come over and we said we were going to the picnic and he was welcome to join us. He accepted and everything was pleasant until he saw our friend and ward member from Africa. He said, "Hey, what do you think that guy over there thinks of the Priesthood ban?"

Without missing a beat, I said, "I don't know. Let's ask him."

I yelled, "HEY, ISAAK!"

Our friend panicked and he said, "No no no! I was just kidding!" I said, "Oh, so you DON'T want to know what Isaak thinks of the Priesthood ban?" "No." "Then shut-up!"

Isaak came over to greet us and I said, "This is our friend J. I wanted you to meet him. J, this is Isaak." They shook hands and J realized I wasn't really going to ask him. He was great at ruining a perfectly good evening during which we never brought up religion. He would be leaving at around midnight and bring up a comment out of the blue like, "Brigham Young sure got a lot of (fill in disgusting term for the female anatomy)." I ignored that comment. He had this weird need to sabotage friendships with Mormons and then claim they were judgmental and never talked to him twice.

I had another friend who was struggling with her testimony in a non-obnoxious way. She simply had questions and I answered them the best I could. I have had quite a few friends leave the church, but I continue to be their friend. A lady I visit taught left the church (already had by the time I met her), but we still became great friends. She appreciates how I respect her beliefs. Another friend of mine who is a pretty new convert has stopped going because of the way her lifelong member husband ended up treating her and the way it was handled. She said she didn't know if she would go to her new ward. I gave her the info in case she decided to go and told her I didn't base our friendship on her being a member of the church. I check on her to see if there is anything she needs and she can decide on her own whether she will remain a member. I have friends of other faiths. I don't see why I couldn't be friends with someone who leaves the church and chooses another.

The issue with this board is that we get people who act like they are struggling when they aren't. They have acutally left at least in their hearts and bring up accusations in the name of doubting. It just seems as though they want to bring up controversial subjects so others will doubt. I have more respect for those who openly oppose the church than people who are just playing mind games with members who have good intentions and sincerely want to help.

Morningstar,

I liked your examples and pretty much everything you'd said until the last paragraph -- I personally *am* struggling and bring up accusations the warts & all history to try to gain perspective on the doubts from both sides. Maybe there are some who just want to castigate the LDS church. Maybe some drum up the rest of the story to *make* others doubt. I just want the truth. Do you (or anyone else) have suggestions on how to bring up a controversial subject objectively, or some way to see both sides of the issue without making other people get bumped into Doubt Canyon? Should new MADB protocols include using title tag-lines such as *controversial*, *doubt-invoking* like how people warn of "spoiler alert" for movie reviews? I'll understand if nobody replies. Thx tho.

--D

[zeezrom]

Morningstar,

I liked your examples and pretty much everything you'd said until the last paragraph -- I personally *am* struggling and bring up accusations the warts & all history to try to gain perspective on the doubts from both sides. Maybe there are some who just want to castigate the LDS church. Maybe some drum up the rest of the story to *make* others doubt. I just want the truth. Do you (or anyone else) have suggestions on how to bring up a controversial subject objectively, or some way to see both sides of the issue without making other people get bumped into Doubt Canyon? Should new MADB protocols include using title tag-lines such as *controversial*, *doubt-invoking* like how people warn of "spoiler alert" for movie reviews? I'll understand if nobody replies. Thx tho.

I have a feeling people here consider me more than simply doubting. When I asked some questions, I fully expected everyone to be familiar with the content so I didn't think of it as a way invoke doubt in others. I have not changed my lifestyle in any way to make me want to justify behavior by ensuring the church is wrong. I want to see the good in the church and embrace it. I just take some of my questions very seriously and many of these questions are directly related to Joseph Smith. Others don't seem to have any problem with things that I have a huge problem with. I guess we are just different.

[Avatar4321]

Minister to them

[rodheadlee]

Certainly I would hope answer A. I moved to a new town a couple of years after being baptised. I went to the bishop of my new ward, which I had never been to, with a serious relapse of a drug problem. All the bishop wanted to know was how did I pay for it, did I steal? Come seem me when you're clean. It lead to a serious fall, with grave consequences for my wife and I. 25 years later and we are still picking up some of the pieces. I don't know what I expected him to do, a prayer and a blessing would have been nice. I had no testimony problems I'm just weak in the flesh.

[William Schryver]

Silver Knight:

Help them come back with kindness and charity.

If they are intent on jumping, don't let them pull anyone else off the edge with them.

Wisely spoken.

.

.

.

Dr. Steuss:

I think the first step that might help someone is to acknowledge that there are viable reasons for one to have doubts and struggles. Few pains sting worse than feeling alone, and then having someone make you feel even more alone than you previously were. One day I was feeling particularly persnickety, and I was voicing to my mother how much a certain aspect of the Church bothered me. When she replied

[rodheadlee]

.

.

.

rodheadlee

This saddens me deeply, and I hope that there has been a healing of your soul now that the worst is past. I have, over the course of the past 20 years, spoken and sung at the funerals of a step-father, an uncle, and two younger brothers

[CV75]

When a Mormon is out on a ledge

There are so many types and conditions of being out on a ledge. There are those who know they are on the ledge and those who do not know; those who open up and self-identify as struggling and those who don't; those who want and/or seek help and those who don't. Those who aren't struggling may be on a ledge and not know it. Assuming we are correct in knowing they are struggling (and whether we are struggling or not), we need to behave in such a way that the relationship is open to the influence of the Spirit, and things work out from there. I have been in situations where many concerned people wanted to "intervene" on the individual but I felt inclined to express my confidence to him that he would figure out his concerns without all the fuss, and he did. The best thing we can do is live so as to be close to the Spirit and we will be guided on how best to meet the individual's need. In any event, and however they choose, consistency and accessibility (give them no reason to mistrust or avoid you) is an essential ingredient.

[MorningStar]

I think Zak hit-nail-on-head == love them back. It would be the thing I'd call "True Religion". There's way too little of this in the world generally, and sadly way too little of it even among the LDS people/Jesus' restored church. Most members I talk to have a persecution complex and are just itching to flog some apostate ***. I suppose your #B could be ammended to "Yell 'jump' or wail upon them with a golf ball retriever until they deservingly plummet into Hell for becoming stiff-necked unbelievers!!! *sigh* Seriously though, most of the time the first reaction a true believer has when confronted with a person who shares their doubts of the LDS Church and supplies details is to circle the wagons, take aim and defend against this newly identified ravenous wolf. But I somehow don't think it's what Christ had in mind....unless it IS what he had in mind....I dunno.

Morningstar,

I liked your examples and pretty much everything you'd said until the last paragraph -- I personally *am* struggling and bring up accusations the warts & all history to try to gain perspective on the doubts from both sides. Maybe there are some who just want to castigate the LDS church. Maybe some drum up the rest of the story to *make* others doubt. I just want the truth. Do you (or anyone else) have suggestions on how to bring up a controversial subject objectively, or some way to see both sides of the issue without making other people get bumped into Doubt Canyon? Should new MADB protocols include using title tag-lines such as *controversial*, *doubt-invoking* like how people warn of "spoiler alert" for movie reviews? I'll understand if nobody replies. Thx tho.

--D

I know there are people who are sincerely doubting. The people who pretend they're doubting kind of ruin it for them because it makes others suspicious. I don't mind people bringing up their questions. It's just a bit fishy when they ask a question and you answer it, then it leads to another issue, and another issue, and another issue, and the person is nothing but argumentative, doesn't take plausible explanations into consideration or even thank those who are trying to help, and then it's, "Oh yeah? How do you explain THIS?!" A person who goes into attack mode just doesn't seem like a sincere doubter to me. The thing is, we don't really know what a person is really like online. We don't have the benefit here of looking at a person's face and mannerisms or hearing their tone of voice. I think dealing with our friend online would have been very difficult. There's a lot more you can do to show love when you actually know a person. You're not going to suddenly discover that they were never really Mormon at all, but an Evangelical who is just trying to point out all the flaws in your religion.

[katherine the great]

When a Mormon is out on a ledge, should we:

A. Try to coax him back in?

B. Yell, "Jump"?

--Consiglieri

Do what Mel Gibson did in Lethal Weapon. (and don't tell me you didn't see it because it was rated "R.")

[sleepyhead]

When a Mormon is out on a ledge, should we:

A. Try to coax him back in?

B. Yell, "Jump"?

Any thoughts?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Hello Consig,

I vote for yell jump.

As a catholic, Mormon, and then a part of the 70's Jesus movement, I believed life was a test. Now I believe life is a learning experience. This has made a profound difference in how I relate to the world. I'm happy I jumped.

[Lamanite]

There was a guy in my EQ who started mentioning right in EQ class how Joseph married many women that were quite young and many were kept secret from Emma. (This was the fateful beginnings of my questioning last November.)

If this was the genesis of your apostasy then I would say you never believed enough to even apostatize in the first place.

Quite frankly, I think resolution and reconciliation with polygamous/polyandrous marriages comes easily enough to those who have a testimony. At the very least, intellectual satisfaction can be gained through a serious study of cultural and religious attitudes of the time.

Todd Compton?? Seriously!?!?

Big UP!

Lamanite

[Glenn101]

When a Mormon is out on a ledge, should we:

A. Try to coax him back in?

B. Yell, "Jump"?

Any thoughts?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

I do not subcribe to either A. or B. If a person could be coaxed back in, he/she could also be just well be coaxed back out. Telling them to "love it or leave it" also is not a very Christian act. Providing love and support and urging them to find their answers through their own connecting reconnecting with God is the best way I have come up with. It has not always resulted in the person in question staying wih the church, but it has always left the door open.

Glenn

[handys003]

There seems to be a difference of opinion on this board as to whether A or B is the correct response.

I hope we can discuss this subject without bringing personalities into this.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

There is no discussion about it. This is from the Savior and our theme for Ward Conference this year March 21st.

"Lost Sheep"

Luke 15:

4 What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine ^ain the wilderness, and go after that which is ^blost, until he find it?

Those on the edge you go get. Period end of discussion.

[zeezrom]

If this was the genesis of your apostasy then I would say you never believed enough to even apostatize in the first place.

Thanks!

Do you understand what "beginnings of questioning" means?

[Jeff K.]

Do you?

Lamanite and I aren't exactly intellectual twins of different mothers.... but he is spot on in his statement. The knowledge you highlighted in your post is so well known, so obvious that to say you quesitoned after years and years makes one wonder what you really knew of the Mormon church. It is the equivalent of seeing the sun and saying "I haven't noticed that".

It isn't the beginnings of questioning, rather it is the shallowness of the beginnings that is so strange.

[Jeff K.]

As to choose to leave, we must all choose to leave or stay. I respect those who have lost their testimony but don't try to destroy the testimony of others, like some "renard subtil".

[zeezrom]

Lamanite and I aren't exactly intellectual twins of different mothers.... but he is spot on in his statement. The knowledge you highlighted in your post is so well known, so obvious that to say you quesitoned after years and years makes one wonder what you really knew of the Mormon church. It is the equivalent of seeing the sun and saying "I haven't noticed that".

Really? Joseph's polygamy/polyandry was well known and obvious to you (as obvious as the sun)? Sure I knew he practiced polygamy but that is it. I have not yet met a mormon in real life that found the details as well known or obvious upon finding it out. If a Lutheran found out that Luther gave advice to someone promoting polygamy, they might think, "well, that's okay - he was just a man trying his best to reform." You can allow flaws. But when you have a man like Joseph Smith... What other man on this earth has claimed so much in regards to revelation? Joseph's claimed role makes it much more difficult to allow for flaws. That is why I think so many people struggle with his practice of polygamy or some other aspect of him that paints a different picture than what they grew up believing. And don't think I read ISL and suddenly fell away. I don't consider myself "fallen away". I still love a lot of aspects of LDS and find good here.

[Lamanite]

Really? Joseph's polygamy/polyandry was well known and obvious to you (as obvious as the sun)? Sure I knew he practiced polygamy but that is it. I have not yet met a mormon in real life that found the details as well known or obvious upon finding it out. If a Lutheran found out that Luther gave advice to someone promoting polygamy, they might think, "well, that's okay - he was just a man trying his best to reform." You can allow flaws. But when you have a man like Joseph Smith... What other man on this earth has claimed so much in regards to revelation? Joseph's claimed role makes it much more difficult to allow for flaws. That is why I think so many people struggle with his practice of polygamy or some other aspect of him that paints a different picture than what they grew up believing. And don't think I read ISL and suddenly fell away. I don't consider myself "fallen away". I still love a lot of aspects of LDS and find good here.

I am a convert to the Church and was well informed. Did I learn about it (Polygamy, Polyandry, post manifesto Polygamy et al.) in Sunday School? No. But, I don't think it is the proper role of Sunday School to cover aspects of Mormon History than are no longer relevant to the modern Church. Do you?

Big UP!

Lamanite

[zeezrom]

I am a convert to the Church and was well informed. Did I learn about it (Polygamy, Polyandry, post manifesto Polygamy et al.) in Sunday School? No. But, I don't think it is the proper role of Sunday School to cover aspects of Mormon History than are no longer relevant to the modern Church. Do you?

I would argue relevancy but fear a flame war. From the Lucy Walker thread, I know this will go nowhere because we will never agree.

[Lamanite]

I would argue relevancy but fear a flame war. From the Lucy Walker thread, I know this will go nowhere because we will never agree.

Maybe not so relevant to your situation. But I wonder when do you feel like you should have been told about all this? And if you ever had any type of spiritual witness regarding Josephs calling(s), what do you do with it now that you don't believe?

Big UP!

Lamanite