Criticism Of Institute Program

[CV75]

As I said, where actions or inaction by the Church leaders/members contributed to a faith crisis that caused severe marital strife. 

Please provide details for a case study.

[ERayR]

All true.

 

Do you believe that as a church (generally, leaders & members) we can do things that help to create and grow faith in individuals?

 

And, is the corollary of that also true... that we can do things that serve to decrease and/or destroy faith?

 

No faith is an individual journey.  The best we can do is share our experiences and hope it helps.  Do we as individuals sometimes mess up in our interpersonal relationships?  Yes we do.  Do we sometimes place our faith in the wrong thing or person?  Yes we do.  Our faith should be in Jesus Christ and not in people or things.  I learned that the hard way just as many do.

[CV75]

It isn't about me.  But it does need to be understood from the perspective of people, not just principles.

 

Do you understand how a faith crisis can be earth shattering for a person?  Have you ever personally witness the impact that it can (and does) have on marriages?

 

If so, can you admit that "the Church" (meaning past and present governing levels of leadership) have represented teachings, history, and doctrine in ways that have now created faith crises for church members?

 

If you can't honestly answer "yes" to those questions, I'm not sure how to help you understand unless you're willing to seriously drop some walls.  I know, for myself, 20 years ago I never would have been able to answer "yes" to that last question.

Yes I understand (by definition and by observation); yes I have witnessed the impact (and also how the marriage impacted the resolution of the faith crisis); and yes about the Church, as a thought experiment entailing an uncharacteristically accusatory perspective, which perspective can only be embraced once the seed of doubt has been planted and nourished and  erosion of faith has begun.  The article addresses this "admission" perspective for those both in crisis and those conducting a thought experiment.

 

But it seems that you may be stuck behind your own walls created by the transformation it took for you to hold such an admission as valid, and as necessary for others to possess understanding. The article can help you with that (and the missionaries!).

[ERayR]

I realize that it is difficult for you to understand the faith crises that I and others have been through.  I don't know how to effectively communicate it here since you seem more interested in defending a particular position (which is, of course, understandable given the nature of these boards).

 

I do not think your experience is unique.  I have had such an experience and most of the people I know or have known in the Church have had such an experience to a greater or lesser degree.  What I and others have done is to center our faith in Christ.

 

When someone offends you its a bummer but how you let it affect you is your choice.  If you come into possession of some information that affects you it is up to you how you let it affect that core faith in Christ.  So yes I think it unreasonable for one to blame the Church or someone else for their faith crisis.  It is you who make the decisions that affect your faith.

[rockpond]

What I and others have done is to center our faith in Christ.

 

As have I.

 

When someone offends you its a bummer but how you let it affect you is your choice.  If you come into possession of some information that affects you it is up to you how you let it affect that core faith in Christ.  So yes I think it unreasonable for one to blame the Church or someone else for their faith crisis.  It is you who make the decisions that affect your faith.

 

I wasn't offended and I take personal responsibility for my choices with respect to my faith crisis.  But the Church controlled much (if not all) of the flow of faith/religious information into my life for the better part of four decades.  They get both credit for all the good that they did and blame where they messed up.

[stemelbow]

No.

Good...'cause that was throwing me off.

I have to admit I'm confused by some of your statements, but it's not a big deal.

You had said, previously, which prompted me to ask more from you, "Everyone must accept responsibility for their own actions. But we can also not ignore the role of faith and the church in our lives. And in doing so, the Church must also accept responsibility for its actions."

I'm still not sure what the church can do about faith crisis and marriages breaking apart. It's going to happen no matter what. I'm not sure what role the Church has and has failed on, on those fronts.

[rockpond]

Yes I understand (by definition and by observation); yes I have witnessed the impact (and also how the marriage impacted the resolution of the faith crisis); and yes about the Church, as a thought experiment entailing an uncharacteristically accusatory perspective, which perspective can only be embraced once the seed of doubt has been planted and nourished and  erosion of faith has begun.  The article addresses this "admission" perspective for those both in crisis and those conducting a thought experiment.

 

But it seems that you may be stuck behind your own walls created by the transformation it took for you to hold such an admission as valid, and as necessary for others to possess understanding. The article can help you with that (and the missionaries!).

 

Your qualified answers (and the fact that you are recommending the missionaries as "help") put us too far apart to really find common ground for a productive discussion in this type of forum (IMO).  Sorry.

 

I don't really have many walls anymore.  And I understand where your coming from quite well since I once believed & felt similarly.

[rockpond]

Good...'cause that was throwing me off.

I have to admit I'm confused by some of your statements, but it's not a big deal.

You had said, previously, which prompted me to ask more from you, "Everyone must accept responsibility for their own actions. But we can also not ignore the role of faith and the church in our lives. And in doing so, the Church must also accept responsibility for its actions."

I'm still not sure what the church can do about faith crisis and marriages breaking apart. It's going to happen no matter what. I'm not sure what role the Church has and has failed on, on those fronts.

 

I don't think there is an easy answer as to what the Church can do about faith crises (and their impact on marriages).  It's gonna take time, work, divine guidance, etc but undo some of the damage and reconstruct the narrative.  But I do believe the Brethren are working on it.  It's a tough job, I don't envy them.  But, I do pray for them.

[Tacenda]

Please provide details for a case study.

I'm a case study, study away. I'll even be so bold to post a pic and name, because I don't even care anymore. Edited December 8, 2014 by Tacenda

[stemelbow]

I don't think there is an easy answer as to what the Church can do about faith crises (and their impact on marriages).  It's gonna take time, work, divine guidance, etc but undo some of the damage and reconstruct the narrative.  But I do believe the Brethren are working on it.  It's a tough job, I don't envy them.  But, I do pray for them.

I guess I'm too ingrained with the notion that I should take responsibility for myself and my issues and not seek to blame another to really buy into it. As I said, no matter what the Church does, people will suffer through faith crises, marriages will be torn apart. Things could change, but the crises will still come, marriages will still break apart. I'm not saying the Church shouldn't try to be helpful when possible, but I am saying I can't in any reasonable sense consider the Church is to be blamed for people's failed marriages, broken up families, and faith crises.

[rockpond]

I guess I'm too ingrained with the notion that I should take responsibility for myself and my issues and not seek to blame another to really buy into it. As I said, no matter what the Church does, people will suffer through faith crises, marriages will be torn apart. Things could change, but the crises will still come, marriages will still break apart. I'm not saying the Church shouldn't try to be helpful when possible, but I am saying I can't in any reasonable sense consider the Church is to be blamed for people's failed marriages, broken up families, and faith crises.

 

So, for example, a church member grows up in the church faithfully attending weekly meetings, seminary, institute, BYU religion classes, serving a mission, holding various teaching & leadership positions.  Then, after building their entire family & social life around the church learns...

 

the details of how polygamy was practiced

 

or

 

that everything prophets taught about blacks was wrong

 

or

 

that JS didn't actually use the plates to translate the B of M

 

or

 

fill in the blank with another issue.

 

This contradiction to what they were taught plunges them into doubt, betrayal, and a loss of faith in the ordained leaders they followed.

 

If the Church free of any responsibility for the situation they created?  Do we only acknowledge the good the Church does and when mistakes are made blame the individuals affected but not the Church leaders collectively?  Is that consistent with agency and how God's plan works?

[Jeanne]

I'm a case study, study away. I'll even be so bold to post a pic and name, because I don't even care anymore.

Me too!  Case #2! Study away.

[CV75]

Your qualified answers (and the fact that you are recommending the missionaries as "help") put us too far apart to really find common ground for a productive discussion in this type of forum (IMO).  Sorry.

 

I don't really have many walls anymore.  And I understand where your coming from quite well since I once believed & felt similarly.

Cop out! LOL --"i used to be like you" LOL

[rockpond]

Cop out! LOL --"i used to be like you" LOL

 

You're right... I don't actually know you well enough to say that I used to have a similar belief structure.  But I can definitely see my previous belief system reading that article you are referencing and thinking "the answers are all there!"

 

As for it being a "cop out", I don't know what you would have me do.  Some things just have to be felt.  How do I communicate ideas to you when you are just going to tell me that I'm wrong?

 

If prophets can teach false doctrine... repeatedly and systematically then how can "principle 2" help to provide answers?

 

If a prophet can contradict the commands in his own revelation and the current Church still defend the practice, then how does one place trust in "principle 2"?

[stemelbow]

So, for example, a church member grows up in the church faithfully attending weekly meetings, seminary, institute, BYU religion classes, serving a mission, holding various teaching & leadership positions.  Then, after building their entire family & social life around the church learns...

the details of how polygamy was practiced

or

that everything prophets taught about blacks was wrong

or

that JS didn't actually use the plates to translate the B of M

or

fill in the blank with another issue.

 

This contradiction to what they were taught plunges them into doubt, betrayal, and a loss of faith in the ordained leaders they followed.

 

If the Church free of any responsibility for the situation they created?  Do we only acknowledge the good the Church does and when mistakes are made blame the individuals affected but not the Church leaders collectively?  Is that consistent with agency and how God's plan works?

But someone could very well be faithful and know the same issues you list for years. On top of that, people plunge into "faith crisis" without even knowing these issues. That tells me,

1. Faith crisis will happen even if members are required to take advanced courses in history and doctrine--and those advanced courses are truly advanced.

2. Crisis of faith is individual and thus subject to many factors and not simply because they weren't told information they later found out.

I'm also to make of this:

1. Marriages will break up in some cases with or without a faith crisis involved.

2. Faith crisis does not necessarily lead to divorce or family problems.

With that said, I'm all for laying cards on the table, letting people decide what to learn for themselves in most cases. I just can't accept that "the Church" is to blame for faith crisis or marriage breakups due to faith crises.

[rockpond]

But someone could very well be faithful and know the same issues you list for years. On top of that, people plunge into "faith crisis" without even knowing these issues. That tells me,

1. Faith crisis will happen even if members are required to take advanced courses in history and doctrine--and those advanced courses are truly advanced.

2. Crisis of faith is individual and thus subject to many factors and not simply because they weren't told information they later found out.

I'm also to make of this:

1. Marriages will break up in some cases with or without a faith crisis involved.

2. Faith crisis does not necessarily lead to divorce or family problems.

With that said, I'm all for laying cards on the table, letting people decide what to learn for themselves in most cases. I just can't accept that "the Church" is to blame for faith crisis or marriage breakups due to faith crises.

 

I agree with your four numbered points.

 

But your logic seems to be that because they are not to blame for ALL faith crises and divorces that they must not hold a portion of blame for ANY faith crises and divorces.  That logic doesn't make sense to me... but let me know if I've missed something.

[CV75]

You're right... I don't actually know you well enough to say that I used to have a similar belief structure.  But I can definitely see my previous belief system reading that article you are referencing and thinking "the answers are all there!"

 

As for it being a "cop out", I don't know what you would have me do.  Some things just have to be felt.  How do I communicate ideas to you when you are just going to tell me that I'm wrong?

 

If prophets can teach false doctrine... repeatedly and systematically then how can "principle 2" help to provide answers?

 

If a prophet can contradict the commands in his own revelation and the current Church still defend the practice, then how does one place trust in "principle 2"?

I answered these questions in #148 and #153. Describe what is it about the answers you do not understand, and I’ll be happy to clarify.

 

Elder Uchtdorf answered them last year: https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/10/come-join-with-us?lang=eng Principle 2 is reflected throughout that talk.

 

“Principle 2” covers your “if” scenarios for those who struggle with it, no matter how convinced they are that they are right. The principle is about faith in God’s knowledge and what He does with it—a theme that has been around a lot longer than the Restored Church. Trading faith for precious convictions, conclusions and hurts has been around just as long, but never was the correct choice to make. Perhaps you haven’t let go of some vestiges of your previous faith crisis.

[rockpond]

I answered these questions in #148 and #153. Describe what is it about the answers you do not understand, and I’ll be happy to clarify.

 

Elder Uchtdorf answered them last year: https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/10/come-join-with-us?lang=eng Principle 2 is reflected throughout that talk.

 

“Principle 2” covers your “if” scenarios for those who struggle with it, no matter how convinced they are that they are right. The principle is about faith in God’s knowledge and what He does with it—a theme that has been around a lot longer than the Restored Church. Trading faith for precious convictions, conclusions and hurts has been around just as long, but never was the correct choice to make. Perhaps you haven’t let go of some vestiges of your previous faith crisis.

 

Ah... I think you may have found the gap between us in this discussion...

 

The faith crises I've been referring to are those where individuals lose their faith in Mormonism and the Restored Church, not necessarily God (though that sometimes happens).

 

Focusing more on God's knowledge and not the knowledge put forward by prophets/apostles was a key part of my faith transition.  But that doesn't play well in Mormon circles.  And when a faith crisis leads one spouse out of the Church (even while maintaining a fervent belief in God) it can create a great deal of tension between that spouse and the one who is still firmly "in" the Church.

[ERayR]

I agree with your four numbered points.

 

But your logic seems to be that because they are not to blame for ALL faith crises and divorces that they must not hold a portion of blame for ANY faith crises and divorces.  That logic doesn't make sense to me... but let me know if I've missed something.

 

Let me try it this way.  Some leaders and some members may produce bad information but how you receive and react to that information is your own responsibility.

[stemelbow]

I agree with your four numbered points.

 

But your logic seems to be that because they are not to blame for ALL faith crises and divorces that they must not hold a portion of blame for ANY faith crises and divorces.  That logic doesn't make sense to me... but let me know if I've missed something.

I'm not sure what you want to blame the Church for concerning any particular faith crises or divorces.

[rockpond]

I'm not sure what you want to blame the Church for concerning any particular faith crises or divorces.

 

I tried to explain that in my reply to you in post #161.

 

Also touched on it in post #164.

[rockpond]

Let me try it this way.  Some leaders and some members may produce bad information but how you receive and react to that information is your own responsibility.

 

Do they bear any responsibility for producing bad information?

[ERayR]

Do they bear any responsibility for producing bad information?

 

If nothing else you are tenacious.  They have no control over your choices.  If you are driving (alone) in the mountains and get lost whose fault is it.

[rockpond]

If nothing else you are tenacious.  They have no control over your choices.  If you are driving (alone) in the mountains and get lost whose fault is it.

 

If a church leader produces bad information, do they bear any responsibility for that?  (Is this an unfair question?)

 

If I'm driving alone and get lost, it's my fault.  But that isn't an accurate analogy.

 

If I'm driving alone but following an incorrect map that was provided by a map-maker claiming that they know the way... I am still responsible for my choice to follow that map but the map-maker is responsible for their false claim and the incorrect map.

[ERayR]

If a church leader produces bad information, do they bear any responsibility for that?  (Is this an unfair question?)

 

If I'm driving alone and get lost, it's my fault.  But that isn't an accurate analogy.

 

If I'm driving alone but following an incorrect map that was provided by a map-maker claiming that they know the way... I am still responsible for my choice to follow that map but the map-maker is responsible for their false claim and the incorrect map.

 

If a Church leader gives you information you should confirm it with personal revelation before turning down a wrong road.  It is called personal responsibility.  If you follow erroneous information and take a wrong road it is your responsibility to make the course correction.  It is easy to blame but seldom productive.  So you affix blame to prophet ______________ or apostle_______________ what have you accomplished?  You still have to correct course.