Isn't It Time We Call Ourselves Out?

[Scott Lloyd]

 

I think it would be cool if someone flipped a switch in the COB and President Monson stood up in conference and said "We're doing great with the vicarious work, and now it's time to work just as hard to help out the living."  Instead of monthly organized Stake Temple trips and an annual day of community service, we would do monthly service projects with an annual organized Stake Temple trip. 

 

Wasn't it President Monson who added "care for the poor and the needy" as one of the elements of the mission of the Church?

 

But it's true he did that without minimizing the work of salvation for the dead. To embrace the restored gospel of Christ is to accept that the work of searching out one's deceased ancestors  and performing vicarious temple ordinances is just as vital to the salvation of mankind as anything done in mortality.

 

But in the overall scheme of things, the things we emphasize in Church week after week do seem kind of...odd when compared to what we read in the New Testament and when we think of what a "christian" lifestyle can mean.

 

If what some regard as "a 'Christian' lifestyle" excludes such elements as salvation for the dead or the championing of the family unit in society, well, perhaps that is because most Christians reject of ignore the latter-day revelation with which members of the Church of Jesus Christ have been blessed.

Edited June 8, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Sleeper Cell]

3- The instructor referred to the Pharisees as being most interested in "outward expressions" of righteousness as a way of proving their "inner committment" to God. The phrasing immediately made me think of the garment statement that's part of the TR interview.

 

Underclothing is an outward expression?

 

I could make a better argument that church attendance is an outward expression of righteousness.  Or serving a mission.  Or doing volunteer work for the Red Cross or your local food bank.  Perhaps I should no longer keep up my training as a volunteer disaster service worker.  After all, far more people see me doing that, than will ever see my underwear. 

[tonie]

Let's stop rising up to condemn others, and get to work. We're all in this together, and we don't really advance the Lord's work by the kind of navel-gazing, judgmental, condemnatory bile you have spewed against your own faith and co-religionists.

Thanks,

-Smac

How many threads and post did you create condemning and passing judgment on Kate Kelly (even before she was excommunicated)?

I would say the OP has raised a very important issue that, we Saints, need to do a lot of self-reflection on.

[smac97]

How many threads and post did you create condemning and passing judgment on Kate Kelly (even before she was excommunicated)?

That would be ... none. I don't think I ever condemned Kate Kelly. And her local leaders adjudicated her conduct as amounting to apostate behavior.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Scott Lloyd]

 

Underclothing is an outward expression?

 

I could make a better argument that church attendance is an outward expression of righteousness.  Or serving a mission.  Or doing volunteer work for the Red Cross or your local food bank.  Perhaps I should no longer keep up my training as a volunteer disaster service worker.  After all, far more people see me doing that, than will ever see my underwear. 

 

 

Indeed.

 

In fact, it's my impression that anti-Mormons, apostates and idle chatterers make a far bigger public deal of "Mormon underwear" than do faithful Mormons who, for the most part, would prefer to keep the matter sacred and private.

 

By the way, Happy Jack Wagon's reconstruction of what the teacher in his class allegedly said about the Jewish phylacteries and garment borders -- which were required under Mosaic law -- being an outward expression of an inner commitment may be an example of making a person (the teacher) an "offender for a word."

 

It appears that what Christ was really condemning was not so much the wearing of the apparel per se as the embellishing and enlarging it far beyond what was required under the law just so they could "be seen of men."

 

Viewed in this light, the comparison to the temple garment seems even less relevant.

Edited June 8, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[why me]

The church has been stressing service for years now. Members are told that they should do charity work and do service toward their fellow human beings. And the church does give much to charity work as an organization. Also, we need to remember that the lds church is a world wide church and as such, it contains many cultures. Most radically different from the american culture of rugged capitalism or self reliance. One cannot make a blanket statement about 'the church'.

[Sleeper Cell]

I don't know that I agree with your points specifically, but I do agree that I'm sometimes mystified by the Church's emphasis on certain things and lack of emphasis on others.  In the last 185 years, the Church has developed into an incredibly organized and efficient "machine", but based on what I hear each week, our efforts seem to be most focused on getting people to home teach each other and go to the Temple to do vicarious work for the dead. 

 

I think it would be cool if someone flipped a switch in the COB and President Monson stood up in conference and said "We're doing great with the vicarious work, and now it's time to work just as hard to help out the living."  Instead of monthly organized Stake Temple trips and an annual day of community service, we would do monthly service projects with an annual organized Stake Temple trip.  The focus of the youth and adult programs would be constant service, with food drives, clothing drives, regular service projects and a continual reminder of the ways in which we can help other people.   What if the Church looked at other specific needs in our communities and attacked them with the same energy and focus that was dedicated to Prop 8 in California? 

 

There have been interesting moves to emphasis service (I thought the Church had set up a website to identify community service opportunities, but I couldn't find it).  And I understand missionaries are spending more time in community service, which is great.  But in the overall scheme of things, the things we emphasize in Church week after week do seem kind of...odd when compared to what we read in the New Testament and when we think of what a "christian" lifestyle can mean.

 

I tend to agree.  But couldn’t we increase our emphasis on community service without reducing our emphasis on home teaching and temple work?  Perhaps we should look at community service as a logical extension of home teaching (helping members) and vicarious temple work (service work for the dead), rather than as a competing goal.  Besides, a greater emphasis on community service might help us to become better home teachers (e.g., having a specific objective for each family, rather than making visits merely for the sake of making visits). 

[Mystery Meat]

IMO, if you measured the Church's charitable work on a per capita basis (active members of the Church) and on the good that actually comes from that service I would bet dollars to donuts that the LDS Church (and its membership) is punching well above its weight class.

Edited June 8, 2015 by Mystery Meat

[HappyJackWagon]

 

Indeed.

 

In fact, it's my impression that anti-Mormons, apostates and idle chatterers make a far bigger public deal of "Mormon underwear" than do faithful Mormons who, for the most part, would prefer to keep the matter sacred and private.

 

By the way, Happy Jack Wagon's reconstruction of what the teacher in his class allegedly said about the Jewish phylacteries and garment borders -- which were required under Mosaic law -- being an outward expression of an inner commitment may be an example of making a person (the teacher) an "offender for a word."

 

It appears that what Christ was really condemning was not so much the wearing of the apparel per se as the embellishing and enlarging it far beyond what was required under the law just so they could "be seen of men."

 

Viewed in this light, the comparison to the temple garment seems even less relevant.

I disagree. As a matter of policy there are many callings that require you to be endowed (thus wearing the appropriate G's). It's an "outward expression of an inner committment to follow the Savior Jesus Christ." This seems like a good comparison to other outward expressions that denote a person's righteousness.

 

We often focus on the outward signs of our worthiness though maybe my alleged interpretation of my instructors exact words is wrong.

[HappyJackWagon]

IMO, if you measured the Church's charitable work on a per capita basis (active members of the Church) and on the good that actually comes from that service I would bet dollars to donuts that the LDS Church (and its membership) is punching well above its weight class.

Maybe. But it's a very insular service for the most part. We serve within our own small little ward community teaching a class or serving in a leadership calling. Frankly, as good as those things are, I doubt the church as a whole does a great job of serving others and donating to charities outside of the church.

 

It makes you wonder if all those hours spent in extra meetings really has the same impact in the world as someone serving in a soup kitchen.

[Gray]

 

I tend to agree.  But couldn’t we increase our emphasis on community service without reducing our emphasis on home teaching and temple work?  Perhaps we should look at community service as a logical extension of home teaching (helping members) and vicarious temple work (service work for the dead), rather than as a competing goal.  Besides, a greater emphasis on community service might help us to become better home teachers (e.g., having a specific objective for each family, rather than making visits merely for the sake of making visits). 

 

 

I think the membership has been stretched thin enough as it is. Something would have to give. 

[stemelbow]

Hmm. Your manner of "call(ing) ourselves out" sounds quite a bit like "calling the Church to repentance." Don't get me wrong, the Church may at times be in need of being called to repentance. But I think it is the responsibility of the Brethren to do so.

 

Yep. You are calling the Church to repentance. That's not our gig, bro.

And I reject your broad premise about the Church being Pharisaical.

 

Feel free to call yourself to repentance. But others over which you have no stewardship . . . that's not your job. Calling the Church in its entirety to repentance and publicly accusing it of being Pharisaical and hypocritical . . . I don't think that's your job, nor do I believe that such meta accusations are warranted.

 

You'll have to explain why you think this way. I'm not sure what you mean by "arbitrarily shutting people out." I'm not seeing much in the way of "arbitrary" conduct in the Church.  The conditions for baptism have been set by God, and are therefore not reasonable defined as "arbitrary."  Qualifications for attending the temple are likewise set by God, and are likewise not arbitrary.  We are expending huge amounts of time, money, resources, and personal service in sending out tens of thousands of missionaries every year to preach the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ (ironically, you manage to find fault with this as well), which is principally designed to invite people into the Kingdom, not "arbitrarily" shut them out of it.  We do not live in isolated communes.  We have instead set up stakes of Zion around the world so as to give as many people as possible an opportunity to join our community of faith.  This hardly sounds like an organization bent on "arbitrarily shutting people out of the kingdom of heaven."  In fact, your accusation is a pernicious falsehood and calumny that deserves to be soundly rejected.

So at present, I'll say "No, this is not us."

 

Somehow, I think you'll only be interested in interpretations which tear down the LDS Church. So I'll decline to participate in a discussion about this. You're asking us to play with a rigged deck.

 

And sincere, heartfelt prayers are also in abundance in the Church. We all have room to improve, of course. But your over-the-top denunciations of the Church in toto are overwrought, unfair and uncharitable.

 

What's this "we," kemosabe? Is it possible that there are many corners of the Lord's vineyard where Church members do reach out and serve widows? And widowers? And divorced persons? Shut-ins? Never-married persons? Families with marital or parenting problems, or with children facing difficulties? Single-parent homes? Lower income families? Individuals with employment problems, or social/mental/emotional challenges?

Are you familiar with the Church's welfare program? Its employment training program? Its Provident Living program? Its social services program? The Perpetual Education Fund? Deseret Industries?  Bishops' storehouses?  Fast offerings?  Home Teaching? Visiting Teaching? The Relief Society? Personal Priesthood Interviews in priesthood quorums? Bishops' interviews and in-home visits? Scouting? The YM/YW programs? Constant themes in over-the-pulpit counsel from the Brethren about serving our fellow man and improving our communities? Ward and stake activities designed specifically to foster communal relations?

The Church has programs and counsel coming out of its ears which are designed to help the Saints help each other. These programs can be, and often are, quite successful. And yet here comes Captain Navel Gazer to publicly castigate the entirety of the LDS Church, call it to repentance, accuse it of being hypocritical and pharisaical, and so on.

 

The mind reels.

 

Then, Mr. Armchair Quarterback, maybe some should consider spending more time serving in and advancing the Church's many programs and adhering to the counsel from the Church's leaders which focus on "substance," and spend a bit less time presuming to publicly judge and condemn the Church in its entirety for just not living up to your lofty expectations.

 

More fault-finding and navel-gazing. Wow! How constructive and helpful this is!

 

You "might" be "stretching" a "little" on this "one?"

Your post exemplifies one of the most pernicious things about faultfinding: You'll always succeed at it.

 

Oh, brother. Then quit navel-gazing and get to work, bro. Go volunteer at DI, or United Way, or the Red Cross. Get your home teaching or visiting teaching done every month. Get to know your neighbors and help those in need. Fulfill your church calling. Take care of your family. Have patience and charity for those around you.  Pray and fast for them.  Go serve in the temple.  Fill your life with good works, faithful works, works of love. And who knows? Such things just might end up making the world a better place, and might be a bit more effective than presuming to publicly judge and condemn the Church in its entirety for just not living up to your lofty expectations.

 

Oh, the irony.

 

Then quit navel-gazing and get to work, bro. There are many, many Latter-day Saints who are doing God's work, and you just publicly accused them, their leaders, their Church of gross sins.  Let's stop rising up to condemn others, and get to work. We're all in this together, and we don't really advance the Lord's work by the kind of navel-gazing, judgmental, condemnatory bile you have spewed against your own faith and co-religionists.

Thanks,

-Smac

Do you really feel like you know me, or something?

I have no idea where you are getting any of this. I don't really feel a desire to try and argue with you about whether your accusations about me are true, because I realize I am weak and my contributions are, or can be, pretty small. But I asked questions here, I gave some anecdotal concerns and fears for explorations purposes. I love the Church and sometimes I fear we are missing the boat, sometimes not so much. Yesterday as we discussed my fears of feeling like we're missing the boat came out again. I might be overly critical, but we're all something. I just want to discuss this stuff.

[stemelbow]

It seems easier to be self-critical as a Latter-day Saint than to look at the institution and say there are some problems, and how can we solve them. Given that approach it's hard to see how the institution itself can be reformed without the president of the church leading that reform. 

 

But, even if we didn't have that cultural barrier to institutional introspection, I think it would still be very difficult to change. This is why people form breakoff groups. But then the new groups slowly turn into the institution they were rebelling against.

I think doing small little things can help implement big changes. I just can't be a top down type person for all things. It seems to me God would be as willing to inspire the least among us to inspire change.

[stemelbow]

I don't think we are very often 'them' though.

 

I mean, we all have those moments.  We are all hypocrites to some extent.  However, I think that the majority of people who go to church are sincere in their desire to follow Christ, care about those around them, and are trying to hunger and thirst after righteousness.  No one who does those things, no matter how flawed, can be compared to pharisees.

 

Do you really think that the majority of your ward members are really has horrible as you have described them, saying prayers to be seen of men, not caring about widows or those in need, etc?

I dont' really have any reason to think the Pharisees weren't much different than what you describe though.

I'm speaking generally which includes far more than individual ward members. I don't think they are horrible at all, and I really doubt I'd see the Pharisees, at least not the majority of them, as horrible at all. Hopefully that last sentence helps explain myself some.

[stemelbow]

The question was put to you.

 

But if you don't have a response, that's cool.

 

For my part, I quite liked his response and agree with him that there is in the OP a lot of blanket condemnation and accusation of gross sins being poured out against people who in the main are trying to do good. And a bad rap against the Church of Jesus Christ as an institution.

So you agree with his condemnation of me, in that I don't do enough? Hmmm...sounds interesting. I'm curious how you guys know so much about me? Just curious.

[stemelbow]

What I saw was not so much "seeing Pharasaical behaviors in the Church" as it was a blanket condemnation of the Church in general. And over-the-top accusation for individual quirks, such as praying too long. I seldom see that done in the Church these days, and even then, it's something I can tolerate and try to curb whatever annoyance I might feel therefrom. The real target of Christ's chastening were those who make a public show of their own righteousness and then neglect weightier matters of the law such as ministering to those in need. I'm not convinced that is always a characteristic these days of those whose public prayers sometimes get a bit long.

 

 Elder Maxwell on one occasion said  that "we are each other's clinical material; the Lord allows us to practice on each other." (Emphasis in original.) I think it good to bear that in mind.

Well truth is, we don't know the mind and will of the Pharisees enough to see the condemnations that were directed at them do not apply to us. The statements themselves seem to fit, at least to some extent. It's a good caution for us to consider--and I'd say that's probably one reason it's in scripture.

Truth is, the Pharisees prayed and were condemned by Jesus. Certainly as with any people who pray they held much sincerity, but were still condemned generally. I'm not really certain why Smac got so upset with me he tried to turn it on me, and why you support that. But, it seems clear, neither of you really think the Church is pharisaic in some sense. And I"ll make note of that.

Sound fair?

[smac97]

So you agree with his condemnation of me, in that I don't do enough?

Rejecting your calumnies against the Church and your co-religionists is a "condemnation" by me of you?

What sort of Orwellian world do you think we live in?

 

-Smac

[stemelbow]

Rejecting your calumnies against the Church and your co-religionists is a "condemnation" by me of you?

What sort of Orwellian world do you think we live in?

 

-Smac

I was thinking more along the lines of your effort to turn this on me as if I don't do enough.

Then, Mr. Armchair Quarterback, maybe some should consider spending more time serving in and advancing the Church's many programs and adhering to the counsel from the Church's leaders which focus on "substance," and spend a bit less time presuming to publicly judge and condemn the Church in its entirety for just not living up to your lofty expectations.

WHy presume to think I don't do enough?

Oh, brother. Then quit navel-gazing and get to work, bro. Go volunteer at DI, or United Way, or the Red Cross. Get your home teaching or visiting teaching done every month. Get to know your neighbors and help those in need. Fulfill your church calling. Take care of your family. Have patience and charity for those around you. Pray and fast for them. Go serve in the temple. Fill your life with good works, faithful works, works of love. And who knows? Such things just might end up making the world a better place, and might be a bit more effective than presuming to publicly judge and condemn the Church in its entirety for just not living up to your lofty expectations.

Why do you say I don't do these things?

Then quit navel-gazing and get to work, bro. There are many, many Latter-day Saints who are doing God's work, and you just publicly accused them, their leaders, their Church of gross sins. Let's stop rising up to condemn others, and get to work. We're all in this together, and we don't really advance the Lord's work by the kind of navel-gazing, judgmental, condemnatory bile you have spewed against your own faith and co-religionists.

I agree, we're in this together. Talking things through is helpful. I gave anecdotal observations to spark discussion here. You gave condemnations of me, a person you presumably don't know.

[smac97]

Do you really feel like you know me, or something?

Nope. I don't know you much at all, except that you have risen up to condemn the Church and call it to repentance, and you did so by making what I think are unfair and uncharitable denunciations of your fellow Saints.

 

I have no idea where you are getting any of this. I don't really feel a desire to try and argue with you about whether your accusations about me are true, because I realize I am weak and my contributions are, or can be, pretty small.

What "accusations" are you talking about?

And how did you, the accuser of your faith and your co-religionists, become a victim?

 

But I asked questions here, I gave some anecdotal concerns and fears for explorations purposes. I love the Church and sometimes I fear we are missing the boat, sometimes not so much.

Holy cow! Do you often "ask questions" and express your love of the Church by issuing public and blanket accusations of it being pharisaical, hypocritical, "arbitrarily shutting people out of the kingdom of heaven," accusing Church members of being "gleeful" about "how many won't make it," and on and on and on?

How silly of me to not recognize all of this as an attempt to lift up and encourage your fellow Saints. Nothing says "I love you" like a public accusation of being a Pharisee and hypocrite!

 

Yesterday as we discussed my fears of feeling like we're missing the boat came out again. I might be overly critical, but we're all something. I just want to discuss this stuff.

Count me out, then. I think such an exercise in public navel-gazing and fault-finding is not a particularly worthwhile exercise.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited June 8, 2015 by smac97

[stemelbow]

Nope. I don't know you much at all, except that you have risen up to condemn the Church and call it to repentance, and you did so by making what I think are unfair and uncharitable denunciations of your fellow Saints.

 

What "accusations" are you talking about?

And how did you, the accuser of your faith and your co-religionists, become a victim?

 

Holy cow! Do you often "ask questions" and express your love of the Church by issuing public and blanket accusations of it being pharisaical, hypocritical, "arbitrarily shutting people out of the kingdom of heaven," accusing Church members of being "gleeful" about "how many won't make it," and on and on and on?

How silly of me to not recognize all of this as an attempt to lift up and encourage your fellow Saints. Nothing says "I love you" like a public accusation of being a Pharisee and hypocrite!

 

Count me out, then. I think such an exercise in public navel-gazing and fault-finding is not a particularly worthwhile exercise.

Thanks,

-Smac

Alrighty then. Have fun.

I feel extra bad for the Pharisees when I read from you. I assume they were somewhat like us--people who try their best and yet, as we all, can be hypocritical.

[Russell C McGregor]

I mean call the Church, meaning us, out for being a Pharisaic org?

Interesting in GD yesterday, no? Assuming everyone is on the same schedule as our ward--Woe unto you,...Hypocrites"

Going to Matthew 23 wherein Christ is said to have condemn the scribes and Pharisees.

Vs 13

The more I sit in Church, the more I discuss with other LDS soteriology, I feel like we're arbitrarily shutting people out of the kingdom of heaven, making it impossible for us to get in, and often, Church members seem gleeful expressing how many won't make it. Is this not us?

Vs 14

Not sure we figured out what was meant by devouring widows' houses, so any insight is appreciated here. Making long showy prayers seems applicable to much of LDS meetings' prayers to me. I fear we forget the widows often, if that holds any meaning here--we get pretty busy in life. We get a little more showy than substance. This seems very applicable to our modern church.

vs 15

If applicable as it seems to me, ouch! We expend a lot of effort to compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and with the attitude we often carry it may be more destructive than helpful, I fear.

vs 16 - 22

Sometimes we seem more concerned with the ornate than the actual object of import. We love our temples and are proud of their beauty, forgetting that it isn't the beauty that is important, it isn't the appearance of being a part of it that is important. I don't know, I might be stretching a little on this one.

vs 23 - 24

I've certainly felt like I myself and my fellow Church goers get caught up in things like tithing, whether we are exactly observant there and forget that weightier matters--judgment, mercy, and faith. I feel on this we strain at a gnat and swallow a camel.

vs 25 - 26

We can certainly seem to worry more about appearing clean for the outside and forget that we are no more clean than others. I have a big concern that this is a big problem that is only growing.

vs 27 - 28

I hate thinking on this because I know of so much personal pain and anguish in the Church. But I think there is plenty applicable here as well. I fear I too am inwardly unclean, full of dead men's bones, but somehow come off trying to appear as righteous.

vs 29 - 39

We wont' see Christ until we can say, "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord". We certainly feel blessed to have our prophets and apostles, but perhaps we still aren't quite getting it. perhaps we're still unable to comprehend that which He needs us to comprehend. Our love for our apostles and prophets has not brought Christ unto us. Not until sometime in the future when change has affected us and we are more apt to feel blessed for those whom the Lord sends.

Some of my thoughts from yesterday. the class, as little as I participated as to not upset, seemed to disagree with me and felt defensive as I asked questions, so I thougth I'd bring it here for discussion.

So Stem: when you pray, do you say, "Lord I thank thee that I am not as other men, and especially that I'm not as pharisaical as those Mormons?"

[Scott Lloyd]

Alrighty then. Have fun.

I feel extra bad for the Pharisees when I read from you. I assume they were somewhat like us--people who try their best and yet, as we all, can be hypocritical.

The fact that the condemnation of the Pharisees came from no less a figure than the Creator and Savior of the world indicates to me that it was warranted.

 

Your condemnation of the latter-day Church of Jesus Christ and its faithful followers I'm not so sure about.

[stemelbow]

I don't know that I agree with your points specifically, but I do agree that I'm sometimes mystified by the Church's emphasis on certain things and lack of emphasis on others.  In the last 185 years, the Church has developed into an incredibly organized and efficient "machine", but based on what I hear each week, our efforts seem to be most focused on getting people to home teach each other and go to the Temple to do vicarious work for the dead. 

 

I think it would be cool if someone flipped a switch in the COB and President Monson stood up in conference and said "We're doing great with the vicarious work, and now it's time to work just as hard to help out the living."  Instead of monthly organized Stake Temple trips and an annual day of community service, we would do monthly service projects with an annual organized Stake Temple trip.  The focus of the youth and adult programs would be constant service, with food drives, clothing drives, regular service projects and a continual reminder of the ways in which we can help other people.   What if the Church looked at other specific needs in our communities and attacked them with the same energy and focus that was dedicated to Prop 8 in California? 

 

There have been interesting moves to emphasis service (I thought the Church had set up a website to identify community service opportunities, but I couldn't find it).  And I understand missionaries are spending more time in community service, which is great.  But in the overall scheme of things, the things we emphasize in Church week after week do seem kind of...odd when compared to what we read in the New Testament and when we think of what a "christian" lifestyle can mean.

Excellent contribution.

[stemelbow]

The fact that the condemnation of the Pharisees came from no less a figure than the Creator and Savior of the world indicates to me that it was warranted.

 

Your condemnation of the latter-day Church of Jesus Christ and its faithful followers I'm not so sure about.

neither am I. I'm not trying to say my ideas expressed here are anything more than an effort to discuss them. Let's just say, in each case, my thoughts are still a work in progress and I'm not at all comfortable elevating my thoughts to an established conclusion.

[stemelbow]

So Stem: when you pray, do you say, "Lord I thank thee that I am not as other men, and especially that I'm not as pharisaical as those Mormons?"

I am a Mormon who recognizes in these condemnations many of my own weaknesses.