Isn't It Time We Call Ourselves Out?

[Teancum]

If anyone actually provided some that would make a nice change from the usual attacks.

In other words there is no legit criticism for you.

[Calm]

 (I thought the Church had set up a website to identify community service opportunities, but I couldn't find it).  

In case someone has not posted it yet...haven't read the whole thread and probably missed some posts as well:

 

http://www.justserve.org/aboutus/

[Russell C McGregor]

Now there is a novel outside the box thinking.

That's right. The fact that it is utterly conventional and almost obligatory thinking for those who identify with a certain "tribal" grouping around here only adds to its novelty and originality!

[Calm]

And that you object to it, and say as much, is great. I appreciate the thoughts. I'd wonder, though, that if Christ felt the need to issue blanket accusations against a group and many of its faithful members and such accusations were necessary to put in scripture, it is not so bad for us to stop and think if our group is worthy of His condemnation. Indeed, I think it ought to be in consideration. I assume many Pharisees, in their day, were good people, good in every way many LDS people are.

Have you studied what the Pharisees actually practiced and why it made sense for Christ to condemn them in that context?

[Calm]

Which makes challenging them very difficult. It was much easier when dealing with antimormons. Do you remember a time when the critics were purged from the board because they became too many? And there needed to be a balance between believers and non believers? I wonder what is the balance now. But it would be difficult to 'purge' lds members who are critics.

Not if they break board rules.  Critics were "purged" not because they were too many, but because those who were purged were too aggressive.  Just as happens when believers are banned.

Edited June 9, 2015 by calmoriah

[ttribe]

That's right. The fact that it is utterly conventional and almost obligatory thinking for those who identify with a certain "tribal" grouping around here only adds to its novelty and originality!

Oh, the irony.

[strappinglad]

I believe that the OP used the pronoun WE when suggesting pharisaical actions. That means he included himself in the criticism. He did paint with a fairly broad brush and got the " physician heal thyself " response. I would have liked to have had a couple of specific examples of how the current members discourage others from joining the church. Personally I have seen non-members reject the church where it is in a majority position because they felt ostracized by the " in crowd " .I doubt there is much of this attitude where LDS are a miniscule percentage of the area. Do WE ( I am asking for it ) look down on the non-members because they drink and smoke and do drugs and do the nasty? Do WE do the same things and yet portray a holier than thou attitude when in the Church environment , thus enabling the title hypocrites?

I had an interesting conversation with a non-member the other day who had lived around Mormons for much of his life and in various communities. He expressed that he saw members fight like dogs with each other but band together to cut out the ' outsider ' when it came to business dealings. He was not interested at all in investigating because of such experiences. Can WE acknowledge the accuracy of these criticisms or do WE reject them out of hand?

[Senator]

Exactly what kind of course and how long should it be undertaken before you would let anyone join the Church?  Based upon your comments I am thinking that maybe we set up universities and when they finish a full doctorate degree, pass a type of board certification, then we allow them to be baptized.  At this point would you allow a person to join or should there be a multiple degree requirement?  Say a degree in psychology, philosophy, and divinity for good measure.  

 

Gosh, I am glad the Savior just taught and baptized him the same day.  Just seems a lot easier and focuses on what is the most important thing - salvation. 

 

Wow, you concocted all that based on my comments?

 

You've either got a vivid imagination, or a chip on your shoulder.

 

Actually, it sounds you've got a little of both.

[Nemesis]

Oh boy! More negativity about the Church! I hope the kinds of people who start threads like this one don't wake-up and realize the only way to realy improve the church is to humbly, quietly and respectfully model the kind of behavior they wish to see in others. My cause is mightily advanced every time church members succumb to the temptation to look outward, condemn others, and tare each other down rather than taking a critical look into their own faulty hearts, courageously seek out what's laking and then make spiritual self-improvement job number one. But I'm very hopeful they won't wake up because it's far too much fun for carnal minds to condemn others instead of surrendering to the will of God and doing the hard work of genuinely repenting of their own sins with broken hearts and contrite spirits. So keep up the good work boys and have yourselves a ball! I'll be seeing you at the windows of the great and spacious building -- and don't be late...

Your pal, The Adversary

This is not conducive to dialogue. You'll be out of the thread for now. Please read the board guidelines.

Nemesis

[why me]

Not if they break board rules.  Critics were "purged" not because they were too many, but because those who were purged were too aggressive.  Just as happens when believers are banned.

 

Of course, memory is always not so dependable. But I thought that I remembered years ago, and I am speaking about 8 years ago or so, when it was made clear that the board is a mormon board and a balance needs to be maintained. Back then, the board was a rugged debate board with critics and members/apologists hammering it out. And of course there was also dialogue. But this was when FAIR owned the site. The rules were different.

 

However, this thread is a good case in point: A lds member starts a thread which is critical of the lds church and a couple defenders attempt to defend the church they belong to. But they are rather outnumbered by the lds members who are critical of the lds church and are forced on the defensive. This is quite usual these days. But there is nothing wrong in that because it is a mormon discussion board. So, as long as there are more lds members who post critical OPs of the church and very few lds members who wish to defend the church, the imbalance will remain. But these are only my reflectiions....I could be wrong.

[Calm]

 a chip on your shoulder.

 

Actually, it sounds you've got a little of both.

I cannot imagine after enduring these threads for years that anyone of us have escaped some sort of chip in some sort of way.  Constant discussion about changing with no actual change....biggest frustration trigger for me.

Edited June 9, 2015 by calmoriah

[Calm]

 A lds member starts a thread which is critical of the lds church and a couple defenders attempt to defend the church they belong to. But they are rather outnumbered by the lds members who are critical of the lds church and are forced on the defensive. 

 

You should go take an actual count to see how accurate your impression is.

[Kaleb Webb]

 

 

The operative word here is "constructive." Criticism that is misdirected, ill-founded, unjustified is not, by definition, constructive.

stemelbow seemed like he was trying to be thoughtful in his OP, but he said it in a way that rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. He might have been a bit naive about what he said, but it seemed like he had good intentions to me. 

[mormonnewb]

Have you studied what the Pharisees actually practiced and why it made sense for Christ to condemn them in that context?

 

From my limited study, it seemed that Christ's biggest complaint against the Pharisees was that they often followed the letter of the Law while ignoring the spirit of the Law.  While I believe that most saints attempt to do both, I think we can all acknowledge ways in which we demand technical compliance with the Law (i.e., no coffee, tea, alcohol or tobacco), while, in some cases, ignoring the spirit of the Law (i.e., consuming copious amounts of Coca-Cola, meat and Ben & Jerry's).

 

In fact, one of the most poignant examples for me involved the great George Romney.  As is pointed out every 27 posts on this board, Brother Romney took part in a civil rights march.  However, Brother Romney never marched with Dr. King and in fact, missed the largest march in Detroit on June 23, 1963 because it fell on a Sunday.  Brother Romney strictly observed the Sabbath, but in doing so, I think he missed out on a great chance to help the Church avoid the "racist" label it would later acquire.  Interestingly, I'm sure that some will jump to the defense of Gov. Romney and let me be clear: It is NOT my intention to defame him in any way (he's my favorite Mormon politician of all-time). That being said, my reading of the NT tells me that Christ would have been at the march.  In fact, my reading of the history of the 20th century tells me that He WAS at that march.

 

Another of Christ's complaints about the Pharisees was that they were quick to condemn Christ for being in the presence of sinners.  The Pharisees very simply didn't smoke, drink or chew or go with Jews that do.  Yet, Christ would actually seek out the sinners and want to be in their presence.  Most notably to me, when Christ saw the Chief tax-collector Zacheus, He did NOT invite Zacheus to dine with Him and the disciples at the home of Mary and Martha (or at the temple pot luck dinner).  Instead, Christ invited Himself over to Zacheus home, which was very likely the first century equivalent of the Bada Bing Club from the Sopranos (oh yeah, the Sopranos was a show on HBO a few years back ... oh yeah, HBO is a cable television network ... oh yeah, television is ... sorry, I couldn't help myself).  I truly believe that Jesus did that because He wanted to reach more than Zacheus, but also his fellow sinners.  Yet, as saints, I suspect that most of us take the opposite approach.  Sure, we're more than happy to invite a sinner to church or to visit us in our homes or come to our ward picnic / trunk-or-treat / etc.  But are we willing to go where the rest of the sinners are?

 

In fairness, I suspect that the answer varies widely from saint to saint.  Some of us are good at following the letter and the spirit.  Others of us struggle on one or more ends of the spectrum.  But if that isn't something that should be discussed on a MORMON discussion board, I'm not sure what should be discussed.

[Teancum]

That's right. The fact that it is utterly conventional and almost obligatory thinking for those who identify with a certain "tribal" grouping around here only adds to its novelty and originality!

Another post ozzing with irony.

Quite funny really.

 

Edited June 9, 2015 by Teancum

[HappyJackWagon]

I wish

 

... every ...

... single ...

... member ...

 

of 

 

... every ...

... single ...

... unit ...

 

in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints could rotate through callings that require us to be in attendance at Ward/Branch Council Meetings.  I am a reasonably sincere, charitable, empathetic human being, yet, until I was in a series of such positions, I had ...

 

... absolutely ...

... no ...

... clue ...

 

either about the depth of needs and challenges faced by my brothers and sisters in the ward (after his first Sunday counseling members as the bishop of his ward, my brother came home and told his wife, "Let's just be grateful for our problems"), nor of the extraordinary lengths both leadership and rank-and-file ward members go to help their brothers and sisters meet their needs and face their challenges.

 

Until someone sees the operation of the ward or branch from that perspective, I don't think one is qualified to pontificate on how pharasaical his brothers and sisters are.

You're acting as if hypocricy and pharasaism is somehow unique to evil people. Of course it is not. It is a natural part of life for all people. It is the natural man lifting himself up higher than another. It is why we judge others harshly. Being pharasaical isn't a sentence to eternal damnation but the awareness of it in our lives is an awakening to the idea that we can be better. If we can't see a need to be better we never will be.

 

BTW- as one who has been in ward and stake council meetings my entire adult life I look at it from that perspective. There is a great deal of wonderful, amazing service done out of compassion and charity for others, but there is also judgement. There is also focus on rules and policies, sometimes placed ahead of the individuals. It isn't an ALL or NOTHING proposition. We can be good and still pharasaical. The pharisees weren't terrible people. They were trying to be devoted to God but they took it too far and became focused on the thick of thin things.

[Senator]

I cannot imagine after enduring these threads for years that anyone of us have escaped some sort of chip in some sort of way.  Constant discussion about changing with no actual change....biggest frustration trigger for me.

True that!

[rodheadlee]

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.

Ok let's discuss. When you say "we" do you mean the 15? The Apostles and the prophets and his counselors ? Or do you mean various members that fit the mold?  Do you include yourself in that mold? The Church is us.I don't go to the Temple because they won't let me in. When you go to the Temple do you go with a broken heart and a contrite spirit? or do go to be seen by your relatives, neighbors and employer? I suppose my heart is not broken enough and my spirit is not contrite enough or they might let me in. None of my relatives, neighbors, friends or employers are in the Church so I don't need to be seen. I do fear dying and facing my ancestors and them asking me why I haven't got their Temple work done. Perhaps you could help? PM me if you want to help me get my Temple work done. If not, no problem. I suppose it's sad that the sum of my Mormon friends are contained in this board and I haven't even met anyone in person. I guess that's because we are constantly in transit. 

 

I used to feel the Church was hypocritical in it's application of the WOW. But after many years of reflection I'm sure it's about obedience to the Lord , to see if I will do what He has asked me to do.

 

I'm off to work so I can't post again until tonight.

[Gray]

Institutional pride is much like personal pride - in that it brooks no criticism. There can be no valid criticism when the ego is at stake! 

 

This is something that affects all of us at a personal level and something that plagues all institutions of every stripe. 

[stemelbow]

I'm not afraid.

 

You are broadcasting calumnies against your own faith and co-religionists to the world.

Pardon me for thinking you're afraid of something. But to conclude what you just did based on this thread seems to indicate fear. But since you're not afraid, I'll wonder why else and where else you got the idea that I'm broadcasting calumnies against my own faith and co-religionists to the world? I'm posting on a message board that has less readers than probably thousands of personal blogs--such a small readership I doubt I know anyone in my personal life who has come across it, and my family extends largely in LDS spheres. This is not broadcasted to the world--not in any sense. It is a tiny little corner of the internet where very few people come to read about and talk about things that are on the minds of some people associated with the LDS Church. I think you're being a tad bit dramatic.

 

You took it upon yourself to "call ourselves out," to publicly accuse the Church in its entirety of being Pharisaic and hypocritical,

I've skimmed some posts ahead and I believe it is HappyJack who pointed out that everyone is and can be pharisaical and hypocritical. To think that the Church is somehow exempt is just silly. I fear it's institutional pride as Gray has suggested.

that the Church is "arbitrarily shutting people out of the kingdom of heaven," that the Church is "making it impossible for us to get in (to the Kingdom of Heaven)" (?!), that the Church neglects widows, that the Church's missionary efforts are profoundly misguided and even "destructive", that the Church improperly venerates temples, that the Church has forgotten "weightier matters--judgment, mercy, and faith," and so on.

In my way of thinking on this, the Church is the people. Now surely there are exceptions to all of this. I'm not trying to put this on the shoulders of the GAs. My context was thinking in terms of things I hear on Sunday, regularly, from those whom I attend Church with and those whom I have attended Church with regularly for many years in many wards.

You said all these things, but you did not mean to give offense?

Come again?

Not personally. I thought self-reflection was a good thing and it seems, just as I can be hypocritical so can other LDS. We can do better and it seems to me, some of the things the Pharisees were condemned for we, meaning at least some of us LDS, can also be guilty of.

 

First, this seems like an attempt to retroactively justify you execrable comparison of the LDS Church to the Pharisees.

Second, the Savior condemned the Pharisees. That merits a separate thread if you like. But I think to characterize them as merely "people trying to do their best" is to wrest the scriptures. I just don't think Jesus was in the habit of condemning people who are "trying to do their best."

Third, if you really believe that the Latter-day Saints really are "trying to do their best," then why the need to "call them out?"

Everyone I've ever met can be both hypocritical and be trying to do their best. We become pretty complex when you realize we are all at any given time many things.  

Nor do I. But that does not justify your condemnations of the Church.

 

I think we do that on an individual level. It is not within our stewardship to call the Church in its entirety to repentance, as you have done. Or to accuse the Church in its entirety of gross sin, as you have done.

If a husband and wife are having marital difficulties, the husband does his marital relationship any favors by betraying his wife's trust and confidence by going online and publishing to the world all of the things he thinks she is doing wrong.

 

That's the job of us to assess ourselves individually. It is not our place to accuse those not within our stewardship of gross moral failings (like comparing the Latter-day Saints to a group complicit in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ).

 

By publicly accusing me (along with the rest of the Church) of being a pharisee and a hypocrite?

Wow. With friends like these...

-Smac

Smac, you could certain be an exception. I'm thinking there are tons of them.

[stemelbow]

It occurs to me that the Church belongs to Jesus Christ; that's why it is called the Church of Jesus Christ.

 

If the Church as a whole is as guilty of wrongdoing as the people to whom Christ directed his severest recorded reproaches, it seems to that we as a people are on the verge of being rejected by Christ. That would be an extremely grave matter.

 

Is that what stemelbow and ttribe really think?

It seems to me Christ chastises those whom He loves. We all need it. Christ doesn't just reject people because they are hypocritical. We're all hypocritical. He doesn't reject us because we can be pharisaic or strictly by the letter of the law. I think you are being rather dramatic on this point, full of dislike for Pharisees whom you don't know. They were, it seems to me, largely like many of my co-religionists, and in many ways much like myself.

[stemelbow]

You honestly believe that the pharisees were sincere people who tried their hardest to do what God wanted them to do?

Most people are sincere people. Why would I assume the Pharisees were any different? They prayed and in so doing, I assume, thought they were doing so sincerely. Many of them were probably very sincere in their prayers. But the whole got condemnation because some, most, or however many were saying long ol' prayers to sound all high and mighty. Now, that seems like a small thing--it happens in the Church all the time, it seems to me. But it was something Christ seemed to think was a problem.

[stemelbow]

Well said.  I think I should have been more circumspect in my remarks.  To that end, I apologize to Stemelbow for my intemperate remarks.

 

Thank you,

 

-Smac

oh thanks. Didn't see this until now.

[stemelbow]

I wish

 

... every ...

... single ...

... member ...

 

of 

 

... every ...

... single ...

... unit ...

 

in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints could rotate through callings that require us to be in attendance at Ward/Branch Council Meetings.  I am a reasonably sincere, charitable, empathetic human being, yet, until I was in a series of such positions, I had ...

 

... absolutely ...

... no ...

... clue ...

 

either about the depth of needs and challenges faced by my brothers and sisters in the ward (after his first Sunday counseling members as the bishop of his ward, my brother came home and told his wife, "Let's just be grateful for our problems"), nor of the extraordinary lengths both leadership and rank-and-file ward members go to help their brothers and sisters meet their needs and face their challenges.

 

Until someone sees the operation of the ward or branch from that perspective, I don't think one is qualified to pontificate on how pharasaical his brothers and sisters are.

Interesting. I guess I'm qualified? Not really sure I am, but it's good to know I am in your view. But as a topic of discussion I think it worthy of my and friends time.

[stemelbow]

We? You got a mouse in your pocket? I got nailed to the cross last week for pointing out that being a pretender is the same thing as being a hypocrite. I posted the exact same verses.

We can all be hypocritical so I'm not sure why people are so upset by someone suggesting as much.