thatjimguy Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 From Shawn McCraney, to Ordain Women, and now Humanistic Mormonism, I've looked at people that have problems with the church....at least at first glance it seems they have a problem with the church. I get the feeling sometimes, it isn't really the church they have a problem with. I would say it is LDS society they are really mad at. I just feel it in their words sometimes. They just seem to say the church has oppressed or insulted them, when I think it may be the members that may have done so, and in turn, caused these backlashes. But I'm a convert and even then, a Pennsylvania one, I know little about hardcore LDS society. So, I'm interested to hear if how close you folks think I am to the mark on this.
tagriffy Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 You may be right, but teasing out and distinguishing "LDS Church" and "LDS society" is a difficult task. Insofar as the LDS Church undergirds and justifies what LDS society does, you may be making a distinction without a difference. 2
Popular Post Boanerges Posted July 27, 2015 Popular Post Posted July 27, 2015 I think you might be right. I would use the term culture as opposed to society, but that is admittedly semantics. While I wouldn't consider myself a dissenter (I am an active TR holder with a leadership calling), I do have some issues with church culture as opposed to "the church." What exactly "the church" is is hard to explain or decipher for some. I personally see the church as the institution and its doctrine and teachings as given by the upper leadership. Modern era teachings (those of the current First Presidency, Quorum of the Twelve especially) do seem to diverge somewhat from the culture. For example, the current handbook says about administering the sacrament: Ties and white shirts are recommended because they add to the dignity of the ordinance. However, they should not be required as a mandatory prerequisite for a priesthood holder to participate. Nor should it be required that all be alike in dress and appearance. However, there are many members who would insist upon a white shirt and tie and may be judgmental of those who participate lacking such attire. It's a cultural expectation, not a commandment. There are many, many other examples. The gospel is simple and the leaders of the church do teach the gospel (and often testily of its simplicity). Members tend to complicate things. So while I am not a dissenter, I do live the gospel in my way and allow others the same privilege and respect. For what it's worth, I do almost always wear a white shirt - but because I like white shirts and choose to do so, not because of anyone else's expectation or because I think it is doctrine. (I am also a convert, originally from Pennsylvania and currently reside in a rural area of the northeast.) 5
HappyJackWagon Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 You're right that many struggles are with culture and not the church per se. But culture begins somewhere, often at the top, especially when it's an authoritarian, heirarchical structure. So in short, we can generally find reason to blame the culture, blame the church, or blame ourselves. There's plenty of blame to go around if we're looking to make it a blame game. 1
Popular Post jkwilliams Posted July 27, 2015 Popular Post Posted July 27, 2015 You're right that many struggles are with culture and not the church per se. But culture begins somewhere, often at the top, especially when it's an authoritarian, heirarchical structure. So in short, we can generally find reason to blame the culture, blame the church, or blame ourselves. There's plenty of blame to go around if we're looking to make it a blame game. In my experience, people join the LDS church for all kinds of reasons, and people leave for just as many various reasons. It's always best to let people tell you for themselves why they have made certain decisions. 6
Thinking Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 I get the feeling sometimes, it isn't really the church they have a problem with. I would say it is LDS society they are really mad at. I just feel it in their words sometimes. They just seem to say the church has oppressed or insulted them, when I think it may be the members that may have done so, and in turn, caused these backlashes. I think you're focusing on one stage of the disaffection of many members. Many members still attend LDS services for a while after they have stopped believing. It's not enjoyable to endure what seems like endless meetings when you don't believe, so some complain on internet forums about the meetings or activities that they don't want to attend anymore. While it may seem like the reason they stopped attending, their perceived animosity toward LDS society is really a symptom and not the cause of their disaffection. 2
HappyJackWagon Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 I think you're focusing on one stage of the disaffection of many members. Many members still attend LDS services for a while after they have stopped believing. It's not enjoyable to endure what seems like endless meetings when you don't believe, so some complain on internet forums about the meetings or activities that they don't want to attend anymore. While it may seem like the reason they stopped attending, their perceived animosity toward LDS society is really a symptom and not the cause of their disaffection.The focus of our meetings yesterday was Enduring to the end. I had a few thoughts about it. 1- "Enduring" seems to be a very negative term for a life that is supposed to bring us joy2- "Enduring" seems to be accurate for many who are disaffected but still attend regularly3- "Enduring" to the "end" is inevitable. "Enduring" is not the operative word. "End" is. Whatever that end may be.
KevinG Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 We don't endure the gospel, but we do endure the inevitable opposition and mortal frailty that comes with proceeding towards what will bring us joy. 3
bluebell Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 We don't endure the gospel, but we do endure the inevitable opposition and mortal frailty that comes with proceeding towards what will bring us joy. And more importantly, without enduring, the changes that we are trying to make to cause us to be more like Christ-to "learn heaven" as Brad Wilcox describes it"-will not be deep and lasting changes if we don't endure in living the kind of life that brings them about. They will be surface level only. 3
Mars Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 few things in life worth doing or having come easily. 1
KevinG Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 few things in life worth doing or having come easily. That may be a hard lesson for the "everyone gets a trophy" generation. 1
jkwilliams Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 That may be a hard lesson for the "everyone gets a trophy" generation. I agree with this more than you think. The hardest thing I ever did was leave the church, but it was worth it. 1
KevinG Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 I agree with this more than you think. The hardest thing I ever did was leave the church, but it was worth it. Integrity is not easy. Doing things that are against the grain of our culture even more difficult. I may disagree with your conclusions about the LDS claims on truth, but I acknowledge your conversion must have been difficult. My mother cried when I told her I was leaving the Methodists to become a Mormon. 2
jkwilliams Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 Integrity is not easy. Doing things that are against the grain of our culture even more difficult. I may disagree with your conclusions about the LDS claims on truth, but I acknowledge your conversion must have been difficult. My mother cried when I told her I was leaving the Methodists to become a Mormon. I would imagine you have no regrets, either. I admire your integrity. It is often much more difficult to do the right thing than otherwise. 1
Mormonmaniac Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 From Shawn McCraney, to Ordain Women, and now Humanistic Mormonism, I've looked at people that have problems with the church....at least at first glance it seems they have a problem with the church. I get the feeling sometimes, it isn't really the church they have a problem with. I would say it is LDS society they are really mad at. I just feel it in their words sometimes. They just seem to say the church has oppressed or insulted them, when I think it may be the members that may have done so, and in turn, caused these backlashes. But I'm a convert and even then, a Pennsylvania one, I know little about hardcore LDS society. So, I'm interested to hear if how close you folks think I am to the mark on this. I know a few people who have left the church and while members were treated like gold and had great fellowship. On little thing set them off and the next thing you know they hate everything about the church and blame the church for everything. That is usually the case.
jkwilliams Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 I know a few people who have left the church and while members were treated like gold and had great fellowship. Onlittle thing set them off and the next thing you know they hate everything about the church and blame the church for everything. That is usually the case. Yep, people who leave the church usually do so for exactly the same reasons and behave exactly the same once they're out. 1
BookofMormonLuvr Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 (edited) For me it is the opposite, I love LDS culture- I tell people all the time it would be easier to go back to being Mormon, then to deal with all the infighting, lack of programs/activities, etc... in the orthodox RLDS Movement- it is some of the LDS doctrines I have an issue with. Though my personal theology is beginning to fit somewhere between the two, and outside of the two at the same time. Edited July 27, 2015 by BookofMormonLuvr 1
cinepro Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 From Shawn McCraney, to Ordain Women, and now Humanistic Mormonism, I've looked at people that have problems with the church....at least at first glance it seems they have a problem with the church. I get the feeling sometimes, it isn't really the church they have a problem with. I would say it is LDS society they are really mad at. I just feel it in their words sometimes. They just seem to say the church has oppressed or insulted them, when I think it may be the members that may have done so, and in turn, caused these backlashes. But I'm a convert and even then, a Pennsylvania one, I know little about hardcore LDS society. So, I'm interested to hear if how close you folks think I am to the mark on this. That might be true for some, but you also would have people who stay because of the "culture". So I would bet it evens out in the end. 1
KevinG Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 It is much easier to disappear quietly from a religion when you live in the "mission field". It is harder when every neighbor, family member, and friend expect to see you in the pews on Sunday. This does not excuse bad behavior, or the inability to stop criticizing your former faith; but it does explain why it is difficult to just quietly leave when you are in the population center of your religion.
why me Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 (edited) From Shawn McCraney, to Ordain Women, and now Humanistic Mormonism, I've looked at people that have problems with the church....at least at first glance it seems they have a problem with the church. I get the feeling sometimes, it isn't really the church they have a problem with. I would say it is LDS society they are really mad at. I just feel it in their words sometimes. They just seem to say the church has oppressed or insulted them, when I think it may be the members that may have done so, and in turn, caused these backlashes. But I'm a convert and even then, a Pennsylvania one, I know little about hardcore LDS society. So, I'm interested to hear if how close you folks think I am to the mark on this.I think that when people leave publically they are more or less making a fashion statement and by doing so, they wish to be noticed. I would bet a penny that when they were members they enjoyed the community and they loved the church. They stood up at testimony meeting and gave their testimony, telling about their spirtual experiences with god and with the holy ghost. And then they find themselves on the way out, finding a reason to do so. They forget their testimony statements and they forget the spiritual experiences that they had. Why? Because they didn't know this or that about church history or for some other reason. These are basically people who are now poor in spirit, regardless what they may say otherwise. But I would raise the bet to a dollar if these people who have left, would reflect on their reasons just a little and tell me with a straight face that they had a miserable experience with the lds community and did not feel the love that they felt with the members. And then deny their spiritual experiences by telling me that they can feel the same at a baseball game or a circus. Edited July 27, 2015 by why me
tagriffy Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 For me it is the opposite, I love LDS culture- I tell people all the time it would be easier to go back to being Mormon, then to deal with all the infighting, lack of programs/activities, etc... in the orthodox RLDS Movement- it is some of the LDS doctrines I have an issue with. Though my personal theology is beginning to fit somewhere between the two, and outside of the two at the same time. That's about where I'm at. That's why nowadays I identify myself as a Mormon at large. 1
The Nehor Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 That may be a hard lesson for the "everyone gets a trophy" generation.Yeah, if only the gospel just gave out a gold, silver, and bronze and kicked everyone else down to hell so we can learn this hard lesson. I have never seen a gospel endorsement I trust for competitive as an attribute of God.
The Nehor Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 The focus of our meetings yesterday was Enduring to the end. I had a few thoughts about it. 1- "Enduring" seems to be a very negative term for a life that is supposed to bring us joy2- "Enduring" seems to be accurate for many who are disaffected but still attend regularly3- "Enduring" to the "end" is inevitable. "Enduring" is not the operative word. "End" is. Whatever that end may be.1. I am convinced this life is meant to be joyful though we can find some joy in it. It is calculated to bring joy but most of it comes more long term.2. Maybe.3. When we say enduring to the end it is a shorthand for the scriptural injunction to "endure it well". Surviving it is not enough.
HappyJackWagon Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 3. When we say enduring to the end it is a shorthand for the scriptural injunction to "endure it well". Surviving it is not enough.CRAP!
filovirus Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 The focus of our meetings yesterday was Enduring to the end. I had a few thoughts about it. 1- "Enduring" seems to be a very negative term for a life that is supposed to bring us joy2- "Enduring" seems to be accurate for many who are disaffected but still attend regularly3- "Enduring" to the "end" is inevitable. "Enduring" is not the operative word. "End" is. Whatever that end may be.When the scriptures talk about "endure to the end" it is most often done after expounding on a gospel principle, such as faith, baptism, etc. In this context, "endure to the end" means staying strong in the faith, or rather, keeping a testimony of Jesus Christ and doing those things that will strengthen that testimony until death and beyond. When we see the word "endure" by itself, we usually see in the scriptures that it means the suffering of hardships associated with life in general.
Recommended Posts