Private Groups Of Members Meeting Together

[DBMormon]

Like Scott, I remember the Church recommending against such groups. I think it was back in the 90's. (I doubt they'd approve of this board either).

I think the Church ban came around the same time as the September 6 incident and was pretty widely known.

again circumstantial without any direct statement.

Edited August 23, 2015 by DBMormon

[DBMormon]

The instant I read about your private group I had a strong negative reaction and began searching for words to explain why I had such misgivings. But as I continued to read other responses. I saw Nehor hit the bullseye, perfectly expressing what it was I was trying to say:

"Like yours, groups where the spiritually sick meet for "fellowship" and infect each other with their own sicknesses." (The Nehor)

With very few words, Nehor gets to the very heart of the problem. Let's put it this way: If I were to ever contemplate starting such a group, I would ask myself if it was a good idea to have a number of wavering members get together in one place in a spiritually unstable environment where there was a very real likelyhood it could all end up with the group of doubters negatively reinforcing each other in their faith crises...Very counterproductive.

But I suppose a faith strengthening group might do some good as long as the discussion leader is a very solid member of the Church who really knows his stuff. Someone who, unlike like John Dehlin, isn't prone to finding fault with the Church and is not dealing with a faith crisis of his own. And it makes sense that it would surely be much wiser to counsel each wavering member one at a time, and do so in a manner approved by the local leadership. But if the counseling was going to be done in a group setting, it would be far better to have one wavering member meet with two or more unwavering members.

It's not a private group - my invitation went out on facebook to any who were interested.  I also encouraged people coming to bring others who they thought would benefit..  By the way I could list a private group that meets together to discuss Church but this group would have most here side stepping such connection and defending it as a defensible exception to the rule.

Edited August 23, 2015 by DBMormon

[ALarson]

I know of a group that meets in Southern California (I have friends who have attended it) that Duncan mentioned above.  It's "The Miller Eccles Study Group" ( http://www.millereccles.org/ )

I don't know if it is church sanctioned or approved, but they've had quite a variety of guest speakers (Dallin H. Oaks, Will Bagley, Jana Riess, Leornard Arrington, D. Michael Quinn, Peggy Fletcher Stack, Daniel C.Peterson, Richard Bushman and many more).

Edited August 23, 2015 by ALarson

[rongo]

Why don't you ask your bishop and stake president what they think, Bill? 

 

You have stated that our opinion here (which you solicited) carries no authority. Do you think your bishop and stake president have authority over their jurisdictions? Or, only when they don't disagree with what you are trying to do?

 

Your podcasting is one thing, but presiding over study groups in your home for "transitioning Mormons" is another. And, I think everyone here (including you) knows why you don't want to ask your priesthood leaders for approval.

 

At minimum, you should definitely ask that they attend when you discuss tithing, and see what they think of your "study group" meetings . . .

[DBMormon]

Why don't you ask your bishop and stake president what they think, Bill? 

 

You have stated that our opinion here (which you solicited) carries no authority. Do you think your bishop and stake president have authority over their jurisdictions? Or, only when they don't disagree with what you are trying to do?

 

Your podcasting is one thing, but presiding over study groups in your home for "transitioning Mormons" is another. And, I think everyone here (including you) knows why you don't want to ask your priesthood leaders for approval.

 

At minimum, you should definitely ask that they attend when you discuss tithing, and see what they think of your "study group" meetings . . .

maybe I already have.... everyone here has assumed I haven't.  Also your calling it a study group.  We are not studying anything.  My Bishop and Stake president have authority over their church jurisdiction and not my home or who I have in it.  They preside over the functions the Church has given them which are spelled out in the handbooks and they preside over the sanctity of the the ward building and they are to help bring all unto Christ but their authority has limits and presiding in my home has clearly been defined as outside their limits.  

 

And no I would have no problem notifying a leader of my meetings if I hadn't done so already.

 

Lastly I wouldn't ask.  I would notify them, If I hadn't done so already.  No where am I required to ask about what I may do in my home.  Again I preside there.

[Danzo]

I have a private gospel study each week on Monday night. Usually with just my family, but occasionally with other families and individuals. I am pretty sure the church approves of it.

Edited August 23, 2015 by Danzo

[DBMormon]

I know of a group that meets in Southern California (I have friends who have attended it) that Duncan mentioned above.  It's "The Miller Eccles Study Group" ( http://www.millereccles.org/ )

I don't know if it is church sanctioned or approved, but they've had quite a variety of guest speakers (Dallin H. Oaks, Will Bagley, Jana Riess, Leornard Arrington, D. Michael Quinn, Peggy Fletcher Stack, Daniel C.Peterson, Richard Bushman and many more).

ooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh   call the strengthening members committee.  Has anyone who has stated their objection to my being part of such a group even considered that 

#1 there may be no rule and hence no problem unless it turns into something negative

#2 that your bias gets in the way of reality and real policy

#3 that the reasoning you give you don't allow it logic to push you to apply it to others doing the same thing that you do approve of

#4 that since there is no rule all are free to use their agency

 

I do find it humorous that several of you likely went crazy last night on search engines trying to find that rule you know is out there only to come up empty but rather than acknowledge there is no rule or policy and therefore this isn't a big deal, you still choose to defend your discomfort of me rather than the acknowledge the false assumption.  

[DBMormon]

I have a private gospel study each week on Monday night. Usually with just my family, but occasionally with other families and individuals. I am pretty sure the church approves of it.

and you meet regularly?   ouch

[JAHS]

I only remember many years ago that we were told to be cautious when participating in study groups, so that no false doctrines were being preached or suppported (eg. Polygamous groups, Any Opposed, Ordain Women, etc). One caution in the handbook which you have no doubt also seen is about Self-Awareness Groups

 

"Many community resources provide effective help for members who suffer from social or emotional problems. However, some groups that purport to increase self-awareness, raise self-esteem, or enhance individual agency advocate concepts and use methods that can be harmful. Some groups falsely claim Church endorsement, charge exorbitant fees, and encourage long-term commitments. Some intermingle worldly concepts with gospel principles in ways that can undermine spirituality and faith."

 

Home Evening Groups for Singles and student wards can be organized:

 

"The bishopric may organize one or more home evening groups for single members who do not have children in the home and do not live with their parents. If possible, the bishopric appoints a single priesthood holder to lead each group. If a ward has few single members, the stake presidency may authorize bishoprics to organize home evening groups that cross ward boundaries. Resources for home evening lessons include the scriptures, the Family Home Evening Resource Book, Gospel Principles, and other approved Church materials."

 

The only groups the Church sanctions, outside of regular church meetings, seems to be those that are organized and overseen by local Bishoprics. Other than that you are on your own.

Edited August 23, 2015 by JAHS

[ALarson]

ooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh   call the strengthening members committee.  Has anyone who has stated their objection to my being part of such a group even considered that 

#1 there may be no rule and hence no problem unless it turns into something negative

#2 that your bias gets in the way of reality and real policy

#3 that the reasoning you give you don't allow it logic to push you to apply it to others doing the same thing that you do approve of

#4 that since there is no rule all are free to use their agency

 

I do find it humorous that several of you likely went crazy last night on search engines trying to find that rule you know is out there only to come up empty but rather than acknowledge there is no rule or policy and therefore this isn't a big deal, you still choose to defend your discomfort of me rather than the acknowledge the false assumption.  

Um...  I posted about this group to show support for you.

Edited August 23, 2015 by ALarson

[DBMormon]

 

I only remember many years ago that we were told to be cautious when participating in study groups, so that no false doctrines were being preached or suppported (eg. Polygamous groups, Any Opposed, Ordain Women, etc). One caution in the handbook which you have no doubt also seen is about Self-Awareness Groups

 

"Many community resources provide effective help for members who suffer from social or emotional problems. However, some groups that purport to increase self-awareness, raise self-esteem, or enhance individual agency advocate concepts and use methods that can be harmful. Some groups falsely claim Church endorsement, charge exorbitant fees, and encourage long-term commitments. Some intermingle worldly concepts with gospel principles in ways that can undermine spirituality and faith."

 

Home Evening Groups for Singles and student wards can be organized:

 

"The bishopric may organize one or more home evening groups for single members who do not have children in the home and do not live with their parents. If possible, the bishopric appoints a single priesthood holder to lead each group. If a ward has few single members, the stake presidency may authorize bishoprics to organize home evening groups that cross ward boundaries. Resources for home evening lessons include the scriptures, the Family Home Evening Resource Book, Gospel Principles, and other approved Church materials."

 

The only groups the the Church sanctions, outside of regular church meetings, seems to be those that are organized and overseen by local Bishoprics. Other than that you are on your own.

 

exactly

[strappinglad]

Do you moderate the topic/atmosphere? My mother attended a literary club for women. My parents had a Rook playing group also for decades. The Elder's quorum had firesides regularly and discussed various religious topics. These have since faded away. Religion , like politics, can bring out some heated passions and the possibility for contention runs high which, as the scriptures say, causes the Spirit to depart.

You are going to do what you think is right with or without permission so have at it. Just be willing to put an end to it if it evolves in directions you find less than desirable. I came close to creating a study group quite some years ago. Upon further thought, I recognized the pitfalls and backed away. The mods here might provide advice in herding cats.

[DBMormon]

Um...  I posted about this group to show support for you.

i know and I was being sarcastic in my first sentence and then using your post as I asked everyone else in light of it if they have considered groups like you just mentioned and why they will go out of their way to excuse those while still pushing back at mine.  It is confirmation bias and not a realy grasp of church policy.  I was not being snarky at you.  I didn't mean for you to read it that way.  I agreeing with you and asking others why they will excuse such groups.

[ALarson]

There are also quite a few book clubs that meet in members homes and I know of some that read all types of books written by former members of the church, never mo's and current members regarding church history and other topics.  

Edited August 23, 2015 by ALarson

[ALarson]

i know and I was being sarcastic in my first sentence and then using your post as I asked everyone else in light of it if they have considered groups like you just mentioned and why they will go out of their way to excuse those while still pushing back at mine.  It is confirmation bias and not a realy grasp of church policy.  I was not being snarky at you.  I didn't mean for you to read it that way.  I agreeing with you and asking others why they will excuse such groups.

Got it.  And, I agree.

[DBMormon]

Do you moderate the topic/atmosphere? My mother attended a literary club for women. My parents had a Rook playing group also for decades. The Elder's quorum had firesides regularly and discussed various religious topics. These have since faded away. Religion , like politics, can bring out some heated passions and the possibility for contention runs high which, as the scriptures say, causes the Spirit to depart.

You are going to do what you think is right with or without permission so have at it. Just be willing to put an end to it if it evolves in directions you find less than desirable. I came close to creating a study group quite some years ago. Upon further thought, I recognized the pitfalls and backed away. The mods here might provide advice in herding cats.

Do I actually need permission?  See, you state that I will do what I want with or without permission but no one requires permission be asked.  Do you ask permission to go to sleep at night?  Do you ask permission to drive your car to work?  no and it is silly because permission is not required.  Neither is it here.  Now in terms of the effect the group has on the individuals I am steadfast and determined that it will encourage people to stay in the church and to work towards making it work.  That said it will validate the church and its history as messy but all there already know that, they just are struggling to cope with it.

[The Nehor]

Is there an official statement that says I need a leaders permission to meet with other mormons? Until then, no need to tell a groupvof folks here who have no authority whether I did. And your last assumtion is what I call a false assumption..

 

Well if you can say that without feeling like a weasel then why do you want our input?

 

 

ooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh   call the strengthening members committee.  Has anyone who has stated their objection to my being part of such a group even considered that 

#1 there may be no rule and hence no problem unless it turns into something negative

#2 that your bias gets in the way of reality and real policy

#3 that the reasoning you give you don't allow it logic to push you to apply it to others doing the same thing that you do approve of

#4 that since there is no rule all are free to use their agency 

 

1. You're in charge. It is almost certainly negative.

2. Call a waambulance.

3. If the Republican Party is allowed to meet why can't the Nazi Party. NOT FAIR!!!!!!

4. You are free to use your agency and be damned by it. You have every legal right to form your group and God has every legal right to damn you for it.

 

I do find it humorous that several of you likely went crazy last night on search engines trying to find that rule you know is out there only to come up empty but rather than acknowledge there is no rule or policy and therefore this isn't a big deal, you still choose to defend your discomfort of me rather than the acknowledge the false assumption.  

 

I find it humorous that you think we touched google. It is not a false assumption. If you want proof of that go tell your bishop or stake president what you are doing. Again, not holding my breath.

 

Seen this before, nothing new under the sun, and all those cliches.

[ALarson]

Are you announcing anything about these get togethers at church or is it just by invitation or word of mouth?  If you're not going around at church discussing it or announcing it, it's your business who you invite into your home.  

 

ETA:

 

BUT, if your leaders start getting word that you're doing anything to destroy testimonies or education members about negative aspects of the church or its history, I do believe then they have a right as your leader to ask you about these meetings.

 

Maybe invite some who are complaining to join you so they can see what these meetings are for?

Edited August 23, 2015 by ALarson

[The Nehor]

Are you announcing anything about these get togethers at church or is it just by invitation or word of mouth?  If you're not going around at church discussing it or announcing it, it's your business who you invite into your home.  

 

And it is the Bishop's business whether he counsels people not to attend.

[ALarson]

And it is the Bishop's business whether he counsels people not to attend.

See my edit I was writing when you posted.

Edited August 23, 2015 by ALarson

[DBMormon]

And it is the Bishop's business whether he counsels people not to attend.

sure but since no one in my ward is in the midst of a faith crisis, none of them were aware of the group and were not in attendance.  But I guess he could.  That would be in his jurisdiction.

[The Nehor]

It seems to me that this is just one more way out church culture creates an environment of dependence and control over the membership. Indeed it emphasizes among other things that do as well, a parent child relationship. At least in my opinion it can develop people who become spiritually and intellectually immature. Of course most will dismiss my thoughts on this as the views of a filthy negative apostate.

 

I dismiss it from experience. Unauthorized study groups always seem to go bad. The organizer always thinks......

 

When I was finishing up at BYU I organized a scripture study group with people in my ward that was quickly given the kibosh by the bishop. This is one of the largely unwritten rules of the Church that I find particularly restrictive and concerning. Evidently we may only study the scriptures in groups during the 30-40 minutes of Sunday school when no one has anything insightful or particularly intelligent to say.

 

.....that they can give more insight then those called/assigned by God to teach. You see, they have something insightful and particularly intelligent to say. They want out from under the thumb of Church Leadership so they can teach what SHOULD be taught. Any surprise these things go bad?

 

Why do you assume the worst about Bill and his intent?

 

I honestly think he has convinced himself he is doing a good thing. The human capacity for self-delusion is very impressive.

[DBMormon]

Are you announcing anything about these get togethers at church or is it just by invitation or word of mouth?  If you're not going around at church discussing it or announcing it, it's your business who you invite into your home.  

 

ETA:

 

BUT, if your leaders start getting word that you're doing anything to destroy testimonies or education members about negative aspects of the church or its history, I do believe then they have a right as your leader to ask you about these meetings.

 

Maybe invite some who are complaining to join you so they can see what these meetings are for?

podcast, facebook, personal invitation.  Other than about a half dozen people on this board or a half dozen apologists who like to rebuke me, I have never gotten any kind of council from anyone, church leader or otherwise, suggesting I consider stopping the podcast or my meeting with others.  It simply has never happened.

[Bob Crockett]

Do I actually need permission?  See, you state that I will do what I want with or without permission but no one requires permission be asked.  Do you ask permission to go to sleep at night?  Do you ask permission to drive your car to work?  no and it is silly because permission is not required.  Neither is it here.  Now in terms of the effect the group has on the individuals I am steadfast and determined that it will encourage people to stay in the church and to work towards making it work.  That said it will validate the church and its history as messy but all there already know that, they just are struggling to cope with it.

 

I certainly see nothing wrong with your meetings. 

 

But your post is just another attempt, perhaps unconscious on your part, to provoke a certain segment of this board -- typically those who rise to the defense of the church.  I don't give a hoot one way or the other.

[DBMormon]

I dismiss it from experience. Unauthorized study groups always seem to go bad. The organizer always thinks......

 

 

.....that they can give more insight then those called/assigned by God to teach. You see, they have something insightful and particularly intelligent to say. They want out from under the thumb of Church Leadership so they can teach what SHOULD be taught. Any surprise these things go bad?

 

 

I honestly think he has convinced himself he is doing a good thing. The human capacity for self-delusion is very impressive.

yet that means it could be you or at least both of us or are self deluded right?