perspective on issues

[Mars]

i live in the washington, DC area.  i'm a ward missionary, in charge of teaching new member discussions.  recently a woman was baptized.  she's in her mid 30s, no children, in the education industry.  works with autistic kids and special education through fairfax county public schools.  she got her education around here, but lived and worked in new york city for about 10 years prior to a recent move back to this area.

her mother is deeply religious and got baptized as well.  her mother was born in sierra leone but moved here in the 70s and all her children grew up in the DC area, including the one daughter who was baptized.

last night we held a new member discussion on the topic of obedience.  during my preparation for the lesson, i couldn't remove from my mind the sense of alarm i've gotten after reading numerous blog posts, message board posts, and articles about the recent policy change.  how can we be obedient if we don't believe in the direction we're being asked to go?  clearly, mileage varies.  for some people this is a clear indication that the way they perceive right and wrong and what would be God's plan is no longer in sync with that of the leadership of the Church and trusting their own judgment (i mean this sincerely), they are taking a path that leads them out of membership.  these things can weigh on my mind as i watch our brothers and sisters attempt to reconcile what the world teaches about right and wrong, what salt lake city teaches about right and wrong, and what we believe to be right and wrong.

how do you do justice to a new member with these weighty issues?

i tried to be sincere and tackle it head on.  i asked this woman, bluntly, how it felt being asked to listen to these all white, mostly utahn and mostly american, older men, on issues of what right and wrong were.

she said i had the wrong idea altogether.

she said that her journey into our faith has been like waking up from amnesia.  like going into a home you grew up in, and turning on each light in each hallway, room, or corner, and recognizing things you always knew were yours.  there wasn't a sense of foreign misbelonging.  she felt like she was coming home.  and she loved it.

i was deeply moved by her answer.

i realize not everyone feels that sense of belonging, and sincerely, my heart goes out to them.  this also isn't meant to hand wave people's concerns and fears and ignore any real problems of society and culture clash we experience in the church.  i do see leadership in salt lake as "The Brethren," and i do sustain them.  i only mean to add another voice to chorus as we all sound off and wrestle with these very important issues and try to make sense of our place in it all.

[Storm Rider]

I believe that a fundamental problem with philosophies that push an agenda of combating racism and promoting diversity and inclusiveness is that they first must begin by deconstruction society and labeling everyone and everything.  Everyone must be a race, be a gender, be a political party, be a religion, be a sexist - everyone must be labeled and everyone must be separated.  The end result of these philosophies is not a better society, but societies that is deconstructed into small, unworkable, segments of separate, opposing groups that are always at odds with one another.

The antithesis is families, communities, and nations (in the context of a nation resulting from a melting pot).  Social groups that are bonded together beyond the labels that are so important to these philosophies that purport to result in a betterment of society.

This mother knew she belonged, that she was home, because she recognized the truth of God's reality.  There was no racism, there was no gender preference or bias, there was only the understanding that she was a member of the Kingdom of God and she belonged.  What a humbling teaching and understanding for each member of the Church. 

[RevTestament]

19 minutes ago, Mars said:

i live in the washington, DC area.  i'm a ward missionary, in charge of teaching new member discussions.  recently a woman was baptized.  she's in her mid 30s, no children, in the education industry.  works with autistic kids and special education through fairfax county public schools.  she got her education around here, but lived and worked in new york city for about 10 years prior to a recent move back to this area.

her mother is deeply religious and got baptized as well.  her mother was born in sierra leone but moved here in the 70s and all her children grew up in the DC area, including the one daughter who was baptized.

last night we held a new member discussion on the topic of obedience.  during my preparation for the lesson, i couldn't remove from my mind the sense of alarm i've gotten after reading numerous blog posts, message board posts, and articles about the recent policy change.  how can we be obedient if we don't believe in the direction we're being asked to go?  clearly, mileage varies.  for some people this is a clear indication that the way they perceive right and wrong and what would be God's plan is no longer in sync with that of the leadership of the Church and trusting their own judgment (i mean this sincerely), they are taking a path that leads them out of membership.  these things can weigh on my mind as i watch our brothers and sisters attempt to reconcile what the world teaches about right and wrong, what salt lake city teaches about right and wrong, and what we believe to be right and wrong.

how do you do justice to a new member with these weighty issues?

i tried to be sincere and tackle it head on.  i asked this woman, bluntly, how it felt being asked to listen to these all white, mostly utahn and mostly american, older men, on issues of what right and wrong were.

she said i had the wrong idea altogether.

she said that her journey into our faith has been like waking up from amnesia.  like going into a home you grew up in, and turning on each light in each hallway, room, or corner, and recognizing things you always knew were yours.  there wasn't a sense of foreign misbelonging.  she felt like she was coming home.  and she loved it.

i was deeply moved by her answer.

i realize not everyone feels that sense of belonging, and sincerely, my heart goes out to them.  this also isn't meant to hand wave people's concerns and fears and ignore any real problems of society and culture clash we experience in the church.  i do see leadership in salt lake as "The Brethren," and i do sustain them.  i only mean to add another voice to chorus as we all sound off and wrestle with these very important issues and try to make sense of our place in it all.

I am a convert as well, but have always been an independent thinker. I would characterize my initial conversion to the church much like hers... The more I learned, the more I felt that this church answered the concerns I had about the way other churches lived the Bible. I would say it was the Bible which converted me. If I had found something deeply contradicting the Bible, I probably wouldn't have joined, but it was the opposite. I felt the Bible confirmed this church was true, and my experience with members confirmed this as well. For the first time I gained church friends, and had a sense of family with church members which was really important, whereas previously all my friends were from school. I felt this church lived the gospel, and still do. As I matured further, tho I had a new question or two, which really didn't pertain to the church however, but more as my status as a Christian....not that I didn't believe in Christ, but I honestly felt I didn't understand the atonement and therefore could not honestly say I had a testimony in it... my questions were in the why category.

I must say though that just like this church encourages investigators to question inconsistencies in their old faiths, if any, they should not try to shut down this process once one becomes a member. This includes questioning the leadership. If I had known when I joined that BY had taught that Miriam was married to the Father, I probably would not have joined, or if I learned that this church believed that to be true as a matter of doctrine. I find it a little inconsistent to believe that it is wrong to believe that the Catholic pontiff is not infallible, and then to believe that somehow our church leadership is. Rather than teaching that they are, I believe they should teach obedience to the will of God, as confirmed by the Holy Spirit, whose job it is to teach the truth of all things. In other words if what the apostles are teaching is true, the membership should be able to receive a confirming message on it. I doubt this will happen because the church has been heading another direction for so long, but that is my feeling about the matter. So although I do not agree with everything every church president has ever said, and I believe history has shown some of it to be opinion, I still believe the church is true... or contains the truth of the gospel. I believe submitting fully and blindly to earthly authority of any sort is a dangerous road. My wife had a bad stint with the church because she learned and experienced church leaders who were abusing their families and yet continued to be called. Further, if they were questioned, the questioners were "pounded" into submission, and their concerns were not addressed. This is not the way to handle things imho, and severely damaged her testimony. In other words if someone "dares" to raise their hand in opposition to someone being sustained, their concerns should be addressed, and they should not be automatically reprimanded or lose their calling, etc. The church needs to realize that their leaders are not perfect, but are mortal, fallible men. Otherwise asking to be sustained is just a ruse, and serves no true purpose other than to bow to a monarchial leadership. There I said it, and that is my piece.

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Mars said:

i live in the washington, DC area.  i'm a ward missionary, in charge of teaching new member discussions.  recently a woman was baptized.  she's in her mid 30s, no children, in the education industry.  works with autistic kids and special education through fairfax county public schools.  she got her education around here, but lived and worked in new york city for about 10 years prior to a recent move back to this area.

her mother is deeply religious and got baptized as well.  her mother was born in sierra leone but moved here in the 70s and all her children grew up in the DC area, including the one daughter who was baptized.

last night we held a new member discussion on the topic of obedience.  during my preparation for the lesson, i couldn't remove from my mind the sense of alarm i've gotten after reading numerous blog posts, message board posts, and articles about the recent policy change.  how can we be obedient if we don't believe in the direction we're being asked to go?  clearly, mileage varies.  for some people this is a clear indication that the way they perceive right and wrong and what would be God's plan is no longer in sync with that of the leadership of the Church and trusting their own judgment (i mean this sincerely), they are taking a path that leads them out of membership.  these things can weigh on my mind as i watch our brothers and sisters attempt to reconcile what the world teaches about right and wrong, what salt lake city teaches about right and wrong, and what we believe to be right and wrong.

how do you do justice to a new member with these weighty issues?

i tried to be sincere and tackle it head on.  i asked this woman, bluntly, how it felt being asked to listen to these all white, mostly utahn and mostly american, older men, on issues of what right and wrong were.

she said i had the wrong idea altogether.

she said that her journey into our faith has been like waking up from amnesia.  like going into a home you grew up in, and turning on each light in each hallway, room, or corner, and recognizing things you always knew were yours.  there wasn't a sense of foreign misbelonging.  she felt like she was coming home.  and she loved it.

i was deeply moved by her answer.

i realize not everyone feels that sense of belonging, and sincerely, my heart goes out to them.  this also isn't meant to hand wave people's concerns and fears and ignore any real problems of society and culture clash we experience in the church.  i do see leadership in salt lake as "The Brethren," and i do sustain them.  i only mean to add another voice to chorus as we all sound off and wrestle with these very important issues and try to make sense of our place in it all.

We will see more of this as people seek out the church for what it is, and others leave us for what they personally are not.

Society grows more polarized daily and more and more will see us as a shining light in the darkness.  The darker it gets the brighter the beacon will shine.

[BlueDreams]

Thanks for sharing. I like her description about amnesia and recognizing all the rooms in a home. I'm not a convert, so I've never had that experience. For me the church is like a warm blanket in winter. It feels right and in place. I've thought a bit about what would it be like to obey if I don't agree. I've had small moments like that some mundane and some very personal and difficult. But I haven't had one that was more fundamental to my core being. I've thought of some of my faithful heroes who did/do have challenges like that. For myself I've decided its a matter of importance. At the end of the day, I read my scriptures and feel the spirit. I go to the temple and feel at home. I worship and pray and know this is a place where God's truths are found, many which were lost and that I wouldn't be able to be found in another faith.

But there are moment of dissonance where I do disagree with the direction, perspective, or beliefs of those around me. I had a number of those this weekend and while talking to a friend who had an uncomfortable one as well. I liked what she received as an answer to her concern that the person in charge did their best in their limited human vision. For myself it's kinda like having split vision for a moment....of what's before me and what the spirit clearly testifies of and then what i feel and see isn't quite there...not just yet. 2 Examples: The provo tabernacle and a lesson in church. 

Tabernacle: I've just been set apart to be a worker there and I'm beyond excited. I toured it officially once, had a special walk through on sunday for YW and RS YSA's in the temple district, volunteered there a second time, and walked through it again after volunteering. To say I love it is an understatement. My heart feels knit to it, my art geek self loves the period influences found everywhere, and i've had the spirit testify things to me in it/about it more than once. My moment of dissonance was from the artwork. The art with people in it are all beautiful pieces of largely very pale faces. There's one that has people with a slight hint of melanin, but it's negotiable. And it makes me a little sad both for the historical thoughts, as well as knowing the problems that still exist today.

 Lesson in church: The lesson circled almost solely around 1 Nephi 13. It started with an admittance that at one point the teacher and many of the missionaries on his mission believed the church was just trying to be PC about not naming the Catholic church as the great and abominable church....but that he realized now that it wasn't the case. This was uncomfortable, but it was manageable and we talked and I participated for the first part, talking about things and what not. It was a very small group of us and it moved to the latter half of the chapter, which focused then on american mythos about the greatness and spiritually directed Columbus, a country whose settlers were here almost exclusively for freedom and religion, and then a glowing report of our nation's founding and that it was founded on equality. At that point I was very aware that I was the only brown face in the room. To the teacher's credit, he did clarify after seeing my incredulous oh, really look on my face that they weren't perfect with the equality piece of things. And someone had noted that some things Columbus did was embarrassing (then quickly moved past it to her spiritual ponderings about columbus and what it must have been like). Words like eurocentric americana were running through my head. At moments like this it is uncomfortable and I find myself making a decision....will me speaking up actually be helpful or will it leave them defensive and "lose the spirit?" Sure, I lost it by then, but is it fair to make them uncomfortable because I most definitely am? Can I say this judiciously without alienating? Sometimes I do, that day I didn't.

Most days the church feels like home....but from time to time I'm reminded we still have dirt in our house and cobwebs in the corner. This isn't a perfect home.       

With luv,

BD  

 

[Ahab]

Waking up from amnesia is a good analogy as long as you associate that idea with coming to know, again, how things should be.

When I joined the Church, and even before that as I was discussing things with the returned sister missionary who introduced me to "Mormonism"  and the Elders she invited over to meet me, and even before that when I first read a Book of Mormon that was sitting above somebody's fireplace while I was at their house doing some remodeling while they were away, and even before that... anyway, during that time in my life I also became more aware of how things "really" are while contrasting all of that with how things should be and the more I did the more I realized there "really" is such a thing as evil in this world, and also what is good, too.

That's what she was talking about, I think.

Seeing the difference between good and evil, light and darkness, after she had become accustomed to how much darkness there really is in this world.  

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

We will see more of this as people seek out the church for what it is, and others leave us for what they personally are not.

We are already beginning to see this here, and my sense is that we are in very, very early stages.

A lovely, powerful man was baptised in our ward six days ago. His parents and elder sister were murdered when he was 10 years old. He spent the next ten years or so living on the streets of one of the most crowded cities in West Africa. When he was finally able to get work, he saved for eight years to be able to come here to study nursing. He works crazy shifts in order to pay his uni fees, and we held his baptism late in the evening because that was when he was able to get 2.5 hours off of work in order to be baptised.

His dying father's final words to him were to find people who would teach him God's truth, and he's spent the past two decades in a constant search, attending every church he could find, listening to street preachers and those who went door-to-door. Nothing every felt like home. I was with the missionaries the first time we taught this brother -- which he requested after meeting us for the first time -- and for many of his lessons after. True to pattern, the missionaries encouraged him to ponder on and then pray about the things they were teaching him. I loved his first response: 'I can do that, but it is unnecessary. As you have taught me, the words have tasted sweet because they are truth. Finally I have found the truth I have been searching for'. (By the way, amongst the issues that I personally raised during the lessons were polygamy and former priesthood restrictions.)

We had our missionary coordination meeting last night, and all three sets of missionaries had found new people to teach during the week. Four years ago, our one set of missionaries struggled to find a single interested soul. But people are looking now, and they recognise the light when they see it.

Edited January 28, 2016 by Hamba Tuhan

[The Nehor]

9 hours ago, Mars said:

i tried to be sincere and tackle it head on.  i asked this woman, bluntly, how it felt being asked to listen to these all white, mostly utahn and mostly american, older men, on issues of what right and wrong were.

Why? I mean I assume at some point the missionaries taught the concept of revelation right? That it is not actually a bunch of old white american mortals leading the church right?

[The Nehor]

9 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

I believe that a fundamental problem with philosophies that push an agenda of combating racism and promoting diversity and inclusiveness is that they first must begin by deconstruction society and labeling everyone and everything.  Everyone must be a race, be a gender, be a political party, be a religion, be a sexist - everyone must be labeled and everyone must be separated.  The end result of these philosophies is not a better society, but societies that is deconstructed into small, unworkable, segments of separate, opposing groups that are always at odds with one another.

It is an interesting problem. The severe attempts to end racism are covering it up instead of solving the actual problems. It replaces the overt racism we had before with a more covert form. It is an improvement but it is not the ideal.

It leads to a divide as some people face being walked around on tiptoes for fear of offense which no one enjoys. Amongst the dominant group you have some who rail against the whole idea because they like being dominant and some who race off to find oppression categories to fit themselves into. The latter has gotten so bad that it is like the Oppression Olympics with people claiming all kinds of made-up genders, races, sexualities, and even body types so they can pull the oppression card and imagine this will let them judge the speech of others. Some of them are even making up new pronouns to avoid our current gender binary.

Some hate the whole thing and want to pretend racial advantage and racism itself are both dead. LDS often fall into this category. Some even go so far as to claim that reverse racism is the real problem and that the poor are oppressing the rich, minorities are oppressing majorities, and the like. These people are insane.

The real answer of course is Zion but hardly anyone wants that.  

[Storm Rider]

Getting off topic, but I will do so only briefly to engage with Nehor's excellent post.  We make choices every day that prefer one person over another person and/or one group over another.  Race, gender, etc. are just some of the qualifications or attributes we use, but the range is as varied as there are people.  Why is one set of qualities deemed superior to another set?  Because we can test them?  When is it ever just one thing that we use to make a choice in affiliation in a social context?  

There is not a single person alive that does not use a wide range of preferences in their social relationships and communication.  Preferred classes become a farce because each individual in the preferred class uses preferences just as much, if not more, than everyone else.  We are human beings and each should have the right to have preferences.  The gospel teaches us how to care for our fellow man regardless of preferences.  When it comes from the heart it is real.  When the government attempts to legislate the result is never what was intended.  

Growing up in the military I saw a distinct mixing of humanity regardless of race.  Race did not appear to be an issue in the military to my young eyes.  Outside of the military I found a whole host of ways that people used to express preferences and of them reflected gospel teachings.

I find it infinitely more easy to beware of strangers and reject stupid people, obnoxious people, rude people, before having concerns about preferred classes of people created by government.  But that is my personal issues and others have their own personal issues.  

[Maidservant]

12 hours ago, RevTestament said:

My wife had a bad stint with the church because she learned and experienced church leaders who were abusing their families and yet continued to be called.

The only way I got a semi-peace on this regarding my growing up ward is, I finally realized that if there were to be a ward in our neighborhood without men (and women) who were abusers--there wouldn't have been.  The ward would have had to be disbanded completely.   So I guess God had mercy on us a bit and let us go forward as we were and who we were.

[Maidservant]

To the OP.

The way I am able to stay currently is because I do not allow my level of understanding (or as I imagine) to undo my direct experience.  I have had to walk out of many a Sunday School, and I almost stood up twice last year to call my entire Relief Society to repentance on a certain subject (was SHAKING with energy, but still I didn't have the guts i.e interrupting the lesson etc).

But I also know what it is to watch my older son transmit the priesthood to his younger brother. Wow.  I often play the piano for baptisms, and I never fail to feel, FEEL, the clarity when they go in and come up from the water.  And if I leave the covenant community, then who will I visit teach?  I'd have to find somebody :D.

My problems are also much deeper than the church, as I also wrestle about the person of Jesus (but not only that).  And even when I get answers that help ME (sometimes in the temple!), they don't look anything like what I still have to hear at church.  And my poor kids, they ask me questions after church, seminary, and scripture reading, and I always ask them, "Do you want me to tell you what I'm supposed to tell you, or share with you what I really know?"

But I stay.  It's my people.  It's my God.  It's me.

Edited January 29, 2016 by Maidservant

[Mars]

12 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Why? I mean I assume at some point the missionaries taught the concept of revelation right? That it is not actually a bunch of old white american mortals leading the church right?

why not?

edit to add: i can't figure you out, nehor.  and i think you like it that way.

my thinking was this: she's black.  literally, african-american.  her parents are from sierra leone and she was raised on the east coast.  10 years in new york.  i thought there would be a good chance that sometime, somewhere, someone would ask her that question.  i was curious what her answer would be.  i had it in mind that we could discuss it and i could remind her of exactly what you brought up, namely revelation, and that no matter the nationality or genetic makeup of the quorum of the 12 and first presidency, we could always rely on revelation to make supplement and provide foundation for our obedience.

we didn't even have that discussion because she wasn't even in the same space as that question.

Edited January 29, 2016 by Mars

[Bobbieaware]

47 minutes ago, Mars said:

 

why not?

Because each member, no matter what their station and calling in the Church might be, is entitled to the same spirit of revelation that inspires and directs the leaders of the Church. The goal is that each member becomes a prophet or prophetess in his or her own right, each individual being directed by revelation from God within their own stewardships and spheres of influence. This principle is critically important because the saints aren't meant to subsist on borrowed spiritual light and only to be dictated to in blind ignorance. Rather than allowing themselves to be bossed and bullied about by other imperfect human beings, each man, woman and child in the Church is privileged to receive direct revelation from heaven that ministers comfort and  confirms to the heart and mind when leaders of the Church are in harmony with God and being directed by his will. If the leaders of the Church were the only ones to receive revelation, the Church would soon wither and die as the true Church of Christ. 

 17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:

 18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,

 19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, (Ephesians 1)

 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, (Ephesians 1)

Edited January 29, 2016 by Bobbieaware

[Mars]

i know that, bobbie...

[BlueDreams]

2 hours ago, Mars said:

why not?

edit to add: i can't figure you out, nehor.  and i think you like it that way.

my thinking was this: she's black.  literally, african-american.  her parents are from sierra leone and she was raised on the east coast.  10 years in new york.  .., 

Psst...small pet peeve. She's not "literally African-American"...African American is a (diverse) ethnic group within the black diaspora. being black in America doesn't make one African-American...especially since she knows exactly what country in Africa she came from. 

 

- end soap box broadcast -

With luv, 

bd

 

[Mars]

fair enough

i just meant to say that she was born in america to african parents, and that the identifying set of words "african(\s+|-?)american" (regular expressions implied) which are normally attributed to, as you say, a diverse ethnic group within the black diaspora, was not to be confused with her personal story.

that's all.

Edited January 29, 2016 by Mars

[Senator]

I've always harbored a certain envy for converts to the church. They have that distinct before, and after perspective.

[BlueDreams]

I know. I've seen people give me something similar when they've told me I'm African american or that a white south african is African American. The real answer is that they are (country of origin)-american and technicalities render the terms basically useless.

 It's also tied to the related peeve of treating Africa as a country as opposed to a continent. It's a regular expression that is fairly annoying to those who could technically fit it, but really, really don't and brushes over the distinctions, historical, and cultural concerns tied to varying groups. In this very topic, the way that africans v. african americans feel about it often vary greatly. African populations are less likely to have major concerns or are more at ease with explanations for it whereas african americans are more likely to (speaking in broad generalities) to struggle. This is in part because their historical context of oppression entails a very strong and present racial struggle for AA's whereas African national conflict and struggle were often more complicated than racial lines. This doesn't apply for all on either end, of course....but it can be important in understanding what may work for a a 1st gen Sierra Leonnean-American may not apply as easily for an multigen African-American. 

 

With luv,

BD

Edited January 29, 2016 by BlueDreams

[Ahab]

7 hours ago, Mars said:

why not?

edit to add: i can't figure you out, nehor.  and i think you like it that way.

my thinking was this: she's black.  literally, african-american.  her parents are from sierra leone and she was raised on the east coast.  10 years in new york.  i thought there would be a good chance that sometime, somewhere, someone would ask her that question.  i was curious what her answer would be.  i had it in mind that we could discuss it and i could remind her of exactly what you brought up, namely revelation, and that no matter the nationality or genetic makeup of the quorum of the 12 and first presidency, we could always rely on revelation to make supplement and provide foundation for our obedience.

we didn't even have that discussion because she wasn't even in the same space as that question.

What do you mean she wasn't in the same space as that question?  I think she was, per my understanding of her answer and my own related experiences. The light had come on for her to tell her what was true and who she really is as a daughter of our Father in heaven. What do you think she meant when she said what she said?... particularly the part about feeling like she had come home and what she had found here was hers?

[RevTestament]

18 hours ago, Maidservant said:

The only way I got a semi-peace on this regarding my growing up ward is, I finally realized that if there were to be a ward in our neighborhood without men (and women) who were abusers--there wouldn't have been.  The ward would have had to be disbanded completely.   So I guess God had mercy on us a bit and let us go forward as we were and who we were.

My point is that these men were doing things bad enough to be excommunicated, yet were called again. And then a woman who raised her hand to dissent was called out - as I heard the story - without really getting to say why she dissented. So I disagree that such men should be holding priesthood positions and be affirmed. If someone knows differently, their reasons should be heard. If that results in everyone in the ward getting excommunicated then they weren't really in His church anyway as I see it.

[Mars]

1 hour ago, Ahab said:

What do you mean she wasn't in the same space as that question?  I think she was, per my understanding of her answer and my own related experiences. The light had come on for her to tell her what was true and who she really is as a daughter of our Father in heaven. What do you think she meant when she said what she said?... particularly the part about feeling like she had come home and what she had found here was hers?

some people like to call into question the truth claims of the church.  if they really are prophets, seers, and revelators, then they're not a bunch of out of touch white guys from mostly utah who make crap up without knowing how the rest of the world works.  some people here on this board have asserted that the product of church leadership is no better or worse than any other bunch of people trying to make stuff up as they go.  that they, church leadership, are no more or less inspired than the less of us.

if that's true, then the commandments don't make sense.

after all, God gave us commandments after having first made known unto us the plan of salvation.  (cf alma 12:32, paraphrased)

so i began the discussion in that vein, with that scripture.  it's one thing to think and believe that there is a God, settling the question of existence.  it's quite another to decide that certain things came of God.  part of the testimony of a new convert is, imo, gaining faith that the leadership of the church is what it says it is.

so i asked the lady the question of whether or not it was bothersome, or whether or not she had any discomfort with the idea that people who were not like her or did not share life stories similar to hers were asking her to live her life in a certain way.

that concern didn't register.  iow, she wasn't in the same as that question.  everything about her conversion has been like coming home to a house you grew up in but had forgotten, or waking out of amnesia.  there was no concern that guys who didn't know what she went through were asking her to be obedient to stuff without understanding her or her trials.  she felt warmth, familiarity, and rejoicing at belonging.  i was relieved that she saw it that way.  i see it as a mark of maturity to her fledgling faith.

hope that answers your question.

[Ahab]

So you agree that she felt comfortable within the Church and with our leaders because she knew by the revelation/light she received that the Church is led by our Lord who is in tune with our Father and the counsel we get here is in tune with the counsel we got from our Father in our heavenly home? 

That she knew that the Church is an extension of our heavenly home she connected with from her premortal past?

That she's not questioning whether the Church is an extension of our heavenly home because she has received enough revelation/light to know that it is?

Yeah, I would think every new convert to the Church should have found that out before joining. 

The Church is not just a social club directed by people in Salt Lake City.