The purpose of Church

[Calm]

25 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

In what way did my comment about murderers express judgment on anyone?  It was meant to provoke our thoughts on what it means to be inspired by the Spirit.  If having an epiphany of where to find our lost keys fits in to the Spirit's work, then it's likely the Spirit works on the most base of us humans, perhaps in aiding awful atrocities.  Or maybe it's not the SPirit at all that has helped us find out keys.  we are just not sure how else to assign such coincidences and realizations.

Whether or not you meant judgment, generally I expect most people respond to comments using what are to them extreme examples as a judgment on what they are saying, especially if that is all that is said and there is no commentary establishing context.  Trying to encourage people to look at things a new way while not appearing judgmental (which we often do even when not intending judgment just because everyone has been hurt in their lives a lot and therefore most of us operate close to, in not fully in, a defensive mode most of the time) is a tricky thing, too often when we are not careful enough, we push people into defensiveness which can have the opposite effect than intended, resulting in narrowing of thoughts rather than opening them up.

If you are going to be speaking about a nuanced idea such as ideas being taught might be implying the Spirit aids atrocities, then to be effective and not offensive, don't you think taking time to explain the nuance rather than assuming they will get it from a short comment would be a better approach, more likely to get people thinking rather than defensive and frustrated with you as you are with the topic?

It is very understandable why you are frustrated and why you would like to see a change of thought and way of speaking.  You are aware of hurt caused by careless comments and limited thinking.  You may have made extended efforts to explain in detail in the past that you saw little come of it so it feels like effort isn't adding any value.  But even if extended effort doesn't increase understanding in your experience, do you think it is likely short comments do any better?  Isn't it possible they are resulting in the same sensation for those listening that you felt when you heard the man address the girl in his way, that your treatment is insensitive and ignoring the feelings of those involved?

I wouldn't be adding my commentary if it wsn't clear to me you care deeply about how we communicate to each other.

Edited February 13, 2017 by Calm

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I was responding to this statement which made it seem like the fact that it was ignorant and very harmful proved that it was more than his focus that caused the problem-

"It was far more than him just being focused on the wrong thing.  It was ignorant and very harmful." 

I was trying to point out that even ignorant and harmful things can be caused solely by good intentions gone wrong.  I'm sorry if i misunderstood you.

 

No problem.  I thought we were commenting on what was wrong with it.  He had good enough intentions I'm sure, but I'd suggest, even so, it was ignorant and harmful, at least judging from what he told us. 

 

[stemelbow]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

Whether or not you meant judgment, generally I expect most people respond to comments using what are to them extreme examples as a judgment on what they are saying, especially if that is all that is said and there is no commentary establishing context.  Trying to encourage people to look at things a new way while not appearing judgmental (which we often do even when not intending judgment just because everyone has been hurt in their lives a lot and therefore most of us operate close to, in not fully in, a defensive mode most of the time) is a tricky thing, too often when we are not careful enough, we push people into defensiveness which can have the opposite effect than intended, resulting in narrowing of thoughts rather than opening them up.

If you are going to be speaking about a nuanced idea such as ideas being taught might be implying the Spirit aids atrocities, then to be effective and not offensive, don't you think taking time to explain the nuance rather than assuming they will get it from a short comment would be a better approach, more likely to get people thinking rather than defensive and frustrated with you as you are with the topic?

Nobody's perfect, and I assure you I rarely do anything well.  that might be, sure, but I don't see how what I said was judgmental towards anyone. 

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Nobody's perfect, and I assure you I rarely do anything well.  that might be, sure, but I don't see how what I said was judgmental towards anyone. 

I added some to my comment.  I don't know if that makes my point clearer or not.

If you don't see how someone might take your comment as judgmental even if it wasn't judgmental, you don't see it.  That is okay, we all look at the world in very different ways.

[Jane_Doe]

22 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Thanks for the reply.  I am a rape victim too--I've felt a bit of courage to say that here thanks to you.  But mine happened when I was 11 by an older and much larger boy (I think he was 15 or 16).  I didn't speak a word of it until I was grown up though, and I've rarely mentioned it to anyone since.  But if I remained the vulnerable person I was when I was 11, I'm sure it'd be much more of an issue for me. 

I was a kid too. We're not alone-- far from it.  In fact, if you have 2 women in the room, chances are 56% that at *least* one of them was sexually abused before the age on 18.  There's 4 women in your Relief Society Presidency-- 81% odds one of them was attacked.  If you have a Relief Society class with 20 people in it, the odds are 99.96% at *least* one of them was abused as a child, most likely it's 5-8 women in the class.  

When you include adult abuse, these numbers get even worse.  

[stemelbow]

12 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

I was a kid too. We're not alone-- far from it.  In fact, if you have 2 women in the room, chances are 56% that at *least* one of them was sexually abused before the age on 18.  There's 4 women in your Relief Society Presidency-- 81% odds one of them was attacked.  If you have a Relief Society class with 20 people in it, the odds are 99.96% at *least* one of them was abused as a child, most likely it's 5-8 women in the class.  

When you include adult abuse, these numbers get even worse.  

I am male, though.  I'm guessing these types of numbers for males go way way down.  As for the chances....thanks for stating them.  It's always a good reminder. 

[Jane_Doe]

3 hours ago, stemelbow said:

I am male, though.  I'm guessing these types of numbers for males go way way down.  As for the chances....thanks for stating them.  It's always a good reminder. 

Also not rare.  For example, my husband was repeatedly abused.     There's 4 dude in your Priesthood leadership-- 42% odds one of them was attacked.  In a 20 man quorum, the odds are 97% at *least* one of them was abused as a child.

(Edited to fix my math.  Original numbers were too low).

Edited February 14, 2017 by Jane_Doe

[juliann]

The first problem is that anyone thinks the spirit is going to warn everybody. I wish we would stop promoting that. We have a lady in our ward who dominates all classes with her zealous belief that "the spirit" tells us everything we should do....if we are righteous enough. It is no wonder this young lady picked it up. I'm sure it is common.

Second, we have the problem of men thinking they can speak on behalf of women, especially in areas in which they have very limited insight into the female experience.. This guy was so out of line, at least he didn't tell her her skirt must have been too short. What is most sickening is that the young people all heard this. Given the situation at BYU, is there any chance the bishop could be asked to make a statement next week? I don't know what prompted it, but our bishop got up at the end of sacrament meeting and gave a lecture about what "preside" doesn't mean and that marriage partners are equal participants in all decisions with the priesthood not giving the man an excuse to "make the final decision." He even said that the church is defining presiding differently than the dictionary. 

Good for you for reacting so strongly to this. I have learned to pick my battles. What I have found without exception is that even when people remain silent, some will always come up later and thank me for speaking up. For some reason, we have a church culture that doesn't silence or even privileges unenlightened viewpoints from another century. 

[rongo]

20 minutes ago, juliann said:

I don't know what prompted it, but our bishop got up at the end of sacrament meeting and gave a lecture about what "preside" doesn't mean and that marriage partners are equal participants in all decisions with the priesthood not giving the man an excuse to "make the final decision." He even said that the church is defining presiding differently than the dictionary. 

Earnest question: what does preside mean, then? I'm not trying to be contrarian, but I'm honestly trying to think of any definition of presiding that allows for the above at the expense of past understandings.

Thanks! 

[Johnnie Cake]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

I think the man was focused on the wrong thing.  He should have been focused on the girl and the horrible thing that happened to her.  Instead, he was focused on her question about trying to answer why the Spirit didn't warn her.

I don't know that we can say that his world view is that she got what she deserved.  Sometimes we don't say things because we are so focused on making a different point.  That doesn't mean though that we don't believe the other 'things'. 

You're a much more patient person than me Bluebell...and probably more Christ like than me as well... sorry for my vent...it just pissed me off

[Peppermint Patty]

Thanks for this thread Stem. I was also a victim when I was 13. You never get over the hurt, confusion and distrust no matter how many times you pray or try to turn it over to the savior.

[bluebell]

17 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

You're a much more patient person than me Bluebell...and probably more Christ like than me as well... sorry for my vent...it just pissed me off

I doubt it.  It's just, i know i say really dumb things sometimes, even when i mean well, so i try to judge other people with more mercy than justice because that's how I hope other people are judging me.

I can't really expect other people to give me the benefit of the doubt if i'm not willing to try to do the same.   

[Meadowchik]

3 hours ago, CV75 said:

While the bad ideas and behaviors of others can negatively affect us to the point of self-destruction, Christ can likewise influence us in the other direction. I don’t believe He would lead anyone that He led into the Church back out of the Church. I think it is relatively rare that someone comes into the Church without the Lord leading him, and should that happen, the Lord still does all He can to inspire the right reasons for that person to stay in. He may excommunicate as a disciplinary effort to rescue, but I don’t envision Him leading anyone out since His grace is sufficient to overcome any offense that might arise from interacting with others. I think this is what Elder Uchtdorf meant in this talk:

 

 “And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles, or doctrine.

 

 “I suppose the Church would be perfect only if it were run by perfect beings. God is perfect, and His doctrine is pure. But He works through us—His imperfect children—and imperfect people make mistakes.

 

“It is unfortunate that some have stumbled because of mistakes made by men. But in spite of this, the eternal truth of the restored gospel found in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not tarnished, diminished, or destroyed. [My interjection: The eternal truth of the restored gospel is far, far more powerful than the stumbling anyone can do for whatever reason.]"

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/10/come-join-with-us?lang=eng

 

One problem is that it is indeed possible for those human/sin/fault factors to converge so intensely in a ward or situation that the Spirit has left and that, effectively, the "real church" is non-existent in that moment and place.

And if this happens on a chronic basis,  a person might possibly have a better chance of feeling the Spirit of God elsewhere.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears that they is where the math can lead, even if rarely.

[rongo]

10 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I doubt it.  It's just, i know i say really dumb things sometimes, even when i mean well, so i try to judge other people with more mercy than justice because that's how I hope other people are judging me.

I can't really expect other people to give me the benefit of the doubt if i'm not willing to try to do the same.   

Some of my favorite hymn lyrics are from "Nay, Speak No Ill:"

1. Nay, speak no ill; a kindly word/ Can never leave a sting behind;

And, oh, to breathe each tale we've heard/ Is far beneath a noble mind.

Full oft a better seed is sown/ By choosing thus the kinder plan,

For, if but little good is known,/ Still let us speak the best we can.

2. Give me the heart that fain would hide, / Would fain another's faults efface.

How can it please the human pride/ To prove humanity but base?

No, let us reach a higher mood, / A nobler estimate of man;

Be earnest in the search for good, / And speak of all the best we can.

3. Then speak no ill, but lenient be /To others' failings as your own.

If you're the first a fault to see, / Be not the first to make it known,

For life is but a passing day; / No lip may tell how brief its span.

Then, oh, the little time we stay, / Let's speak of all the best we can.

This also reminds me of one of Kristar Stendahl's three points when he came out (as Lutheran archbishop of Stockholm) in public support of the Stockholm Temple, in the face of fierce opposition (the other two were "If you want to know what Mormons believe, ask Mormons. Not Catholics or Lutherans" and "Always leave room for Holy Envy." His stated Holy Envy was the belief about and work for the dead that would take place in the temple): 

"Never compare your best with their worst."

If I were judged by me at my worst compared to others at their best, I would be toast . . .   We need to keep that in mind when we catch people not at their best.

[Ouagadougou]

9 hours ago, stemelbow said:

I hate to say it, but this is just one story of many that has me really down about Church.  I don't relate very well.  I've tried over the years and at different times have felt like I've found a place, found a way to contribute and all that.  But more and more those moments are fleeting.  I guess I'm saying this and being dramatic about it, because it's making me sad to think I'll lose Church.  But recently I've almost felt like it might be best to give it up or give it a break. 

Is it possible God will lead people out of the Church for HIs own purposes?  I've always felt like He does.  The Church is just one teeny tiny org among many resources God has to lead and guide people, to help us along.  I'm guessing some of you would not in a million years consider it like this.  But, if you are that way, I want to understand that too.  I want to know why or how. 

I think a lot of times the church is too black and white on some issues and, unfortunately, some in the church are only focused on the letter of the law.  I've heard similar stories about people who should have "recognized the spirit," when in all actuality, they did nothing wrong.  The girl in this story did nothing wrong, but, unfortunately, some in the church are very judgemental and will always find a way to condemn others, regardless of circumstances and decisions of others.  

With regard to your question about God leading people out of the church for his own purposes, that is the decision of each individual.  I think the important question to ask yourself is the following:  Can you personally grow just as close to your understanding of God outside the church?  For me personally, I can, but I continue to go to church (usually monthly) because of utilitarian purposes and a sense of community.  I have attended other churchs as well--and I think you can feel close to God when you gather with any group of honest/peaceful/charitable people.  I personally get more spiritually going to homeless shelters and feeding the poor than attending any LDS church service (but this is my own experience...others might feel differently).  I do think the vast majority of LDS members are charitable and have good intentions.  Along those same lines, I think members of the LDS church are unique and exceptional in many ways, especially given their focus on promoting strong families and strong communities.  

[sunstoned]

8 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

My initial reaction was...What a totally insensitive ***...but after giving it some thought I've concluded that he was a totally insensitive ***

 

I know its par for the course and exactly what posters expect me to say...but this story is upsetting on so many levels.  Was this man an outlier or the product of just being Mormon.? While my information is limited from what you have shared his views were also shared by other members of your ward and not a single member offered any check to his view.  While I hate to paint with a board brush and I know that there are always exceptions...I fear that this man's worldview is common in the church.  Its a worldview of judging others from the comfort of your private rameumptom. The church talks of compassion and yet so many members who are the product of church attendance share the same opinion of condemnation towards this poor girl.  Shame on them...this whole matter disgust me.  I've seen this same pattern of judging others throughout the church. body shaming, guiling the girl who wears a strapless prom dress, looking down ones nose at the member drinking coffee and yes shaming the rape victim and in effect blaming the victim for her own rape, for not listening to the so called spirit.

The pattern is seen at BYU  in how they've attacked rape victims there, its seen in wards, its seen in how the church has declared war on the LGBQ community...its seems to be pervasive in the culture...a holier than thou mentality and a freedom to judge others

^this^   If I was allowed to give you are rep point I would. 

[carbon dioxide]

12 hours ago, stemelbow said:

Is it possible God will lead people out of the Church for HIs own purposes?  I've always felt like He does.  The Church is just one teeny tiny org among many resources God has to lead and guide people, to help us along.  I'm guessing some of you would not in a million years consider it like this.  But, if you are that way, I want to understand that too.  I want to know why or how. 

 

I can't think of one reason why God would do this.  It would be like me hiring someone to clean my house and hiring someone else to purposely mess it up.  What would I accomplish by this?  The vision of the tree of life explains a lot of why people leave. 

Edited February 14, 2017 by carbon dioxide

[carbon dioxide]

10 hours ago, stemelbow said:

The temple is fine and dandy, sure.  But the work of it will continue on with or without me. 

Sometimes when I am depressed I say similar things to myself. But the reality is the Celestial Kingdom will continue to exist and God will continue to be God whether I choose to follow God and go to the Celestial Kingdom or not.  The work will always go one whether we choose to be a part of it or not.  What we can choose is to be a part of it or not.  We can reap the benefits of obedience or we can shoot ourselves in the foot and let God to chose someone else to do our work.  They will get the reward and we get nothing. 

[Meadowchik]

2 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

Sometimes when I am depressed I say similar things to myself. But the reality is the Celestial Kingdom will continue to exist and God will continue to be God whether I choose to follow God and go to the Celestial Kingdom or not.  The work will always go one whether we choose to be a part of it or not.  What we can choose is to be a part of it or not.  We can reap the benefits of obedience or we can shoot ourselves in the foot and let God to chose someone else to do our work.  They will get the reward and we get nothing. 

Except that we are only accountable to what we know. Different people have different convictions.

[The Nehor]

There is a cultural problem amongst some (not all) the church where they imagine they understand causality and all the things that factor into why things happen. They imagine they speak with the voice of God detailing why things happened when they haven't the slightest idea what they are talking about. The people who do this often will also explain how the current political situation resulted in certain problems, why the missionaries are having less success then they should, and love to imagine that they understand how the world works. They are basically a slightly less ridiculous conspiracy theorist who are convinced they see why things are the way they are.

I think this comes partially from the scriptures. The prophets who wrote them spoke authoritatively as to why certain things are happening and what should be done to correct them. They miss one key element. They are not prophets. Sometimes Priesthood leaders are inspired to give this kind of counsel. Sometimes parents and loved ones are. Sometimes we can get this clarity in our own lives. That is all well and good but unless it comes from revelation or spiritual insight it is speculation and is quite possibly harmful speculation. I don't know the specifics of this case or the relationship this man had with the girl. I do admit that I find it poor taste to share that story unless she gave permission.

Anecdotally I have a friend whose mother feels the need to tell her why things are happening in her life (good or bad) and relays it to something she perceives her daughter is or is not doing. She knows exactly why her daughter is still single, why she got the promotion at work, and even why she is having certain health problems. She is as annoying as she sounds. The end result is her daughter has stopped sharing her life with her mother. It is a busybody trait. It enables the spiritually weak to imagine a kind of spiritual insight they do not have and gives people who feel powerless the illusion that they understand. It is an attempt to mimic the gifts of the Spirit. In that sense it is blasphemy. To be fair I have fallen into the trap myself in the past. I hope I do not do so again.

[CV75]

16 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

One problem is that it is indeed possible for those human/sin/fault factors to converge so intensely in a ward or situation that the Spirit has left and that, effectively, the "real church" is non-existent in that moment and place.

And if this happens on a chronic basis,  a person might possibly have a better chance of feeling the Spirit of God elsewhere.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears that they is where the math can lead, even if rarely.

When the “real Church” has become non-existent, that would be apostasy. While I believe some apostate belief systems are better than others (accommodate the light of Christ better than others), and the Lord might lead someone into one belief system over another, He certainly does not instigate apostasy nor lead someone out of the real Church. Even within these apostate systems, I believe His aim, however long-term, is to bring people to a fullness of the Gospel.

I suppose there could be a unit of the real Church where the members are so toxic, dysfunctional and beyond correction that the unit must be closed. But the faithful who hold to “the eternal truth of the restored gospel” will still be provided another unit where they can enjoy the full blessings. Otherwise the Lord will look to them to endure as the leaven and improve the situation for the struggling unit that remains open, from the inside out.

At the same time, I’m sure the Lord continues to reach out to someone who has decided to leave such a branch or ward. If he can respond to the Lord's reaching and feel His Spirit outside of that environment, he will soon be inclined to do whatever it takes to partake of the sacrament, go to the temple, etc.

[gopher]

It's just never a good idea to use an instance of rape to teach about any Gospel principle.  I do think it's possible to speak up without bashing the person.  A less active member recently told our SS class that he thought couples should live together before getting married.  I was impressed with the kind tone of the class members who responded to him without making him feel stupid or unrighteous or unworthy.  As a result, he has continued to attend.  I hope people speak up and voice their concerns in church.  It just seems our society often can't express disapproval without going into full scorched earth mode.

[bluebell]

25 minutes ago, gopher said:

It's just never a good idea to use an instance of rape to teach about any Gospel principle.  I do think it's possible to speak up without bashing the person.  A less active member recently told our SS class that he thought couples should live together before getting married.  I was impressed with the kind tone of the class members who responded to him without making him feel stupid or unrighteous or unworthy.  As a result, he has continued to attend.  I hope people speak up and voice their concerns in church.  It just seems our society often can't express disapproval without going into full scorched earth mode.

This is so true!  

[Rain]

On Monday, February 13, 2017 at 9:14 AM, stemelbow said:

 

Is it possible God will lead people out of the Church for HIs own purposes?  I've always felt like He does.  The Church is just one teeny tiny org among many resources God has to lead and guide people, to help us along.  I'm guessing some of you would not in a million years consider it like this.  But, if you are that way, I want to understand that too.  I want to know why or how. 

 

I think asking is a great way too study it out,  but I'm not sure anyone can really answer that question without knowing the Lord's whole plan, because one person leaving has an effect on others around him,  but also on posterity. This is not a thing that only affects self.

So I have to go back to the whole prayer thing and being willing to do what the Lord wants and doing what you need to in order to hear the answers.  I know that answer gets scoffed at by some, but if your actions affect the eternal lives of so many then God is the only one who can give the answer. 

Don't get me wrong.  I'm not trying to guilt you into staying. I, personally, think staying is the best answer,  but I can't receive inspiration for someone else. I just know that with the most important decisions in my own life it has been critical to make sure I am willing to hear and live the Lord's answer. 

 

Edited February 14, 2017 by Rain

[Black Moclips]

Stemelbow - I have often wondered along the same lines as you. As a life long TBM (BIC, mission, BYU, temple marriage, etc) who has been completely inactive the last few years,  I think God does lead people out of the church for their benefit, happiness and progression. To think otherwise means the "church" is the point of this life, and that the "church" has all the tools you need. I think you know and can sense that it doesn't.  I think the infamous example still holds true - the church is (was supposed to be) a scaffolding, a support, a help, for the purpose of building you, and if its not working and its not bringing you peace and joy, then its fit to be cast aside. It obviously works for some people, but for many it doesn't.