CV75 Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 5 hours ago, jkwilliams said: I'm sure they do, but it's a mistake to tell someone who is experiencing pain and anguish to tell them their issues are trivial. When my mission president said my issues were "silly," it did not motivate me to contact him. Perhaps this is why you see the Renlunds doing the same thing. But their message is to CES staff who may be helping those in pain and anguish, and isn't, as you noted, what has been portrayed of it.
jkwilliams Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 10 minutes ago, CV75 said: Perhaps this is why you see the Renlunds doing the same thing. But their message is to CES staff who may be helping those in pain and anguish, and isn't, as you noted, what has been portrayed of it. Sure, that’s possible, but apparently I’m not alone in seeing the analogy as dismissive.
Avatar4321 Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 On 7/9/2018 at 6:10 PM, carbon dioxide said: My mother when she was alive had a bad issue of looking at trivial things and blowing them into major tragedies. To her, she was honest. If the car got a dent, it ruined the whole day for her. For us, it was something not to cheer about but dents happen in cars. It is part of life. Move on and try to be a little more careful but its not a big deal to stress about. The point I am making is that we each see things differently. What you may see as damage worse than chips and peeling paint to others is still chips and peeling paint. The Church will never be able to satisfy everyone. There will always be people that will complain about something. The Church can and should do better but there are some people that regardless what happens will never be happy. They grasp on to the problems far tighter than the things that are good. They may accept 10 truths about the gospel but its that one issue that they get wrapped up in that they ignore the truths and focus on the problem and it consumes them. That's why I'm a big proponent of doing what they've taught and working with the things we do know and exercising faith in God about the things we don't know. Even if it was ten issues and one truth, wouldn't focusing on building and applying the one truth and humbly seeking the will of God for the issues be better than chucking the truth and strengthening doubts?
carbon dioxide Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 On 7/10/2018 at 3:46 PM, JulieM said: I agree. I do believe that many who are the most valiant and reading and deeply studying and searching are the ones who uncover the truth about some of what’s not taught at church (historically). So, to classify them as complacent or lazy is odd to me! We really don't learn history at church. If one really wants to know history, they have to study on their own outside of Sunday meetings. When some history is given in church, it is done in a superficial way. So its not like the Church is teaching in detail one thing and they discover something else. It is more like the Church has been lazy to not give members a solid foundation on enough history so that when they discover something outside of Church, they don't have any normal channels to get them resolved. This is where the Church is failing. I have not seen any points of history that have caused me to have a faith crisis problem but everyone is different. There are topics in church that are pretty much off limits. It is hard to discuss various issues because an open way in church because they don't want controversy. Members might not feel comfortable speaking about issues privately with other members and so they pretty much have few options to resolve things. If they got to their bishop, the bishop may not be able to resolve the issue or perhaps redirect them to something else that does not deal with the issues of concern. The Church needs to make a space where people can voice concerns over things in a non-judgemental way. Nobody has all the answers but if enough people are involved, the vast majority of things can be answered I believe in a satisfactory way.
blueglass Posted July 12, 2018 Author Posted July 12, 2018 (edited) Good news. Finally found the full Widtsoe editorial on doubt. After the presidents of the church manuals I am wary of these quote ellipses! Millenial Star Feb 1, 1940 begins on pg 72. https://ia800707.us.archive.org/13/items/millennialstar10205eng/millennialstar10205eng.pdf Also I think it is useful to compare with Richard G Scott's article on Truth, "The Foundation of Correct Decisions" where he gives an example of truth obtained from the scientific method to produce the standard model of physics. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2007/10/truth-the-foundation-of-correct-decisions?lang=eng Edited July 12, 2018 by blueglass 1
blueglass Posted July 12, 2018 Author Posted July 12, 2018 (edited) (cancel) Edited July 12, 2018 by blueglass
CV75 Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 12 hours ago, jkwilliams said: Sure, that’s possible, but apparently I’m not alone in seeing the analogy as dismissive. We don't how many "see" the analogy as you do, or as I do, so that really isn't the issue. Whether we are alone or not in our perceptions, we are exchanging our respective takes on it. You were able to see that the analogy is not as bad as portrayed, and were able to share a personal experience that sheds some light on why you feel the analogy is dismissive. I am able to see that the analogy is for CES staff to apply it to themselves before they can apply it others, and in the latter role, they are also represented by the weak and simple fisherman. Granted, in this thread, more time seems to be spent justifying Stephen's response rather than how he might adopt Angelique's approach to doubts. But the whole presentation is about how people might adopt Angelique's response irrespective of the methods employed by the Church to fulfill her role in bringing people to Christ and into the Church. It seems a lot of emphasis has been placed on leaders garnering trust rather than stimulating faith in Christ; to me that is not much of a solution for those who are struggling. The weak and simple of the earth are not going to get too far garnering trust without first and foremost showing the way to faith in Christ, and typically fail at gaining trust from people who tend to doubt anyway. So in this regard, one of challenges is to help those who are struggling leverage their faith in Christ. I take it that charity and empathy is a given in all our interactions with the struggling, and encouraging faith in and conversion to Christ to be the most consistent service to render. 1
jkwilliams Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, CV75 said: We don't how many "see" the analogy as you do, or as I do, so that really isn't the issue. Whether we are alone or not in our perceptions, we are exchanging our respective takes on it. You were able to see that the analogy is not as bad as portrayed, and were able to share a personal experience that sheds some light on why you feel the analogy is dismissive. I am able to see that the analogy is for CES staff to apply it to themselves before they can apply it others, and in the latter role, they are also represented by the weak and simple fisherman. Granted, in this thread, more time seems to be spent justifying Stephen's response rather than how he might adopt Angelique's approach to doubts. But the whole presentation is about how people might adopt Angelique's response irrespective of the methods employed by the Church to fulfill her role in bringing people to Christ and into the Church. It seems a lot of emphasis has been placed on leaders garnering trust rather than stimulating faith in Christ; to me that is not much of a solution for those who are struggling. The weak and simple of the earth are not going to get too far garnering trust without first and foremost showing the way to faith in Christ, and typically fail at gaining trust from people who tend to doubt anyway. So in this regard, one of challenges is to help those who are struggling leverage their faith in Christ. I take it that charity and empathy is a given in all our interactions with the struggling, and encouraging faith in and conversion to Christ to be the most consistent service to render. Hmmm. I don't think Stephen's response requires justification. As I said, the approach seems to be one of dealing with the specifics of his questions more than the reasons behind them, which remain unknown, or at least unsaid. Angelique is shown as an example of someone whose faith trumped their questions, but again, the reason why she resolved her questions may have to do with the reasons behind the questions in the first place, not that she is inherently more faithful and less doubting. The question for the CES educators seems to be, How do you help the struggling? The answer to me is that you deal with each person individually and find out what they are thinking and why. The Stephens of the world are not necessarily unsaveable, but the implication seems to be that they are because they don't want to be saved. 2
ALarson Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 (edited) 21 minutes ago, CV75 said: We don't how many "see" the analogy as you do.... Well, we certainly know that he's not an isolated case and that there are many who feel as he does. I agree, that we don't have an exact number, but that isn't the issue. The issue is that this number is growing and the leaders of the church are now attempting to figure out a way to help those within that number. And, relating analogies such as this one to those who are struggling isn't helping and isn't a good solution, IMO. Edited July 12, 2018 by ALarson 1
california boy Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 4 minutes ago, ALarson said: Well, we certainly know that he's not an isolated case and that there are many who feel as he does. I agree, that we don't have an exact number, but that isn't the issue. The issue is that this number is growing and the leaders of the church are now attempting to figure out a way to help those within that number. And, relating analogies such as this one to those who are struggling isn't helping and isn't a good solution, IMO. Do you think the numbers are growing? What kind of numbers are we talking about?
jkwilliams Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 5 minutes ago, ALarson said: Well, we certainly know that he's not an isolated case and that there are many who feel as he does. I agree, that we don't have an exact number, but that isn't the issue. The issue is that this number is growing and the leaders of the church are now attempting to figure out a way to help those within that number. And, relating analogies such as this one to those who are struggling isn't helping and isn't a good solution, IMO. Yep, "apparently I'm not alone" doesn't signify that the rest of the world agrees with me. 1
CV75 Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 6 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: Hmmm. I don't think Stephen's response requires justification. As I said, the approach seems to be one of dealing with the specifics of his questions more than the reasons behind them, which remain unknown, or at least unsaid. Angelique is shown as an example of someone whose faith trumped their questions, but again, the reason why she resolved her questions may have to do with the reasons behind the questions in the first place, not that she is inherently more faithful and less doubting. The question for the CES educators seems to be, How do you help the struggling? The answer to me is that you deal with each person individually and find out what they are thinking and why. The Stephens of the world are not necessarily unsaveable, but the implication seems to be that they are because they don't want to be saved. Yes, it is about how the two deal with the specifics of their questions. The "reason" behind faith and doubt, in my experience and observation, is how one regards and holds his faith in / conversion to / testimony of Jesus. My view is that people are not inherently faithful or doubting, but that rather choose at some fundamental level before making their approach a habit. The analogy allows that everyone is saveable, and the fisherman displayed individual attention and empathy. Stephen certainly wanted to be saved, and that is why he went back onto the capsized boat. The implication of that is he that he left the fisherman's boat because of his habits and preferences, the "reason" for which is described above.
CV75 Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 6 minutes ago, ALarson said: Well, we certainly know that he's not an isolated case and that there are many who feel as he does. I agree, that we don't have an exact number, but that isn't the issue. The issue is that this number is growing and the leaders of the church are now attempting to figure out a way to help those within that number. And, relating analogies such as this one to those who are struggling isn't helping and isn't a good solution, IMO. No one is isolated. The LDS leaders have been trying to rescue people from the get-go. There is always something for each generation to draw people away.
ALarson Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 (edited) 42 minutes ago, california boy said: Do you think the numbers are growing? What kind of numbers are we talking about? The numbers of members who are discovering the details regarding some of the more difficult and disturbing historical issues,. This has then caused many of them to loose faith and trust in their leaders and in the church. We are seeing more members coming in with questions as these (true historical details) are being revealed more and more. The Bishop I serve with, mentions this often and he is also concerned about it. One thing for sure (IMO) is that analogies such as the one being discussed aren't the message that those members who are heartbroken and struggling need to hear. They need their concerns validated, not belittled or trivialized. They also don't need to feel that they are to blame for having issues with learning (for example) how Joseph married girls as young as 14 years old, married other men's wives, and did so in a deceitful way behind Emma's back. This is a huge issue for many who have been taught such strict moral guidelines that they are to adhere to or be disciplined. Just learning that alone, is not trivial and it's not silly to be disturbed when learning about it. For many, this is just a start as they realize they aren't familiar with church history and start to dig and read. It then snowballs for many from there and they continue to loose trust in the church and the leaders in the process. Edited July 12, 2018 by ALarson 1
ALarson Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 (edited) 27 minutes ago, CV75 said: No one is isolated. The LDS leaders have been trying to rescue people from the get-go. There is always something for each generation to draw people away. Members do feel isolated and alone when they first learn of historical issues they were not aware of previously. And yes, LDS leaders have been trying to rescue those who are struggling. However, they need to use different methods (and not analogies like this) if they want to reach them.. Whatever they are doing, isn't working well for many (most?) and they are still loosing many good members of the church. I'm not sure what the solution is because IMO, there are simply just no good answers for many of the questions. But making a member feel that their concerns are silly or small...or that it's their fault...is not going to work or get them back. That approach will just push most of them further out of the church. Edited July 12, 2018 by ALarson 3
HappyJackWagon Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 14 hours ago, CV75 said: Please provide a scriptural basis for the Lord's servants teaching this (other than the institution of the Law of Moses or the calling of judges in Israel, which were instituted en masse). The first principle of the gospel is Faith in Jesus Christ. Not faith in the church, Right? Without searching to find the myriad scriptures that support faith in Christ and not placing trust in the arm of the flesh, or discussion of the body of Christ, I'm comfortable in my opinion that the church's primary concern should be bringing people to Christ, so if there is some kind of stumbling block to that, I would think they would want to address it. Again, IMO, I would expect that church leaders would hope and work towards helping people maintain their faith in Christ even if they lose their trust in the church. I guess I don't see how or why that would be a controversial statement. 2
hope_for_things Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 22 minutes ago, ALarson said: Members do feel isolated and alone when they first learn of historical issues they were not aware of previously. And yes, LDS leaders have been trying to rescue those who are struggling. However, they need to use different methods (and not analogies like this) if they want to reach them.. Whatever they are doing, isn't working well for many (most?) and they are still loosing many good members of the church. I'm not sure what the solution is because IMO, there are simply just no good answers for many of the questions. But making a member feel that their concerns are silly or small...or that it's their fault...is not going to work or get them back. That approach will just push most of them further out of the church. Its so hard to know what each individual needs when it comes to support during their faith crisis. I still have a hard time knowing what my wife needs. She no longer has the same beliefs as before, but she hasn't been interested in exploring the history in detail like I have. She also really likes certain aspects of church, and is much happier just going along with what others (church leaders) tell her. At the same time she recognizes many hurtful elements of church now that she was bind to before. So she doesn't really fit in the same way she used to, and that is something that is hard for her when she attends. What I've learned is that everyone's needs are unique, and even as a person that lives in these spaces and interacts with people frequently in the faith crisis world, I still don't know how to help everyone. Its a very personal journey. I wish there were more local support for people struggling. I just think it would help if the church facilitated people getting together and having real conversations and being vulnerable and discussing these issues without shame and blame and judgment. I have a hope that we could get through these things together, but the social stigmas (which I think are sinful) are creating barriers that stop this from happening.
ALarson Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 (edited) 20 minutes ago, hope_for_things said: Its so hard to know what each individual needs when it comes to support during their faith crisis. I still have a hard time knowing what my wife needs. She no longer has the same beliefs as before, but she hasn't been interested in exploring the history in detail like I have. She also really likes certain aspects of church, and is much happier just going along with what others (church leaders) tell her. At the same time she recognizes many hurtful elements of church now that she was bind to before. So she doesn't really fit in the same way she used to, and that is something that is hard for her when she attends. What I've learned is that everyone's needs are unique, and even as a person that lives in these spaces and interacts with people frequently in the faith crisis world, I still don't know how to help everyone. Its a very personal journey. I wish there were more local support for people struggling. I just think it would help if the church facilitated people getting together and having real conversations and being vulnerable and discussing these issues without shame and blame and judgment. I have a hope that we could get through these things together, but the social stigmas (which I think are sinful) are creating barriers that stop this from happening. I agree with all you wrote above. What I'm seeing in our ward is an interesting dynamic. It's still so taboo to even mention certain topics in a group setting (if anyone doubts that, say the word "polygamy" and see the reaction....especially saying "Joseph's polygamy"). But, there are so many members (like your wife) whose beliefs are changing and evolving and who feel alone. So, we end up with quite a few members who are still attending and pretending to still be a staunch believer because of the peer pressure at church (I'm not saying that's your wife, but just what I'm seeing). These are many of the members who are coming in to our Bishop (or have in the past) and pleading for help and for answers. Many keep attending for family (to keep the peace) or because they simply love the ward members and community. But, I am seeing a shift in how people believe and feel about the church (at least in my ward). There's just no way to avoid this and still be more transparent about some of the details of church history and past doctrines. I think there are few who can hear them and not have a change in how they'd formerly believed or felt about the past leaders and current leadership too. Then there's this new policy and other current issues that are causing members to struggle too. I'm not sure what the answer is that will help, but once again, it's not telling analogies like the one in the OP, IMO. That's not what members who are struggling need to hear. It may cause those who are not struggling to feel better about themselves, but it won't help those who are in pain and who are trying to hold on. Edited July 12, 2018 by ALarson 2
blueglass Posted July 12, 2018 Author Posted July 12, 2018 35 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: The first principle of the gospel is Faith in Jesus Christ. Not faith in the church, Right? Without searching to find the myriad scriptures that support faith in Christ and not placing trust in the arm of the flesh, or discussion of the body of Christ, I'm comfortable in my opinion that the church's primary concern should be bringing people to Christ, so if there is some kind of stumbling block to that, I would think they would want to address it. Again, IMO, I would expect that church leaders would hope and work towards helping people maintain their faith in Christ even if they lose their trust in the church. I guess I don't see how or why that would be a controversial statement. The first two talks by Webb and Elder Kim Clark at the CES 2018 training were almost entirely dedicated to Christ. Elder Clark describes the over complication of the bubble diagrams in the plan of salvation from the seminary book of mormon plan of salvation chart (https://www.lds.org/manual/book-of-mormon-seminary-teacher-manual-2017/lessons-1-5/lesson-4-the-plan-of-salvation?lang=eng) Clark says teachers need to emphasize that the diagram is not the plan. Jesus Christ is the plan. "principle number one: Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life.3 The Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is at the center of the plan of salvation. His atoning sacrifice makes everything in the Father’s plan possible." 1
jkwilliams Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 1 minute ago, ALarson said: I agree with all you wrote above. What I'm seeing in our ward is an interesting dynamic. It's still so taboo to even mention certain topics in a group setting (if anyone doubts that, say the word "polygamy" and see the reaction....especially saying "Joseph's polygamy"). But, there are so many members (like your wife) whose beliefs are changing and evolving and who feel alone. So, we end up with quite a few members who are still attending and pretending to still be a staunch believer because of the peer pressure at church (I'm not saying that's your wife, but just what I'm seeing). These are many of the members who are coming in to our Bishop (or have in the past) and pleading for help and for answers. Many keep attending for family (to keep the peace) or because they simply love the ward members and community. But, I am seeing a shift in how people believe and feel about the church (at least in my ward). There's just no way to avoid this and still be more transparent about some of the details of church history and past doctrines. I think there are few who can hear them and not have a change in how they'd formerly believed or felt about the past leaders and current leadership too. Then there's this new policy and other current issues that are causing members to struggle too. I'm not sure what the answer is that will help, but once again, it's not telling analogies like the one in the OP, IMO. That's not what members who are struggling need to hear. It may cause those who are not to feel better about themselves, but it won't help those who are in pain and who are trying to hold on. Lately my wife has been asking me if I would consider attending church with her, and I have decided I will do so just as a matter of being together and supporting each other. Your post makes me wonder if what I see in church will be different from the last time I was attending semi-regularly, 5 years ago. I might be interesting just to attend as an observer of people. 1
ALarson Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 (edited) 6 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: Lately my wife has been asking me if I would consider attending church with her, and I have decided I will do so just as a matter of being together and supporting each other. Your post makes me wonder if what I see in church will be different from the last time I was attending semi-regularly, 5 years ago. I might be interesting just to attend as an observer of people. I don't know how much you'll see (outwardly). Most members who have lost their belief in the church or who are struggling, still feel they have to pretend and keep a front in place they they are a true believer. That's just not healthy though and is hard to sustain long term. Many here (the board) see this and believe that all those members are the same as they always have been....but I'm amazed at how many pretenders there are now attending (at least in our ward and from seeing the amount of outwardly staunch members coming in with personal struggles and doubts). Edited July 12, 2018 by ALarson
blueglass Posted July 12, 2018 Author Posted July 12, 2018 1 hour ago, ALarson said: They need their concerns validated, not belittled or trivialized. They also don't need to feel that they are to blame for having issues with learning (for example) how Joseph married girls as young as 14 years old, married other men's wives, and did so in a deceitful way behind Emma's back. As an example Brian Hales comment in response to someone posting about concerns about hiding marriages from Emma, "You are not alone in condemning Joseph’s plural marriages that occurred without Emma’s knowledge. As I’ve said, I believe he waited because he knew if she rejected it, she would become the transgressor (D&C 132:65). I think the angel commanded it because Emma had rejected plural marriage in Kirtland and the Prophet’s days on earth were short. After his first polygamous union in Nauvoo, he only lived 3 ½ years. If he had waited for Emma, who knows if it would have been established at all." Can anyone read this and not begin throwing dishes against the wall?
ALarson Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 (edited) 15 minutes ago, blueglass said: As an example Brian Hales comment in response to someone posting about concerns about hiding marriages from Emma, "You are not alone in condemning Joseph’s plural marriages that occurred without Emma’s knowledge. As I’ve said, I believe he waited because he knew if she rejected it, she would become the transgressor (D&C 132:65). I think the angel commanded it because Emma had rejected plural marriage in Kirtland and the Prophet’s days on earth were short. After his first polygamous union in Nauvoo, he only lived 3 ½ years. If he had waited for Emma, who knows if it would have been established at all." Can anyone read this and not begin throwing dishes against the wall? I agree. How about just owning that the manner in which Joseph lived polygamy wasn't honest or necessary and members are correct to have issues with them? Could Joseph have obeyed and restored the principle without marrying young teens (many who were girls that Emma loved as daughters)? Yes. Could he have restored the principle of polygamy without venturing into living polyandry and marrying other men's legal wives? Yes. I believe he made some choices that were costly back then and they are still costly today (with the loss of members when they learn the truth about this). Would the principle have been restored if Joseph did practice it as members have been taught in the past? Yes. He could have married a few older widows who were in need. He could have just married one of them and still practiced and restored the principle. If he was to be sealed to those young girls in the eternities, that would have happened with what was to take place with proxy sealings. It was not necessary for him to lie and deceive and betray and hurt Emma (and others) to restore it. If it truly was from God, those would not have been a part of practicing it, IMO. But, I don't want to derail as this is another topic for another thread (and has already been discussed on here). It is just an example though of how member's issues and concerns are very valid and they are disturbing for good reason. The details simply are disturbing. There's nothing wrong with members being upset when they learn about them. Edited July 12, 2018 by ALarson
california boy Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 (edited) 37 minutes ago, blueglass said: As an example Brian Hales comment in response to someone posting about concerns about hiding marriages from Emma, "You are not alone in condemning Joseph’s plural marriages that occurred without Emma’s knowledge. As I’ve said, I believe he waited because he knew if she rejected it, she would become the transgressor (D&C 132:65). I think the angel commanded it because Emma had rejected plural marriage in Kirtland and the Prophet’s days on earth were short. After his first polygamous union in Nauvoo, he only lived 3 ½ years. If he had waited for Emma, who knows if it would have been established at all." Can anyone read this and not begin throwing dishes against the wall? Part of the story falls apart for me with the whole angel and sword part. It seems like if anyone needed an angel to appear to them, it should have been Emma, not Joseph Smith. Or if God is commanding a couple to start up polygamy, don't you think the angel should have appeared to both of them? But for some reason, this seems to be a reoccurring theme. Break off church leader wants to have multiple wives. He gets a vision, he forces his wife to go along with it or does it behind her back. Hummm. Edit: Yeah probably too much of a derail. But these would be the questions I would be bringing up in a group discussion. And if I did, would anyone have an answer for that? So many of these issues, you have to throw out rational questions. Edited July 12, 2018 by california boy 1
pogi Posted July 12, 2018 Posted July 12, 2018 54 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: Lately my wife has been asking me if I would consider attending church with her, and I have decided I will do so just as a matter of being together and supporting each other. Careful brother, that is a slippery slope back into full activity! Next thing you know, you are going to be praying daily...
Recommended Posts