Scrupulosity

[JAHS]

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

No need to apologize. I’m barely keeping up with this thread as is. I don’t frequent the board as consistently as others and so I missed the research you posted and just barely read it. I found the research interesting though not super surprising...at least on  the maladaptive fear based perfectionism. I’m curious as to how they defined adaptive perfectionism and what it means to have a “faith-based approach” to it. It makes sense though it makes me wonder if I would fit into the category. I generally don’t see myself as a perfectionist, but I think that is because I interact and see that mostly from the maladaptive version due to my career. Well and my adaptive perfectionist oriented husband. I make plans and kinda wing it midway and the only thing I’ve really been perfectionistic about was dating relationships when I was younger especially. I religiously squirreled away stats and figures from research in my head as to what would guarantee me a healthy marriage. It was definitely trauma/fear-motivated. 
 

as I think I’ve at least hinted at I definitely think rigid religious beliefs definitely have a positive correlation to lower mental health and scrupulousity. My problem isn’t that but defining all of the church as a rigid religious entity. To me it’s taking only one expression of faith and religious behavior as “the church.” One that I happily don’t belong to though I’ve certainly seen it in others and in local communities  I’m adjacent to. When it’s in an individual I call it checklist Jesus. As in these are the things/milestones I’ve gotta reach and do in my life in order to be “good.” That branch of thought is there in the church but it’s not the whole tree. Note that the importance of grace isn’t introduced in the article as a novel concept for LDS folk. My problem I’ve had and seen elsewhere is that the more legalistic derivatives of the church are often focused on to such an extent that it becomes the primary thing seen on the tree and other derivatives are minimized, denied, or ignored. 
 

The last research you give is actually a great example of that for me. It can be read as mentioned. That to me is a great example of Checklist Jesus. But in context that sermon to me isn’t about making a massive checklist of thoughts and behaviors and eliciting humility with a group that assumed they were basically perfect. That hubris blinded them to their faults and left to both individual and social stagnation. It also allowed them to justify their behaviors that left them stuck in varying pains and social ills. It points them to the ultimate source of capacity.  Not our efforts but God’s guidance and love...grace. When that’s not balanced then there’s going to be a problem.
 

more in a little bit...

with luv,

BD 

When it comes to checklists I like what Elder Oaks once said:
"From such teachings we conclude that the Final Judgment is not just an evaluation of a sum total of good and evil acts—what we have done. It is an acknowledgment of the final effect of our acts and thoughts—what we have become. It is not enough for anyone just to go through the motions. The commandments, ordinances, and covenants of the gospel are not a list of deposits required to be made in some heavenly account. The gospel of Jesus Christ is a plan that shows us how to become what our Heavenly Father desires us to become." (Dallin H. Oaks, “The Challenge to Become,” New Era, Aug. 2002, 12)

As long as we become what we are supposed to become how we get there may not need all things checked off a list.

[Meadowchik]

7 hours ago, pogi said:

Yes, someone suffering from scrupulosity can be traumatized by repeatedly failing to attend church due to the expectation.  But that is a not the original assertion.

.  

 

It starts somewhere and people who aren't unhealthy can get stuck in a  feedback loop of harmful thought patterns, and then reach unhealthy levels. A sense of failure and helplessness can generate more unhealthy patterns and, at some point, traumatic experience. And more unhealthy patterns.

 

 

[MustardSeed]

FWIW while we are defining terms, there is a big difference between OCPD and OCD.  Scrupulousity which is not an official diagnosis seems to align well with OCPD. 
 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

4 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

FWIW while we are defining terms, there is a big difference between OCPD and OCD.  Scrupulousity which is not an official diagnosis seems to align well with OCPD. 
 

I think it’s also important to recognize that all of these mental health disorders exist on a continuous spectrum like height or weight. 

[Calm]

13 hours ago, Mark White said:

If some people aren't doing as well as they can then that must mean they are okay with not doing as well as they can, otherwise they would want to put in some effort to try to do better than they are doing. 

Not everyone understands themselves well enough to know their limits in any given situation. They may not realize they can’t do better or they may blame themselves that they can’t do more. 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

18 hours ago, pogi said:

can expecting 2-3 hours of church

Reading these types of threads is interesting. The Mormonism I was involved with prided itself on not being a Sunday only religion. I guess I was just doing it wrong, but I must have missed the general conference talk where they said - hey all we want you to do is show up for a couple of hours on Sunday then your scotch free for a week! 
 

It’s like on the excommunication thread where it felt like some church defenders were comparing an excommunication to losing your Sams club membership or something. 

Edited May 1, 2021 by SeekingUnderstanding

[Calm]

12 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I think it’s also important to recognize that all of these mental health disorders exist on a continuous spectrum like height or weight. 

But there are also significant differences between acute distress and chronic disorders, especially  where there is biological involvement (could be genetic, injury caused, or otherwise original to the person or developed over time due to extended stress responses or possibly the result of something else I can’t think of at the moment).

I say this because too often even those with the best intentions assume their temporary experience with depression or anxiety or helplessness or whatever is the same in quality as those who have mental disorders of these and they therefore assume they know what the other is experiencing.  I have seen this cause harm because they assume if the sufferer just does what they did to endure or get better, it will help and if it doesn’t, then the sufferer isn’t really trying to get better, etc.  Or the sufferer beats themselves up because they blame themselves for not making it work, not realizing even though  there are shared characteristics of their experiences, there are also fundamental differences that need to be addressed to be able to change. 

Edited May 1, 2021 by Calm

[SeekingUnderstanding]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

But there are also significant differences between acute distress and chronic disorders, especially  where there is biological involvement (could be genetic, injury caused, or otherwise original to the person or developed over time due to extended stress responses or possibly the result of something else I can’t think of at the moment).

I say this because too often even those with the best intentions assume their temporary experience with depression or anxiety or helplessness or whatever is the same in quality as those who have mental disorders of these and they therefore assume they know what the other is experiencing.  I have seen this cause harm because they assume if the sufferer just does what they did to endure or get better, it will help and if it doesn’t, then the sufferer isn’t really trying to get better, etc.  Or the sufferer beats themselves up because they blame themselves for not making it work, not realizing even though  there are shared characteristics of their experiences, there are also fundamental differences that need to be addressed to be able to change. 

I didn’t mean to imply the latter at all. Merely that we are all on a spectrum. Anxiety is a normal healthy emotion. Some humans (psychopaths) feel too little and some feel way to much. It’s not like there is some easily marked line we can draw between normal and excessive any more than we can draw a bright line with say excessive height. I can define 7’ tall as being a giant, but many of the problems a 7’ tall person encounters, a 6’ 9” person will encounter as well.

[Calm]

17 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I didn’t mean to imply the latter at all. 

I just feel the need to fill in gaps even when I know the poster themselves understands the issues....my own compulsion.
 

Quote

Merely that we are all on a spectrum. 

I wish there was a better term than spectrum for talking about range as I don’t believe we can so easily isolate one attribute and accurately describe it on a scale between two opposing extremes.  This imo renders oversimplified versions we then dissect as if the real thing.  Attributes are imo actually complex combinations as are behaviours even while they often appear to be one dimensional.

Edited May 1, 2021 by Calm

[Meadowchik]

43 minutes ago, Calm said:

Not everyone understands themselves well enough to know their limits in any given situation. They may not realize they can’t do better or they may blame themselves that they can’t do more. 

Yes! When my first was born, I experienced massive blood loss due to uterine abruption...My doctor offered a transfusion and I declined. I was very, very tired. But as a first-timer I expected to be tired and thought the feeling was normal. 

That recovery was the worst of all six deliveries, the PPD was the most severe. But I didn't know it at the time, but I did know what I had been taught to do and be.

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Reading these types of threads is interesting. The Mormonism I was involved with prided itself on not being a Sunday only religion. I guess I was just doing it wrong, but I must have missed the general conference talk where they said - hey all we want you to do is show up for a couple of hours on Sunday then your scotch free for a week! 
 

It’s like on the excommunication thread where it felt like some church defenders were comparing an excommunication to losing your Sams club membership or something. 

So true!!

[jkwilliams]

2 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Reading these types of threads is interesting. The Mormonism I was involved with prided itself on not being a Sunday only religion. I guess I was just doing it wrong, but I must have missed the general conference talk where they said - hey all we want you to do is show up for a couple of hours on Sunday then your scotch free for a week! 
 

It’s like on the excommunication thread where it felt like some church defenders were comparing an excommunication to losing your Sams club membership or something. 

These threads always seem to come back to that: don't take the church or your covenants seriously, and ignore your priesthood leaders' counsel. Somehow I missed those lessons. 

[teddyaware]

2 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Reading these types of threads is interesting. The Mormonism I was involved with prided itself on not being a Sunday only religion. I guess I was just doing it wrong, but I must have missed the general conference talk where they said - hey all we want you to do is show up for a couple of hours on Sunday then your scotch free for a week! 
 

It’s like on the excommunication thread where it felt like some church defenders were comparing an excommunication to losing your Sams club membership or something. 

47 Then shall the arm of the Lord fall upon the nations.
48 And then shall the Lord set his foot upon this mount, and it shall cleave in twain, and the earth shall tremble, and reel to and fro, and the heavens also shall shake.
49 And the Lord shall utter his voice, and all the ends of the earth shall hear it; and the nations of the earth shall mourn, and they that have laughed shall see their folly. (Doctrine and Covenants 45)

[SeekingUnderstanding]

11 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

47 Then shall the arm of the Lord fall upon the nations.
48 And then shall the Lord set his foot upon this mount, and it shall cleave in twain, and the earth shall tremble, and reel to and fro, and the heavens also shall shake.
49 And the Lord shall utter his voice, and all the ends of the earth shall hear it; and the nations of the earth shall mourn, and they that have laughed shall see their folly. (Doctrine and Covenants 45)

Now that’s more like it!

[BlueDreams]

Forewarning I haven’t read the thread since last night, so some of this may be repetitive to others Points. these are all in response to @Meadowchik’s posts to me but anyone’s welcome to chime in obviously  

 

 

Quote

 

I can relate to that for sure. Pretty much like my life this past couple years.

Now suppose you have that sort of experience not just during a particularly difficult period but over and over and over. Suppose you're always failing at a thing which you believe you could attain if you were righteous. Suppose you feel completely helpless.

 

 

I have seen what you describe. When I had some of my first ex-LDS folk - or people who were in a faith flux of some sort - I wanted to make extra sure they knew they could bring those concerns and experiences to me as their therapist, no matter my own religious affiliation. So I listened to their stories in detail. My take away from many of the ones that had similar experiences to what you described were if I had been given the exact same set of circumstances there would have been a good chance I left too. Sometimes I had similar negative experiences, but the outcomes were different because the context I found myself in at pivotal moments were very different from theirs. Those different contexts also helped shape my own personal cognitions and religious stances/attitudes. (I should note There were more straightforward stories of leaving too that usually entailed not believing in some way or fashion, or it not fitting them, as the primary reasons to exit. But these were usually not painful or traumatizing events.)

Which leads me to the underlined parts. These are extremely subjective and usually built up from g to complex contexts. They are not intrinsic to simply participating or being a member of the institutional church but what their experiences led them to highlight, prioritize and Understand from it. Again many of these contexts were not their choosing at all. But it helped build up cognitive distortions that are making some of these contexts, previous and current, worse. Changing those often reduces the symptoms. Giving them a different means of interaction with their religious context changes it. In systems theories there is an assertion that changing one or two individuals in the system (the group, whatever that is) can shift the entire system at times. This can happen with those that I meet not currently out but in spiritual crisis. Changing how they interact with the crisis does change the degree of helplessness they experience,  reducing their chance/experience of trauma symptoms or emotional turmoil. This doesn’t mean they’ll stay in the church. That’s not my job. But it does mean whatever choice they do make, they feel more agentic and grounded in their decisions. If they do stay they are not staying in the same paradigm of the church they had prior. In essence their church experience has shifted. 

 

Quote

 

One manifestation of trauma, imo, is the experience of failure that is tied to worthiness when a person cannot for whatever reason adhere to very involved expectations and instructions. Worthiness is a big deal, it is a matter of being cut off from what represents everything good in existence. 

Anyways, I think I started talking about  trauma in response to your mention of it. 

 

 

Okay. For me my first question would be what is meant by worthiness by someone. I’ll use this as an example of what I mean by shift in paradigm. When this is defined by someone influence by legalistic or all/nothing thought it becomes very much what you described. When it is based grace or compassion oriented thought the idea of worthiness takes a very different tone and pattern of thought. I’ve played this with people all the time. Where their assumptions about their worthiness is tied to something rigid and outward focused while that of say a child is because they love them (ie. Intrinsic). Personally the latter is the basis of my church experience. When I am missing it in session I’ve often prayed before I enter the room to see this person I’m struggling to find value in as God sees them. It’s always a kinder version than what I am seeing in front of me. Not that it necessarily excuses the behaviors I’m seeing. 

 

Quote

That's fine. I'm not a medical professional, I am just a layperson who has experienced religious trauma and also continues to observe others who suffer from it and also cares for LDS people steeped in what appears to be scrupulosity. 

Clarification question: what do you mean by the last part in bold? 

Also I did this backwards in response and meant to mention this more specifically. My points should not be read to assume that religious-based trauma cannot happen in an LDS setting. It most certainly can and does. So I hope that nothing I am saying is discrediting or read as discrediting your own experiences of religious trauma. What I am say is that it isn’t baked into the system. That is going to take several other factors (many still outside of direct control of those harmed) coming together at the same time. It’s the difference to me as saying abusive families exist and families abuse. 
 

This may seem a little out of order due to how I have to write them out...

with luv,

bd

[The Nehor]

15 hours ago, JAHS said:

When it comes to checklists I like what Elder Oaks once said:
"From such teachings we conclude that the Final Judgment is not just an evaluation of a sum total of good and evil acts—what we have done. It is an acknowledgment of the final effect of our acts and thoughts—what we have become. It is not enough for anyone just to go through the motions. The commandments, ordinances, and covenants of the gospel are not a list of deposits required to be made in some heavenly account. The gospel of Jesus Christ is a plan that shows us how to become what our Heavenly Father desires us to become." (Dallin H. Oaks, “The Challenge to Become,” New Era, Aug. 2002, 12)

As long as we become what we are supposed to become how we get there may not need all things checked off a list.

I’m doomed.

[MustardSeed]

7 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I’m doomed.

Gee I’d like to be a member of your faith, sounds uplifting and hopeful.  😅😳

[The Nehor]

14 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

Gee I’d like to be a member of your faith, sounds uplifting and hopeful.  😅😳

I am told it can be.

[MustardSeed]

12 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I am told it can be.

Tough break kid. Sometimes the formulas aren’t as predictable as promised.  
- one who knows

[AtlanticMike]

On 4/27/2021 at 2:35 PM, JAHS said:

Scrupulosity is characterized by pathological guilt about moral or religious issues. It is personally distressing, objectively dysfunctional, and often accompanied by significant impairment in social functioning. It is typically conceptualized as a moral or religious form of obsessive–compulsive disorder

I was never a scrupulous individual till 6 months ago. The first 45 years of my life were spent believing that our church was first and foremost about loving one another and charity. I guess I've glossed over the important policies or maybe even some doctrines of our church most of my life because they weren't important to me. 

      Now, by the above definition, I definitely consider myself the poster boy for scrupulosity. I'm definitely obsessed with church doctrine and policies. I'm obsessed with its history and have spent well over a $1000 dollars on books. As of now, as much as I pride myself with being able to work through problems that I encounter, I've become preoccupied with anything to do with the church. It's almost as if I'm possessed. It is so weird!! I hope it goes away for my families sake. 

Edited May 3, 2021 by AtlanticMike

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, AtlanticMike said:

I was never a scrupulous individual till 6 months ago. The first 45 years of my life were spent believing that our church was first and foremost about loving one another and charity. I guess I've glossed over the important policies or maybe even some doctrines of our church most of my life because they weren't important to me. 

      Now, by the above definition, I definitely consider myself the poster boy for scrupulosity. I'm definitely obsessed with church doctrine and policies. I'm obsessed with its history and have spent well over a $1000 dollars on books. As of now, as much as I pride myself with being able to work through problems that I encounter, I've become preoccupied with anything to do with the church. It's almost as if I'm possessed. It is so weird!! I hope it goes away for my families sake. 

I believe it's because you totally believed, lock stock and barrel. I think those that love church for social and whatever comes with it, and don't look at it like you or I and many others, they don't worry about the history or what not. And many on this board that are true believers, I believe would be right there with us, in not leaving it alone or doing research non stop if they had a crisis of faith.

Edited May 3, 2021 by Tacenda

[Hamba Tuhan]

9 hours ago, Tacenda said:

And many on this board that are true believers, I believe would be right there with us, in not leaving it alone or doing research non stop if they had a crisis of faith.

My preferred research is first-person and in the present, not third-person and in the past. I find I get much clearer results that way.

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

My preferred research is first-person and in the present, not third-person and in the past. I find I get much clearer results that way.

Good way to live Mormonism for sure!

[Hamba Tuhan]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Good way to live Mormonism for sure!

I don't think there's any other way. Why should I believe the frankly outlandish things that Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, etc. said/wrote if those things cannot be replicated in my own life?

On this point, I share the Prophet Joseph's scepticism as well as his epistemological approach:

Quote

If I had not experienced what I have, I should not have believed it myself.

 

Edited May 4, 2021 by Hamba Tuhan