Scrupulosity

[Vanguard]

3 minutes ago, pogi said:

Our hand sanitizer at the County comes straight from a local distillery.  I think it is straight vodka.  The poor fella wouldn’t survive my job

Ha! Indeed. One of my clients - a wonderful LDS gentleman - could not lean his elbows on a fine-dining table cloth for fear that his shirt or hands might pick up elements of alcohol left behind from the previous customer and that as a result he would inadvertently? brush his hand or shirt against his mouth and thereby 'consume' some of the alcohol. These concerns permeated his daily life and as is usually the case, his OCD bled into other themes (i.e., physical cleanliness) making his existence all the more horrible.

[Meadowchik]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

I don’t know what you mean by “intricate ideological instructions”.  Do you mean commandments?

It sounds like you are simply suggesting that our morals are wrong and yours are right.

It's pretty straightforward. Along with other ideologies, the LDS framework consists of intricate ideological instructions for righteousness, or very involved, detailed requirements for becoming and remaining righteous, or worthy. Many of these instructions flow from basic principles of right and wrong, but there are yet still many more which are rules which must be followed to demonstrate obedience for obedience's sake. 

[Vanguard]

35 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

It's pretty straightforward. Along with other ideologies, the LDS framework consists of intricate ideological instructions for righteousness, or very involved, detailed requirements for becoming and remaining righteous, or worthy. Many of these instructions flow from basic principles of right and wrong, but there are yet still many more which are rules which must be followed to demonstrate obedience for obedience's sake. 

I think we have some agreement here. IMO, it stands to reason that with more, clear expectations on behavior comes a higher likelihood of these kinds of pathologies. Though I don't believe this argues against having these expectations, we should always be vigilant in dressing our gospel message in the benevolent and forgiving tones of the Savior's message. This messaging needs to be taught at the earliest of ages.

[teddyaware]

1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

I don't know the story of Alma apart from what you've posted here.

Did Alma actually commit grievous sins? If so, then this is not an example of scruples. Scruples are when you obsess over whether or not some little tiny thing is or is not a sin, when you feel huge guilt for something that is not worthy of guilt, when you are paralyzed from action for fear of sin, when you can only see a God of justice and no mercy, etc.

Yes, Alma was truly wicked. In fact, the Book of Mormon says he and those in his group were among “the very vilest of sinners.” 

[teddyaware]

2 hours ago, Duncan said:

but most, if not all people are like Alma, they don't have an Angelic visitor, they need therapy or something to even come to accept the fact that they can be forgiven of their sins-and until their do they will punish themselves as I say in a myriad of ways

Laman and Lemuel were also rebuked by an angel and witnessed many mighty miracles and yet they remained unmoved. Perhaps the difference lies in the fact that Alma was truly sorry and regretful for his sins while Laman and Lemuel never felt bad enough for long enough to have it make a difference.

Edited April 28, 2021 by teddyaware

[3DOP]

5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Does the LDS church have any teachings on this?

Catholicism has long understood and dealt with what we call "scruples."

Here's our definition from the Catholic Encyclopedia (1907):

I like how it says scruples does not have spiritual benefit, but is in fact an evil.

There are lots of directions and advice given to confessors (the priest who hears your confession) to help people suffering from scruples. It ranges from forbidding the reading of certain types of books, such as books that focus on rigorous asceticism, and to the prescribing of certain harmless pleasures. It is also important to teach about grace and forgiveness.

I attend a parish that offers the traditional sacraments, and I have heard a sermon or two about scruples. I assume that there are some who suffer from it in the parish and Father knows from the confessional. I could see someone drawn to the traditional sacraments being more prone to scruples.

Have you ever heard this specifically addressed in sacrament meeting or general conference before?

Good question MN.

I am pretty sure I recall once when at the beginning of a parish mission, we were instructed to stay home for the first conference if any of us had scruples. I think that first conference was on hell. I also remember before I came in to the church that I thought it was good to be scrupulous. I just thought it meant to be thorough and honest in one's dealings. I think there is some confusion in the world about what it means in its original psychological context. I remember the priest explaining that it was not a good thing to be scrupulous, and I knew that I had misused the word. I am sure I have not repeated the mistake since 1995!  

Miserere, it might also be helpful to consider the opposite disorder of the soul, laxity. 

I think this quote from Card. Ratzinger is illustrative of the danger of the two extremes:

“Whoever is no longer capable of perceiving guilt (a lax conscience) is spiritually ill. From the perspective of scrupulosity, we should observe that the reverse is also true—whoever is no longer capable of perceiving innocence is spiritually ill."  

---https://blog.magiscenter.com/blog/overcoming-scrupulosity-with-intellectual-conversion

Edited April 28, 2021 by 3DOP

[Vanguard]

7 minutes ago, 3DOP said:

Good question MN.

I am pretty sure I recall once when at the beginning of a parish mission, we were instructed to stay home for the first conference if any of us had scruples. I think that first conference was on hell. I also remember before I came in to the church that I thought it was good to be scrupulous. I just thought it meant to be thorough and honest in one's dealings. I think there is some confusion in the world about what it means in its original psychological context. I remember the priest explaining that it was not a good thing to be scrupulous, and I knew that I had misused the word. I am sure I have not repeated the mistake since 1995!  

Miserere, it might also be helpful to consider the opposite disorder of the soul, laxity. 

I think this quote from Card. Ratzinger is illustrative of the danger of the two extremes:

“Whoever is no longer capable of perceiving guilt (a lax conscience) is spiritually ill. From the perspective of scrupulosity, we should observe that the reverse is also true—whoever is no longer capable of perceiving innocence is spiritually ill."  

---https://blog.magiscenter.com/blog/overcoming-scrupulosity-with-intellectual-conversion

Very nicely said. I don't know if the original context of the word scrupulous suggested pathology only that currently in a clinical sense of the word we do mean something pathological. There are many instances when adhering scrupulously to something is definitely a positive. For example, I want my accountant to scrupulously adhere to the principles of accounting when tracking my money. When speaking of OCD, however, we do mean something that has gone beyond the pale and is now causing considerable distress in the person's life. And in the context of our religious circles, it means the individual has unduly distorted the what it means to be obedient.

[3DOP]

4 hours ago, Duncan said:

Pres. Oaks nailed it on the head when he said this at a BYU devotional in 1990

"Most of what I have said here has been addressed to persons who think that repentance is too easy. At the opposite extreme are those who think that repentance is too hard. That group of souls are so tenderhearted and conscientious that they see sin everywhere in their own lives, and they despair of ever being able to be clean. The shot of doctrine that is necessary to penetrate the hard shell of the easygoing group is a massive overdose for the conscientious. What is necessary to encourage reformation for the lax can produce paralyzing discouragement for the conscientious. This is a common problem. We address a diverse audience each time we speak, and we are never free from the reality that a doctrinal underdose for some is an overdose for others."

this "common problem" can manifest itself in a myriad of ways from inactivity, rebellion, criminal behavior, therapy, addictions, depression all kinds of stuff

Yes...I am glad we are looking at laxity at the same time. I think Pres. Oaks understood the psychology of the flock very clearly. Thanks Duncan. 

[BlueDreams]

5 hours ago, JAHS said:

President Nelson spoke about this in a great talk called  Perfection Pending.   Here are some excerpts from it:

“Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
Keeping this commandment can be a concern because each of us is far from perfect, both spiritually and temporally. Reminders come repeatedly. We may lock keys inside the car, or even forget where the car is parked. And not infrequently we walk intently from one part of the house to another, only to forget the reason for the errand. I wish that were the worst of my imperfections. People must be doing this so much better than me. Obviously Nelson is. Shoot! I forgot to call him President Nelson! I suck at showing respect to the prophet of the lord. 
When comparing one’s personal performance with the supreme standard of the Lord’s expectation, the reality of imperfection can at times be depressing. My heart goes out to conscientious Saints who, because of their shortcomings, allow feelings of depression to rob them of happiness in life. I’ve done this to myself. I should just be better and get over myself.

We all need to remember: men are that they might have joy—not guilt trips! I’m awful I can’t even feel right about myself and my sins. Why can’t I just figure out like everyone else how to be happy.  We also need to remember that the Lord gives no commandments that are impossible to obey. But sometimes we fail to comprehend them fully. 

The process of perfection includes challenges to overcome and steps to repentance that may be very painful.  I feel that daily....this will also conflict in their minds with the happiness bit he mentions earlier. Either one with be ignored and thee other highlighted or the contradictions will anger them. Or the conflict will re indícate they just don’t know how to do religion right.  There is a proper place for chastisement in the molding of character, for we know that “whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth.”

Mortal perfection can be achieved as we try to perform every duty, keep every law, and strive to be as perfect in our sphere as our Heavenly Father is in his. Okay, I just have to keep doing everything perfectly. If I did I’d probably get rid of these guilt trip and be worthy of god and happiness and love. — this line can inadvertently confirm their need to do every last thing perfectly. If we do the best we can, am I really doing the best I can....I feel like I could do better and have a better attitude about it too the Lord will bless us according to our deeds and the desires of our hearts.
The process of perfection includes challenges to overcome and steps to repentance that may be very painful.  There is a proper place for chastisement in the molding of character, for we know that “whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth.”

 

With all due respect, I would never give this talk to someone who’s struggling with an extreme version of perfectionism or scrupulousity. They’ll read this very differently than say you or I might. I took a piece of this an inserted thoughts or assumptions that may happen with someone who’s really struggling with this just to illustrate a little what I mean. 
 

with luv, 

BD

[Meadowchik]

3 hours ago, Vanguard said:

I think we have some agreement here. IMO, it stands to reason that with more, clear expectations on behavior comes a higher likelihood of these kinds of pathologies. Though I don't believe this argues against having these expectations, we should always be vigilant in dressing our gospel message in the benevolent and forgiving tones of the Savior's message. This messaging needs to be taught at the earliest of ages.

Yes, it really does. Unfortunately, the dressing doesn't always work. Personalities are different, and some people cannot bear the concept of causing someone else pain all the time, and so they do not quite adapt in the way those who teach the message intend. 

[BlueDreams]

Okay finally read most the thread and I had a few more thoughts. 
 

scrupulosity/ocd are an extreme expression of anxiety. They have intrusive thoughts that become distressing or lead to anxiety so they have rituals or compulsions are reduce that sense of anxiety. Because religion often includes rituals, it’s very easy for some to include moralist rituals into this. Scrupulosity is not an official diagnosis. A person showing this would like be diagnose with either anxiety, ocd, or depression. 
 

all of these have some similar root causes in mental processes that fuel these problems. Things that can act as soil for these problems are several. They include family-of-origin patterns, genetic predispositions, and social experiences/cultural message...and yes that includes religion. I get the sense of the debate on cause is the concern of an experience or concerns being oversimplified/dismissed. Which makes sense. On those who’ve left or have experienced personal struggle with the church, they’ve likely heard messages that place the blame on some personal or family deficiencies while excusing their social environment. For those in the church it makes sense because they’ve heard the church overly blamed or described in ways that doesn’t fit their experiences. So it’ll lead to defensiveness in either end.

For what it’s worth, it’s usually all of the above and then some. I wish I could describe in detail some of the cases I’ve seen with this, but obviously can’t. 
 

shoot clicked the reply button to fast...will write more in a little bit

 

Edited April 28, 2021 by BlueDreams

[Vanguard]

32 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Yes, it really does. Unfortunately, the dressing doesn't always work. Personalities are different, and some people cannot bear the concept of causing someone else pain all the time, and so they do not quite adapt in the way those who teach the message intend. 

No, the 'dressing' does not always work. But then again, will the balance always work for everyone? Most definitely not. It is also believed that much of this is genetically based such that if one OCD theme (i.e., scrupulosity) does not take hold, another theme will. There are many themes as OCD is quite the creative bugger...

[The Nehor]

7 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

It's pretty straightforward. Along with other ideologies, the LDS framework consists of intricate ideological instructions for righteousness, or very involved, detailed requirements for becoming and remaining righteous, or worthy. Many of these instructions flow from basic principles of right and wrong, but there are yet still many more which are rules which must be followed to demonstrate obedience for obedience's sake. 

Not really.

[Meadowchik]

42 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Not really.

Really, really.

[Metis_LDS]

7 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Not really.

Yes you are correct, I was watching a program about Orthodox Jews in Manchester UK.  Now they have a rules based religion.  I was amazed at all the daily rules they have to follow and I mean specific ones.

[Meadowchik]

5 minutes ago, Metis_LDS said:

Yes you are correct, I was watching a program about Orthodox Jews in Manchester UK.  Now they have a rules based religion.  I was amazed at all the daily rules they have to follow and I mean specific ones.

I saw it too. But a more rules-based ideology does not negate my point. Also, if you're very enmeshed in one ideology's rules, and possibly adapted to them, the scrupulousness may be less obvious to you, while different versions of scrupulousness will appear more remarkable.

[CV75]

16 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

It's pretty straightforward. Along with other ideologies, the LDS framework consists of intricate ideological instructions for righteousness, or very involved, detailed requirements for becoming and remaining righteous, or worthy. Many of these instructions flow from basic principles of right and wrong, but there are yet still many more which are rules which must be followed to demonstrate obedience for obedience's sake. 

Please give a primary example of the "rules which must be followed to demonstrate obedience for obedience's sake."

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Metis_LDS said:

Yes you are correct, I was watching a program about Orthodox Jews in Manchester UK.  Now they have a rules based religion.  I was amazed at all the daily rules they have to follow and I mean specific ones.

That is so sad, unless they enjoy that regimen.

[Raingirl]

37 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

That is so sad, unless they enjoy that regimen.

Demeaning someone else’s faith. How nice of you. 

[mfbukowski]

How come no one has mentioned the fabulous joy found in keeping to the covenant path and striving for perfection?

The closeness to the spirit, and how easily it is temporarily lost through transgression?

Of course wisdom dictates moderation in all things, but WOW I am surprised at this litany of excuses and self justification in this thread, and the cascade of rep points supporting it.

Shocking.

Try a little harder. You'll like the results!

It's worth it!

[Meadowchik]

Here's the context of my statements, which were a reply to Pogi:

Pogi said:

Quote

 

It is not all experienced the same though.  They may not intellectually know the difference, but they will experience the two differently. Guilt is a good thing.  It tells us that we made a mistake and need to repent.  Toxic shame, on the other hand, tells us that we are a mistake - and once that belief firms it remain fears throughout our life in toxic ways.

There is nothing wrong with teaching right from wrong behavior, which can naturally causes one to feel guilt.  That is a good thing.  It is when they don’t feel guilt that we worry.

 

and I responded:

Quote

Right from wrong is not the same as an intricate ideological instructions for righteousness. The latter can generate myriad laws to transgress and thus a false sense of guilt where there is no actual guilt, just failure to live up to the system's expectations.

Here are some examples of instructions and expectations which go far beyond "teaching right from wrong."

The majority of LDS temple interview questions, which include expectations and instructions to

1) Seek a testimony of God, the Atonement, and the Restoration. This in itself can generate a lot of anxiety and inner turmoil in a person who is otherwise calm and stable.

2) Sustain church leaders. 

3) Not support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of the church. This, along with 2) isn't necessarily about right from wrong. Rather it is about loyalty to the church organization.

4) Keep the Sabbath day holy, attend meetings; partake of the sacrament; and live your life in harmony with the laws and commandments of the gospel?

5) Are you a full-tithe payer? And this and 4) are also more laws that are not necessarily about right from wrong.

6) Do you understand and obey the Word of Wisdom? Same issue, though perhaps more open to controversy than some of the others above. And instead of being expected to simply do one's best to take care of our bodies, we're given some highly specific rules while other important health concepts are neglected. 

7) Wearing the temple garment. Again, not really about right versus wrong, more about symbolism and ritual.

Just this list alone produces major additions to the instructions and expectations a person develops themselves in their efforts to live right from wrong in their lives. 

 

Edited April 28, 2021 by Meadowchik

[mfbukowski]

13 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

On those who’ve left or have experienced personal struggle with the church, they’ve likely heard messages that place the blame on some personal or family deficiencies while excusing their social environment. For those in the church it makes sense because they’ve heard the church overly blamed or described in ways that doesn’t fit their experiences. So it’ll lead to defensiveness in either end.

 

There you go! Right on the mark as usual!

Edited April 28, 2021 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

20 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Here's the context of my statements, which were a reply to Pogi:

Pogi said:

and I responded:

Here are some examples of instructions and expectations which go far beyond "teaching right from wrong."

The majority of LDS temple interview questions, which include expectations and instructions to

1) Seek a testimony of God, the Atonement, and the Restoration. This in itself can generate a lot of anxiety and inner turmoil in a person who is otherwise calm and stable.

2) Sustain church leaders. 

3) Not support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of the church. This, along with 2) isn't necessarily about right from wrong. Rather it is about loyalty to the church organization.

4) Keep the Sabbath day holy, attend meetings; partake of the sacrament; and live your life in harmony with the laws and commandments of the gospel?

5) Are you a full-tithe payer? And this and 4) are also more laws that are not necessarily about right from wrong.

6) Do you understand and obey the Word of Wisdom? Same issue, though perhaps more open to controversy than some of the others above. And instead of being expected to simply do one's best to take care of our bodies, we're given some highly specific rules while other important health concepts are neglected. 

7) Wearing the temple garment. Again, not really about right versus wrong, more about symbolism and ritual.

Just this list alone produces major additions to the instructions and expectations a person develops for themselves in theirs efforts to live right from wrong in their lives. 

 

Oh my gosh. You are just revealing your problem right here.

Obedience is a spiritual exercise program like lifting weights. It's not supposed to be fun, the joy is in the results.

Relax.

Try it, you'll like the results.

Edited April 28, 2021 by mfbukowski

[Duncan]

13 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

How come no one has mentioned the fabulous joy found in keeping to the covenant path and striving for perfection?

The closeness to the spirit, and how easily it is temporarily lost through transgression?

Of course wisdom dictates moderation in all things, but WOW I am surprised at this litany of excuses and self justification in this thread, and the cascade of rep points supporting it.

Shocking.

Try a little harder. You'll like the results!

It's worth it!

because it's a thread about scrupulosity and that word and joy don't go together

some would say it's bizarre to have to get therapy because you heard some form on the gospel

how to "try a little harder" to read the scriptures when you're already doing that? or prayer, or doing missionary work, temple work, ministering

that reinforces that concept that you aren't doing enough, and for the right reason and that others notice your effort or what they think is the lack thereof

my Mom told me that she actually enjoyed not having stake women's conference last year and probably this year, she said that "usually it's the same, they say that you're too fat and not worthy"

[Tacenda]

48 minutes ago, Raingirl said:

Demeaning someone else’s faith. How nice of you. 

No, I didn't demean it. If they like it then that is a good thing, but if it's a lot of pressure to do all those things each day, I feel sad about that. How did I demean it? Did I disrespect it? Or them? I do disrespect a religion that speaks for God and says do this, do that in the name of God and IMO it usually doesn't come from Him. I believe I've heard a lesson or two about the yoke being easy and the burden light.

 Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble of heart; and you will find rest. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”
—Matthew 11:25-30