What is indoctrination?

[Calm]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

There isn't really anything in what you said that I disagree with.

I've also found that a lot of people don't really understand what members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints mean when we talk about "feelings" and the Holy Ghost.  They think we are talking about feeling happy, or sad, or whatever but that's not a great analogy.  

One of our apostles recently taught that to learn spiritual truth we must use both reason and faith.  The feelings from the Holy Ghost would be included in the faith part of that equation.  They would not have their own line or part.

Feelings might be better to be translated as awareness, because we are often talking more of sensation, then emotion.  An expanded or heightened level of thought or so is the sensation.  Lack of the Spirit is a stupor of thought, not a stupor of feeling.  The ‘feelings’ are the sensations we experience with awareness.  An analogy could be when I hear my brothers’ voices, very much their own, but also very close to my dad’s. There is an automatic sense of relaxing when I am with them.  The childhood programming as well as their own personalities and abilities sends the message of strength and stability, security.  I am aware of them and thus I feel their presence in my own responses to them.

Edited February 7, 2022 by Calm

[Nacho2dope]

27 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I think I might derail if I get into it. But appreciate your asking.

Understood. If you ever feel like sharing I would be interested. 

[Fether]

30 minutes ago, James 1 5 said:

As a Father I tried and still try to avoid telling my children what they should believe.  And I generally lived and still live by the same principle with other people too.  I tell others what I believe and what I think and what I know, and sometimes I will also tell others why and how I formed by beliefs and knowledge, but still I try to avoid telling others what they should believe.  I don't want others to rely on me as their source of ultimate truth.  I believe only God is qualified to be in that position as our ultimate teacher of all that is good and true.

So you never taught them about even the Bible?

[James 1 5]

Just now, Fether said:

So you never taught them about even the Bible?

I taught them all that I knew about the Bible, or at least I tried.  I just didn't tell them what they should believe regarding the Bible.  I made sure to tell them that what they heard from me was coming from me, and that God had taught me what I told them.

[Calm]

8 minutes ago, James 1 5 said:

that God had taught me what I told them.

And you don’t think that translated to them as “therefore you should believe this because this is the truth since it is from God”?

Edited February 7, 2022 by Calm

[Paloma]

6 hours ago, Fether said:

What is it exactly?

 

To me, indoctrination includes some element of coercion and/or lack of openness to consider other possibilities.

And I'm thinking of the difference between enculturation and indoctrination.

We are all naturally enculturated because of the families, ethnicity, experiences/environment (including school, church), and countries in which we live.  And then there are wider global cultures like Eastern, Western, African etc.

When I think of the difference between enculturation and indoctrination, I think of the relative freedom and desire we have to question our own assumptions and preconceptions.  

For example, some 'foreigners' and missionaries become aware of their own enculturation and ethnocentricity when confronting other cultures.  They start evaluating the differences.  However, others seem to live within a bubble of unquestioning assumption that one's own way is best and is therefore the only way for everyone to live. 

I would see that as a kind of self-imposed indoctrination.  

 

[James 1 5]

16 minutes ago, Calm said:

And you don’t think that translated to them as “therefore you should believe this because this is the truth since it is from God”?

No because I was careful to make sure they understood what I meant.  What I say is what I say, even when I say God has told me something.  I and God are not the same person, and I wanted them to understand that and know that I knew that.  So when I said God told me something they understood that I was telling them God had told me something.  And they understood me well enough to know that if they wanted to know what God thought then they needed to ask God directly for themselves.  They knew what I said and what I said God had said but they knew that was only my word at that point.

[Navidad]

In any and all faith groups that I can think of, it is one small step from doctrine to dogma. Dogma then leads to duty. Duty then often leads to damage of some kind. I think dogma is alive and well today in both politics and faith. There is even more potential for damage when they (dogma, politics, and faith) mix. I watched it in non-LDS Fundamentalism as a child. I watch it now in Evangelicalism as an older adult. I see it also at times in the ward.

I read several Mennonite magazines and I see dogma of a different kind there as well. Please don't think my focus is on a unilateral criticism of the LDS church. It is not. I am very hard on my own faith groups as well. As I sat there (in the ward) this past Sunday and listened to the many testimonies I was struck by how the vast majority of them were testifying about the correctness, the "truth" of the "church." The tears and testimonies were very church-centered. I came away very saddened and concerned about that. Any time our trust and faith is in an institution, we must arm ourselves with blinders and bucklers (shields) in order to maintain such a trust in something (an organization, institution, or system) that is directed at God, yet man-made. When folks in the LDS church have a faith crisis, it seems to me it is a crisis about their faith in the church (the institution) which is so extremely central in and to their lives. Then data shows that often they then leave God as well. Too often a believer's faith in God is inextricably bound up with faith in an institution that they believe with all their hearts to be God's special place. Then when the institutional walls of faith come tumbling down for whatever reason as they often do (in any faith), so does the faith in the one who we have been taught created the institution.

We all too often miss the point that Christ did not die for a church. His mission on earth and since was not to create a specific church or institution of any kind. His mission was and is to create individuals who trust in Him, who lean not to our own understandings, and who seek to grow closer to Him, not to an institution. When we confuse the Lord of our faith with the location of our faith, the loss of our faith has already been germinated. Dogma (the inability to examine ourselves and our faith) and duty (the requirement to perform to demonstrate fealty to our faith) are the two keys that unlock the door to faith crises, regardless of the particular faith group.

The foundation of my faith is not found or founded (puns intended) in or on any one institution. That is why I can worship and fellowship in an LDS ward, a Baptist, Orthodox, Mennonite, Catholic church, or on my patio by the river. My testimony is that the Lord is true. We won't know the "true" church until we participate in it in glory in eternity. Until then, my wife and I will worship wherever we find ourselves able to sing, pray, fellowship, and worship with other individual believers. That may be in a building we call a chapel, it may be in our living room, or in the woods. The same Lord is the Lord of each and is present via the power of the Holy Spirit in each, because the ministry of the Holy Spirit is an individual one as well. The Spirit indwells and comforts us as individuals, not as a church. Thanks for reading my thoughts this early morning. Blessings on you all.

Edited February 8, 2022 by Navidad

[Paloma]

4 hours ago, Navidad said:

...

His mission was and is to create individuals who trust in Him, who lean not to our own understandings, and who seek to grow closer to Him, not to an institution. When we confuse the Lord of our faith with the location of our faith, the loss of our faith has already been germinated. Dogma (the inability to examine ourselves and our faith) and duty (the requirement to perform to demonstrate fealty to our faith) are the two keys that unlock the door to faith crises, regardless of the particular faith group.

...

As I read your post, I identified with what you wrote so very much!  And that's not surprising as there are a lot of similarities in our background experiences and spiritual journeys.

While I agree with the very last statement you made here about dogma and duty unlocking the door to faith crises, I don't think it tells the whole story.  And that probably wasn't your intention anyway!  

But I was thinking about my own tendency to question and examine everything (to an extreme degree) and it's that rather than the inability to examine myself and my faith that's led to faith crises of my own.  However, when I've tossed everything up in the air for questioning and examination, the one conviction - ie. the one Truth and the one Love that remains is Jesus in all His fullness. 

And in saying that, I've come full circle back to what you're emphasizing here.  When Jesus alone is the centre of my life, I find myself able to see and worship HIm wherever His people are gathered. 

[James 1 5]

6 hours ago, Navidad said:

...
We all too often miss the point that Christ did not die for a church.

Ephesians 5:25-27  Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. 

6 hours ago, Navidad said:

His mission on earth and since was not to create a specific church or institution of any kind. His mission was and is to create individuals who trust in Him, who lean not to our own understandings, and who seek to grow closer to Him, not to an institution.

Our Lords church consists of people who accept him as their Lord, accepting his word and doing what he says they should do.  Try to consider that when you refer to his church as an "institution". We are people.  Imperfect, yes, but with our Lord to help us to become perfect through our Lord's work and ministry and with the help of his church, both our own efforts as members of it as well as the efforts of other members of his church.  see Ephesians 4

Take care that your own dogma doesn't damn you.

[smac97]

On 2/7/2022 at 7:45 AM, Fether said:

What is it exactly?

"Indoctrination" is a somewhat broad concept.  While it can be defined, I am not sure it can be defined with narrow, "exact{ing}" parameters.

On 2/7/2022 at 7:45 AM, Fether said:

Is teaching my children that Joseph Smith was a Prophet indoctrination into the church? Is that bad?

Is consistently telling my children that hitting others is bad also indoctrination into west culture? Is that bad?

Are both bad or just one?

What makes one bad and the other good (assuming one is bad and one is good)?

From Wikipedia:

Quote

Indoctrination is the process of inculcating a person with ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies (see doctrine).
...
The precise boundary between education and indoctrination often lies in the eye of the beholder. Some distinguish indoctrination from education on the basis that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned. As such the term may be used pejoratively or as a buzz word, often in the context of political opinions, theology, religious dogma or anti-religious convictions. The word itself came about in its first form in the 1620s as endoctrinate, meaning to teach or to instruct, and was modeled from French or Latin. The word only gained the meaning of imbuing with an idea or opinion in the 1830s.

I think that bit about "not to question or critically examine" is a fairly significant faultline differentiating "education" from "indoctrination" (at least where "indoctrination" is used pejoratively).

The article goes on to apply the term relative to "socialization," to a political context, to a religious context, and a military context.

Socialization:

Quote

The term is closely linked to socialization; however, in common discourse, indoctrination is often associated with negative connotations, while socialization functions as a generic descriptor conveying no specific value or connotation (some choosing to hear socialization as an inherently positive and necessary contribution to social order, others choosing to hear socialization as primarily an instrument of social oppression). Matters of doctrine (and indoctrination) have been contentious and divisive in human society dating back to antiquity. The expression attributed to Titus Lucretius Carus in the first century BCE quod ali cibus est aliis fuat acre venenum (what is food to one, is to others bitter poison) remains pertinent.

Political Context:

Quote

In the political context, indoctrination is often analyzed as a tool of class warfare, where institutions of the state are identified as "conspiring" to maintain the status quo. Specifically the public educational system, the police, and mental health establishment are a commonly cited modus operandi of public pacification. In the extreme, an entire state can be implicated. George Orwell's book Nineteen Eighty-Four famously singled out explicit, state-mandated propaganda initiatives of totalitarian regimes. Opinions differ on whether other forms of government are less doctrinaire, or merely achieve the same ends through less obvious methods.

I think this is the contextual lens through which we most often view the word "indoctrination."

Quote

Religious indoctrination, the original sense of indoctrination, refers to a process of imparting doctrine in an authoritative way, as in catechism. Most religious groups among the revealed religions instruct new members in the principles of the religion; this is now not usually referred to as indoctrination by the religions themselves, in part because of the negative connotations the word has acquired. Mystery religions require a period of indoctrination before granting access to esoteric knowledge. 

As a pejorative term, indoctrination implies forcibly or coercively causing people to act and think on the basis of a certain ideology.  Some secular critics believe that all religions indoctrinate their adherents, as children, and the accusation is made in the case of religious extremism.^[5] Sects such as Scientology use personality tests and peer pressures to indoctrinate new members.  Some religions have commitment ceremonies for children 13 years and younger, such as Bar Mitzvah, Confirmation, and Shichi-Go-San. In Buddhism, temple boys are encouraged to follow the faith while young.  Some critics of religion, such as Richard Dawkins, maintain that the children of religious parents are often unfairly indoctrinated.

I think critics of the Church (and other organized religions) often capitalize on the negative connotations of "indoctrination" as used in a political context by importing the word and using it in a religious context.  Hence the Church and its members become like "Big Brother."  I don't think it's fair or accurate.  I also think this mischaracgterization can yield some pretty serious negative results (prejudice, even hatred).

Thanks,

-Smac

[Paloma]

3 minutes ago, James 1 5 said:

Ephesians 5:25-27  Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. 

Our Lords church consists of people who accept him as their Lord, accepting his word and doing what he says they should do.  Try to consider that when you refer to his church as an "institution". We are people.  Imperfect, yes, but with our Lord to help us to become perfect through our Lord's work and ministry and with the help of his church, both our own efforts as members of it as well as the efforts of other members of his church.  see Ephesians 4

Take care that your own dogma doesn't damn you.

People ... individual believers yes ... not one group of believers within a specific institution.  Christians can and do see things differently.  I could bring up New Testament Scriptures about not rejecting those whom we're tempted to consider 'outsiders' but I won't.  I'm not wanting to argue, though you yourself invite argumentation through what you've written above.

I can accept that we see things differently and would not have commented on this reply of yours.  But then I saw your last sentence.

Your statement "Take care that your own dogma doesn't damn you" is beyond the pale.  I thought of saying it was ironic, but that would imply that it refers to you more than your intended recipient.  I cannot and will not 'go there' - that is, threaten someone with damnation.

[James 1 5]

4 minutes ago, Paloma said:

People ... individual believers yes ... not one group of believers within a specific institution.  Christians can and do see things differently.  I could bring up New Testament Scriptures about not rejecting those whom we're tempted to consider 'outsiders' but I won't.  I'm not wanting to argue, though you yourself invite argumentation through what you've written above.

I can accept that we see things differently and would not have commented on this reply of yours.  But then I saw your last sentence.

Your statement "Take care that your own dogma doesn't damn you" is beyond the pale.  I thought of saying it was ironic, but that would imply that it refers to you more than your intended recipient.  I cannot and will not 'go there' - that is, threaten someone with damnation.

The word dogma usually refers to some doctrine or belief that isn't true even though some people believe it is true, and we all need to be careful of accepting dogma like that.

And yes the Lord's church does refer to only one specific group of people who accept Jesus Christ as their Lord, accepting his word and doing what he says they should do. His church is that one specific group who accept covenants with him, not only believing but doing what he says they should do.  If you are not in that one group then you are not his.

 

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, James 1 5 said:

The word dogma usually refers to some doctrine or belief that isn't true

Maybe for you, but not for everyone else.

Standard definition googled:

Quote

a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.

 

[Paloma]

1 minute ago, James 1 5 said:

The word dogma usually refers to some doctrine or belief that isn't true even though some people believe it is true, and we all need to be careful of accepting dogma like that.

And yes the Lord's church does refer to only one specific group of people who accept Jesus Christ as their Lord, accepting his word and doing what he says they should do. His church is that one specific group who accept covenants with him, not only believing but doing what he says they should do.  If you are not in that one group then you are not his.

 

Noted that you believe that way.

In the end, the only opinions that really matter are my Lord's and my own.

Having said that, I am thankful that there are a number of people on this board whose opinions matter to me whom I believe see things differently from what you've expressed.

(I'm not unduly personalizing that last statement I've bolded as I take you to be talking more theoretically than personally.  However, I am a Christian and I am not within "that one group" so your statement certainly refers to me and everyone else in that category.)

While I disagree, I am not hurt.

[James 1 5]

9 minutes ago, Calm said:

Maybe for you, but not for everyone else.

Standard definition googled:

 

Yes for me as I have noticed the word dogma is usually used with a negative connotation.  As Navidad seemed to be using the word dogma with a negative connotation, as something we need to be careful about.

[James 1 5]

27 minutes ago, Paloma said:

Noted that you believe that way.

In the end, the only opinions that really matter are my Lord's and my own.

Having said that, I am thankful that there are a number of people on this board whose opinions matter to me whom I believe see things differently from what you've expressed.

(I'm not unduly personalizing that last statement I've bolded as I take you to be talking more theoretically than personally.  However, I am a Christian and I am not within "that one group" so your statement certainly refers to me and everyone else in that category.)

While I disagree, I am not hurt.

Actually, if I correctly understand your position, you believe every Christian is in that one group, with a Christian as anyone who considers his or her self to be a Christian. I think your disagreement with me is about which group is that one group.

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, James 1 5 said:

Ephesians 5:25-27  Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. 

Our Lords church consists of people who accept him as their Lord, accepting his word and doing what he says they should do.  Try to consider that when you refer to his church as an "institution". We are people.  Imperfect, yes, but with our Lord to help us to become perfect through our Lord's work and ministry and with the help of his church, both our own efforts as members of it as well as the efforts of other members of his church.  see Ephesians 4

Take care that your own dogma doesn't damn you.

I believe in a glorious Church with all my heart. It is holy and without wrinkle or blemish. It is the Church of those who have named the name of Christ and look to Him for their salvation and eternal life. I believe that many in the LDS church are part of that Church. I believe that many in all institutional churches and in no institutional church are a part of it. All the denominations, groups, buildings, and sects are institutions. The Church as Christ described it is a community. A community is on a whole different plane than an institution Huge difference. We have no way of knowing in this life the true extent of His Church in eternity. It will be exciting to find out. My view of the Church as Christ talked about it is expansive and rich. Call it dogma if you wish.

[Navidad]

25 minutes ago, James 1 5 said:

Yes for me as I have noticed the word dogma is usually used with a negative connotation.  As Navidad seemed to be using the word dogma with a negative connotation, as something we need to be careful about.

Let me speak for myself. I do believe that dogma refers to doctrine that has fossilized. Whenever someone uncritically and dogmatically (same root) believes that theirs is the only incontrovertible truth - that is dogma. In religious groups, such a belief often leads to darker consequences for the unfaithful. It becomes the duty of the faithful to defend and protect "the faith." If you want, I could provide you scores of examples throughout history.

[Calm]

7 minutes ago, Navidad said:

is the Church of those who have named the name of Christ

Could you explain what you mean by this?  I don’t want to make assumptions because of similar language.

[Navidad]

10 minutes ago, James 1 5 said:

Actually, if I correctly understand your position, you believe every Christian is in that one group, with a Christian as anyone who considers his or her self to be a Christian. I think your disagreement with me is about which group is that one group.

I believe the Holy Spirit bears witness to who is or is not a Christian regardless of institutional affiliation or the lack thereof.

[James 1 5]

4 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I believe in a glorious Church with all my heart. It is holy and without wrinkle or blemish.

Careful.  That idea has thrown a lot of people off course.  Did you read Ephesians 4?  That was written over 2,000 years ago and we still are not perfect yet.  Holy, yes, but we have many wrinkles, blemishes and sins we need to repent from at times.

4 minutes ago, Navidad said:

It is the Church of those who have named the name of Christ and look to Him for their salvation and eternal life. I believe that many in the LDS church are part of that Church. I believe that many in all institutional churches and in no institutional church are a part of it. All the denominations, groups, buildings, and sects are institutions. The Church as Christ described it is a community. A community is on a whole different plane than an institution Huge difference. We have no way of knowing in this life the true extent of His Church in eternity. It will be exciting to find out. My view of the Church as Christ talked about it is expansive and rich. Call it dogma if you wish.

I don't wish to but I can see that you believe some things that aren't true.  I hope you will someday accept the help the true church of Christ is still offering to you so that you can become perfect.

[Paloma]

15 minutes ago, James 1 5 said:

Actually, if I correctly understand your position, you believe every Christian is in that one group, with a Christian as anyone who considers his or her self to be a Christian. I think your disagreement with me is about which group is that one group.

I believe that a Christian is anyone who has put one's trust for salvation in God.  (That's a very short version as I'm not getting into the vital role of Jesus' atonement and individual capacity to understand His atonement which provides the way of salvation, etc.)   What is essential on the part of the 'saved person' is a posture of trust that gives birth to obedience.  True trust (faith) bears the fruit of faithfulness which means living for God/following Jesus/ having a Spirit-filled life.

What I've just said is different, I think, from what you surmised about my believing a Christian is "anyone who considers his or her self to be a Christian".  

God, who knows our heart postures, knows who is a true Christian.  

All true Christians comprise the church, the body of believers, the bride of Christ.

And yes, I think that we disagree when it comes to my last statement.  My view of the church transcends institutions.

[Navidad]

23 minutes ago, Calm said:

Could you explain what you mean by this?  I don’t want to make assumptions because of similar language.

Sure. Thanks for asking. For me, the Church is present wherever two or three are gathered together in His name. That is His promise to us. Numbers and institutions don't matter. Christ, I believe came to earth in the incarnation to create a community of those who would accept Him  and His atonement as a sufficient sacrifice for our sins.  I think the New Testament uses both meanings for the word ekklesia - the called out ones. One is local and one is community. The Church at Corinth is an example of the local church usage. The churches in Revelation - examples of local groups. Already in the epistles the churches were fragmenting into local identities with unique cultural and faith characteristics. That began in the first century. Of much greater importance was the small gathering of those who believed after Christ began his ministry, especially after his resurrection, glorification, and ascension. Church institutions let Him down from the very beginning, and have continued to do so to this very day. The community of Christ the great gathering of those who believe regardless of institution or of no institution are a forecast, harbinger, of what will come in eternity where the Church Triumphant will be alive and well. Christ will provide access to His Father for eternity to all who He judges as worthy, based on his balance of perfect mercy and righteousness. That will be the final gathering of the Church for eternity - the Church perfected (for the first time). That is why I cannot believe that there will still be denominations and institutional churches after death. Like Christ came to fulfill the law; He will at the judgment seat fill and fulfill the Church as the final great gathering. I hope that helps. I know I write too much. Sorry.

Edited February 8, 2022 by Navidad

[James 1 5]

7 minutes ago, Paloma said:

I believe that a Christian is anyone who has put one's trust for salvation in God.  (That's a very short version as I'm not getting into the vital role of Jesus' atonement and individual capacity to understand His atonement which provides the way of salvation, etc.)   What is essential on the part of the 'saved person' is a posture of trust that gives birth to obedience.  True trust (faith) bears the fruit of faithfulness which means living for God/following Jesus/ having a Spirit-filled life.

What I've just said is different, I think, from what you surmised about my believing a Christian is "anyone who considers his or her self to be a Christian".  

God, who knows our heart postures, knows who is a true Christian.  

Yes and I can see that difference.  We are more in agreement on this than I thought.  But a Christian is not necessarily a member of the true church of Christ.  It isn't a one step BOOM you're a Christian and thus BOOM you are automatically a member of the church of Christ.  Baptism is the ordinance that initiates church membership, a symbol of birth into the church, which is the symbolic bride and wife of Christ.  A newly baptized member of the church is as a babe in Christ's church, even if that newly baptized member has been a Christian for a very long time.

7 minutes ago, Paloma said:

All true Christians comprise the church, the body of believers, the bride of Christ.

This is where you are wrong, specifically.  There are many Christians who are not members of the true church of Jesus Christ.

7 minutes ago, Paloma said:

And yes, I think that we disagree when it comes to my last statement.  My view of the church transcends institutions.

Again, try thinking of the church as a group of people rather than as an "institution".  The true church of Christ is a group of people who are bound to Christ by a covenant and to the group through the ordinance of baptism.