- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I didn’t want to overpersonalize the MBTI thread on my own situation, so I thought I’d separate my question here. Hawkgrrl — you’ve described my motivations in the Church near perfectly in the MBTI thread (I’m INFJ). I have been offended a few times, and it is an exercise in white-knuckling to stay active. And you’re right, the inability to have an impact is part of what frustrated me last time. I had several initiatives that were benign and working, and our Bishop would not support them financially or otherwise (a mailing list, after-Church socials that created stronger community and attracted families to move into the Ward, the ability to track and coordinate visits among auxiliaries on our system, which he quashed). I also started a lot of initiatives that went no where due to lack of commitment from others to whom I delegated, in spite of being pretty good at delegation and follow-up and training and support (I have trained senior managers in government, healthcare and private settings).
I was also deeply frustrated that no one would do hometeaching, and I felt I was wasting my time. I felt like Moroni who said eventually “he labored, but without faith”.
Plus, anyone who got active did so because THEY WANTED IT (and we supported them when they came back), not because we did anything to jump start their return to Church; our efforts were largely efforts in sucking air. These were other reasons I asked to be released….and then the attitudes of local leaders about my release offended me. I have also lost my desire for service in ways that I find uninteresting after years of serving tediously out of duty (like moving, for example). And, I stay because my kids are benefiting, and I like the family side of things, as you suggest for NF. Plus, the Church-as-corporation really gets me at times.
However, to add to the issues. I also have a creative side and I DISLIKE structured rules that prevent new ideas. Our last Bishop was a military man and he didn’t have a creative bone in his body — it was all about consistent application of rules and thumping the handbook, which also frustrated me.
So, Hawkgrrl, or anyone with an opinion, with this mental set, how do you suggest an INFJ with these issues stays consistently active, or even learns to THRIVE in the Church?
One thing, forgetting offences is tough — I think Bridget Night would agree with me. We’ve both heard and taught the SMA’s on forgiveness, and yet, the tendency to have strong reactions and want to just get away from it all remains.
As an INFJ, probably the things you need to do more of are: 1 – speak out; INFJs can have a very compelling vision of things, but tend to not share it with others until trust is built. Sometimes they think their privately held convictions are just obvious, but not everyone sees things the same way they do.
2 – be patient with those whose values differ – especially if they are in a leadership position. That doesn’t mean change your values, though! Seek to understand why their values differ, what their motivations are, do they have constraints on them (e.g. limited resources or mandates from their leaders).
3 – continue to advocate for people, especially if you are surrounded by Ts. It’s church after all, we’re supposed to be Christians focused on helping people!
4 – try really hard not to take things personally. I think it was BY who was attributed to saying that if you take offense when it’s not intended, you’re a fool, and if you take offense when it is intended, you’re still a fool. Not that you should go around feeling like a fool – BY was decidedly
notan INFJ! There are definitely INFJs in the church who navigate it successfully, but every situation poses its own unique challenges. The most challenging situations for INFJs would be very strong, ham-fisted leadership that doesn’t accept a lot of input and is focused on numbers more than people. The ideal situation would be working with leaders who put people first (NFs prize human connections while SJs prize organizational effectiveness), who like to draw out suggestions from the councils (NFs prize making a difference and equality while SJs prize order and hierarchy), and who pay attention to the unique circumstances of each church member (NFs prize individuality while SJs prize belonging and uniformity).
I can’t fully address the various Meyers-Briggs interpretations, but I have been an observer or experiencer of working with people who didn’t want input only obedience. We had a stake president who ruled with and iron fist. He loved to announce how much of our allotted budget money he’d sent back to Salt Lake. He took the idea of the stake center can be a temple idea to a new level. Silence in the foyer, seating you row by row (no milling around and selecting your seat – the high councilman seats you etc.) These are just 2 brief examples of how things worked. During that time many very sincere, devoted members of leadership had ideas that they had fasted over, prayed mightily on, even went to the temple for inspirations. Every time he shut them down. Worse still there were people in leadership who adored him, his style, etc. So then the other people really felt like they were a problem. After watching this I began to realize a couple of things. One the problem really was his. Second I decided for myself that when he and I disagreed and I felt I did have a good idea – I always left the interchange telling Heavenly Father – I tried. Then I would repeat the scripture, “Let the Lord judge between me and thee. And reward thee according to thy deeds.” All of that was sincere on my part. As hard as I can I try to serve Heavenly Father. Jesus also asked people to dispute less – so I dispute less, but I don’t hide, and I try hard to step back and see if insights come.
This may not help, I’m sorry for your struggle. Please know your not alone.
That’s an interesting story Mom3. I have a question, what is the motivation for Bishops and Stake Presidents to send budget money BACK to Salt Lake? Do you know? The reason I ask is that our Bishop did exactly the same thing to me. He cut my budget to almost nothing, which left me short to fund high impact initiatives. And I wasn’t asking for big dollars. And, if what Hawkgrrl says is true, my need for have in impact was compromised, which was another nail in my coffien. I learned this flow of funds back to the stake from our financial clerk at the end of the year, and frankly, I was disturbed by it. I ended up funding these inititiatives out of my own pocket and eventually got tired of it given the already sacrificial amounts I was donating in tithing, which never came back to the Ward.
If you or anyone knows what encourages SP and BP’s to do this, I would like to know — beyond efficient use of funds. I see so many ways our Church experience could be improved if more financial resources were committed at the local level to improve the lives of the members, so I really want to understand the BP and SP motivations within our Church to send money back to SLC.
They think it makes them look good, and they want to look good, since they want to be in the position of those to whom they are sending the money. Sending money back is . . . should I really say it the way I feel it? . . . stupid. Period. Should NEVER happen. Period.
Old-Timer wrote:They think it makes them look good, and they want to look good, since they want to be in the position of those to whom they are sending the money.
Sending money back is . . . should I really say it the way I feel it? . . . stupid. Period. Should NEVER happen. Period.
I agree about sending the money back. I have to wonder if the funding gets cut yearly if it’s not spent. I imagine that if the ward/stake had hungry people in it the church would rather the money be used to feed them than sent back…but I could be wrong.
As for the OP, being an INFP and reading here makes me wonder if my inactivity did have something to do with the way I felt about not being heard or shushed because of my radical thoughts. I can see how some of my thoughts would be considered not in line with the cutural aspects, but I can’t figure out how they would be out of line with the actual doctrines.
We just spent $600 on Mother’s Day chocolates. We aren’t sending a dime back. Who is that stupid? Old-Timer wrote:They think it makes them look good, and they want to look good, since they want to be in the position of those to whom they are sending the money.
Sending money back is . . . should I really say it the way I feel it? . . . stupid. Period. Should NEVER happen. Period.
I am zealously frugal by nature. Couple my natural leanings with the “Lord’s money” concept and I could see how I would be a very bad bishop in this respect.
A bishop I really admire helped me to see the other perspective. In essence he said that if the ward is withering on the vine while we are sending back money to stake/SLC, then our stewardship has been shortsighted.
There’s a difference, observant, between spending just to spend and avoid sending money back and being committed to spending what is available in a good way. I’m sure you know that, but I just wanted to make that point. $600 on Mother’s Day chocolates might be stupid, also – simply because there are MANY better, valuable ways to spend it.
observant wrote:We just spent $600 on Mother’s Day chocolates. We aren’t sending a dime back. Who is that stupid?
See, I would rather err on the side on using funds too liberally for the sake of the good of the membership, than using them too conservatively for the sake of the organization. At least, when the organization is awash in cash and is a supposed charitable organization.
I would consider it MORE STUPID to demand all this funding and sacrifice from the members, only to let them languish in poorly funded programs which frustrate, and lose members and leaders…..
Roy wrote:I am zealously frugal by nature. Couple my natural leanings with the “Lord’s money” concept and I could see how I would be a very bad bishop in this respect.
Ditto. However, post epiphany, I’d be a wild card, since I no longer believe the Lord’s work requires money. I’d probably be happy to help the church and the members get rid of all that sacrifice money. Maybe I would throw lots of free food neighborhood parties and ask every member to invite a less-fortunate visitor.
Tom Haws wrote:Roy wrote:I am zealously frugal by nature. Couple my natural leanings with the “Lord’s money” concept and I could see how I would be a very bad bishop in this respect.
Ditto. However, post epiphany, I’d be a wild card, since I no longer believe the Lord’s work requires money. I’d probably be happy to help the church and the members get rid of all that sacrifice money. Maybe I would throw lots of free food neighborhood parties and ask every member to invite a less-fortunate visitor.
Tom — why don’t you believe the Lord’s work does not require money? I would also like to know if you think it requires computer systems or information technology, and why you think so….out of curiosity. Naturally, I think both of these things accelerate the work. But I would like to entertain alternate perspectives (and homogeneous ones too).
Well, I see the Lord’s work as something inward that happens mystically across the globe and through the ages by the workings of the Holy Spirit as we individually learn to relate to each other in a loving and healing way. I think Jesus was hinting at what I’m trying to communicate when he taught that the poor widow put more in the treasury than anybody else, when he taught Judas that he was fine with being anointed with expensive ointment by a fawning woman disciple, and when he taught to sell everything and give to the poor. And I think that his brief three year ministry demonstrates that power doesn’t come with time and money. My take-aways:
Quote:It doesn’t take money; it doesn’t take time. It takes miraculous faith and love.
In other words, time and money are merely poor, shadowy substitutes for faith and love. They are distractions from the real work.
We live in a social, money-driven world. The work of the Lord needs money – with or without an organization. However . . . I agree with the spirit of Tom’s comment completely. Totally. Absolutely.
Yes, the spirit of what Tom said is beautiful. However, I feel it’s overly idealistic in my view — even for an INFJ like me. Also, logically, I’m not convinced it follows given the money-orientation of our Church. Tithing, financial audits, tithing settlements, temple recommends tied to tithing — all these things point to the fact that money IS important, even though it is couched as being good for the members who need to sacrifice.
Think about it, if we had healthy investment into Ward operations, what could be done? We could have better systems for capturing and reporting home teaching, and they could be remote so we can get the work done without having to compete for the clerk’s computer or drive clear across town to enter data. In fact brethren could enter their own home teaching remotely, leaving leaders free to minister, rather than administer. We could invest in paid individuals to coordinate and oversee programs, working with volunteer leaders.
We could stop the endless shortages of Sunday School manuals our Ward experiences, and we could have continued contact with less active through mailing lists (if they consent), generating forwarding addresses to new Wards when they move. Ward activities could be more than pot-luck dinners all the time, providing other worthwhile activities that heighten our kids, and parents interest to attend. Better resources could be provided for Sunday Lessons (like a Church approved Finch Family series). We could have paid counselors that are shared among wards to make faith-based counseling more accessible — so members can get the help they truly need. (Our LDS Social Services people are STRETCHED). We could also remove the tedium of having the Same Ten People clean the chapel all the time.
Yes, money, when coupled with righteous living, love and faith can do much to improve the quality of life at the Ward level. I have lived in the mission field my whole life, except for a brief stint in dense California, and these are problems I have encountered that could be fixed with more liberal use of funds by the Church. Can we trade a mall, for better Ward programs and better access to spiritual and mental counseling that is with our values and principles? Definitely.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.