"My Rebellious Heart"

It’s a process. It’s a refining. Like the art student who thinks he can let his three-year old paint a Pollock, a spiritual novice or initiate cannot walk in and claim the rules are stupid, or they don’t apply. An initiate must walk the path, experience the fullness of time, place, culture and faith, and only then can s/he sift through their experiences with anything akin to moral authority and figure out their place in the plan.

I have noticed on this forum and another forum that many of us also belong the “rules” are discussed quite often and at length. Yes, there are a lot of rules pertaining to being a Latter Day Saint. There are also a lot of rules if you are Jewish or if you claim to be Christian (aside from being LDS). Even if you just use the New Testament there are a lot of rules. I was just doing some quick browsing one day and one web site listed hundreds of rules from the New Testament. Many of them are just variations but they were still listed.

I feel that many of the “rules” are manmade and are local twists on culture or custom that have somehow made it into the rule book. We have many threads on these; women must wear pantyhose, those passing the sacrament must hold their left hand behind their back, you have to wear a white shirt to church.

How do you know which rules are manmade and which rules are from God? I don’t know. We are supposed to have the gift of revelation for use in our own lives. What if our revelation goes against what our bishop or a general authority says? Can we go wrong by following our leaders? We shouldn’t but it has happened.

I agree that most rules are for our benefit but some of them can be downright petty.

There should be rule against rambling posts like this one. I don’t even remember what I was trying to say.

I guess what I want to say is that before we complain about the rules we should try to understand what the rules are, why the rules are what they are, and how they apply. If you want to go to BYU you agree to follow the rules. You have no right to purposely break them. If you want to go to the temple you should follow the rules governing temple attendance.

There are other things I want to say but I will wait and see if they come up in the discussion.

Maybe this is a good apologetic idea if you really believe there is some hidden meaning or value in all these rules.

She doesn’t believe that, and the post is really clear about that.

The point Tracy makes in the post is that there are LOTS of rules that are cultural – but someone who isn’t part of the group (or who is just starting out in the group) isn’t in a position to demand changes to them. One joins a group; one lives within a culture; over time, one gains the right to point out flaws and ask for change. Thus, those who have walked the walk ARE entitled to question and select and suggest.

That’s the reason I really like her post – the grounding she gives to the intial following of defining rules in an “adolescent spirituality” AND the sense of responsibility to understand the proper role of rules in an “adult spirituality”. (Those terms are mine, not hers – but they are consistent with her meaning.) What she’s saying, **in general**, is that only those who are or have been immersed in the culture have the social capital to critique the culture – and I really like the balance that strikes and the way it resonates for me. Children complaining is seen as tantrum throwing – often even if their complaints are correct and/or valid. Thoughtful, believing adults complaining is another thing entirely.

Iow, all of us here have invested heavily in the Church and been invested / still are invested in the culture in some way. Therefore, it’s warranted for us to discuss our concerns with various aspects of the culture – even if we might (rightly) bristle at “outsiders” attacking our community.