Might be the nastiest word in the Church

This notion of unworthiness moves rapidly across the line of credibility more powerfully when within the official context of Church policy we begin to believe that unless we are “temple-worthy” we find ourselves in a one-down or less-than circumstance.

I know that in meetings with my bishop I deliberately frame things in perspective of me struggling, hoping for a change that would allow me to regain my former confidence but having a hard time.

I was even not especially forthcoming about my business and career responsibilities – lest it conflict with the general image of floundering.

I take responsibility for this. I do not know how my bishop would react if I met him as an equal. Someone who is ok with who I am and where I am going. I fear that he would be less willing to allow me to more fully partake in the important milestones (baptism, confirmation, priesthood ordination). I fear that showing confidence in setting my own path would be the greater offense.

As a sidenote: someone told me that everyone deserves respect just by virtue of being human … it has given me much to ponder on how I value other people.

I believe in worthiness and unworthiness.

I just don’t believe in how they are commonly used and applied in our culture.

What do you believe about worthiness and unworthiness?

What do you believe about worthiness and unworthiness?

Worthy means:

“having adequate or great merit, character, or value; of commendable excellence or merit; deserving”.

I believe we focus too obsessively on the final definition (“deserving”) and apply it too often to people, and that is where our application of the terms gets messed up. I think that definition also is important, but, like “chastity” or “modesty”, when we focus so much on one definition that we lose sight of the greater, foundational meaning, things get wonky in a hurry.

I believe “worth” has an important meaning and place in life – and, conversely, that “unworth” has an important meaning and place in life.

I believe there is a real power in worthiness, defined broadly, and that there is real damage in unworthiness, defined broadly.

For example:

I believe parents can be worthy or unworthy of emulation by their children – or that someone can be worthy or unworthy of trust – or that some things are worthy, while other things are unworthy – or that progression has worth, while long-term stagnation lacks worth – etc.

Theologically, I don’t believe we “deserve” much, and I am concerned about “worthiness creep” – meaning that more and more and more things start falling into the category of what we deserve and what we don’t, with the ever-present judgmentalism that accompanies such a view. We lose sight of the fact that none of us are “worthy” (as flawed, imperfect mortals) of an exalted, blessed state and Eternal Life but that all of us are “worthy” (as children of the same God) of an exalted, blessed state and Eternal Life.

Our applications of the concepts are influenced by our mortality in ways that divide and judge too much – nearly always, individually, in ways that make us worthy and others unworthy, except, for example, with issues like depression that reverse the application. That applies to non-traditional, heterodox members every bit as much as it does to traditional, orthodox members. If you don’t believe that, look for the undercurrent of worth-judgment that runs through so many complaints from non-traditional members about traditional members and their views – which often are described in terms of worth and unworth, even though those words aren’t used. It’s natural to nearly everyone, but we are supposed to put aside our nature and strive to see each other as God sees us – and that view can make distinctions of worth and unworth FAR more accurately than is possible for us.

In other words, I believe we have to make value judgments about lots of things (to determine the degree of their worth), but I don’t like the way in our culture those judgments fall so often on people.

…Temple-worthy is also a status you cannot obtain unless you buy it through your voluntary payment of tithing. In this regard purchasing LDS temple-worthiness through tithing looks like a first cousin to the old fashioned indulgences the Roman priesthood used to sell…When it comes to exacting payment, unworthiness is the principle leverage for completing the deal through the priesthood brokers…In other words, Mormons inflict upon themselves unfair comparisons with each other based on the notion of worthiness…We know we are not expected to be perfectionists in this life. We know that perfectionists not only die at younger ages and often with high blood pressure, but also that they have unreasonable expectations and make unreasonabole demands on themselves…They also tend to be highly intolerant of flawed-ness and imperfection in others…

It looks like it’s not simply a matter of treating people in a disrespectful and unfair way and setting many up for unnecessary disappointment. From a practical standpoint, I think the obsession with temple worthiness and what this currently means could end up contributing to the eventual downfall of the Church even more than the internet if nothing changes. Think about it, who currently falls away from the Church permanently in the largest numbers? People that drink, smoke, had sex before they were married, and/or don’t want to pay tithing are often weeded out before they ever even have a chance to get married in the temple. Basically it is the Church itself that sets the expectation that this is the way active members should be and if not then it’s not alright so it’s no surprise that literally millions of members have quickly gotten the impression that the LDS Church is just not for them for decades even before the internet was available.

And now even many members that had already accepted these strict temple worthiness requirements mostly because they actually believed this is they way they were supposed to be are finding information on the internet that leaves them feeling like there is not as much (if any) reason to go along with all of this anymore. Once people believe Church leaders are just ordinary men that don’t necessarily have any special knowledge or authority from God then much of the power the Church has over them is gone, often permanently, and the main influence the Church has left is through other Church members that still expect compliance with these requirements. So many members will either put up with some of these expectations grudgingly and dragging their feet or refuse to play along anymore even if their relationships with other members suffer as a result.

That’s how I’ve felt when I find out historical details that made me questions the authority and wisdom of church leaders. I think the beginning of my perspective change began with the Race and the Priesthood essay….. I then began to think, how am I suppose to trust that the way I’m told to live is really exactly what God wants? Anyways, it’s been confusing. I felt like I’d put a lot of energy, time, and emotional struggle into living a certain way that I now think could possibly be more man made than divine.

As to the worthy/unworthy topic, I completely understand why the church sets forth principles we must abide by to go to the holiest places on earth (temples). I just wish it came across that being honest with your fellowman (and principles like this) was more important than if I drank a cup of coffee.

The venue in life that seems to require endurance is more in the perceptive realm of mind and spirit. It is not better countered by an approach of moralizing about worthiness and exhortation to conscious believing with strict conformity to tradition and doctrine.

Does it matter more that one seeks good because seeking good is a commanded practice with the promise of happiness and future reward?

Or does it matter more that one seeks good for the sake of goodness itself?

The former amounts to “telling God what to do and the people how to behave”, as Watts wrote. Furthermore, from a literal perspective, one would have to assume that Jesus told his Apostles that it is the divine will that they spend the rest of their lives telling everybody how to behave rather than preaching the Resurrected Lord.

The latter suggests that the human will is of itself capable of perceiving the highest good of all concerned. it also suggests such a willful perspective need be practiced in order to obtain a sense of goodness as compared to a self-awareness of obedient worthiness. Such a sense of personal goodness might very well be what human life is about.

If Jesus expects from us a formula approach to performance as believing Mormons, would such a formula be invested in conformity with strictly proscribed in what to think and how to feel?

Could we not consciously – willfully, if you please – practice a formula of personal seeking, asking and knocking? Whatever is found, answered or opened is what Jesus promised. There’s nothing judgmental in any of that. There’s nothing in any of that which suggests that even a church’s approval is necessary for personal validation.

Yep … that very choir in which my voice is too low to sing tenor and to high to go bass. :yawn:

The venue in life that seems to require endurance is more in the perceptive realm of mind and spirit. It is not better countered by an approach of moralizing about worthiness and exhortation to conscious believing with strict conformity to tradition and doctrine.

Does it matter more that one seeks good because seeking good is a commanded practice with the promise of happiness and future reward?

Or does it matter more that one seeks good for the sake of goodness itself?

The former amounts to “telling God what to do and the people how to behave”, as Watts wrote. Furthermore, from a literal perspective, one would have to assume that Jesus told his Apostles that it is the divine will that they spend the rest of their lives telling everybody how to behave rather than preaching the Resurrected Lord.

The latter suggests that the human will is of itself capable of perceiving the highest good of all concerned. it also suggests such a willful perspective need be practiced in order to obtain a sense of goodness as compared to a self-awareness of obedient worthiness. Such a sense of personal goodness might very well be what human life is about.

If Jesus expects from us a formula approach to performance as believing Mormons, would such a formula be invested in conformity with strictly proscribed in what to think and how to feel?

Could we not consciously – willfully, if you please – practice a formula of personal seeking, asking and knocking? Whatever is found, answered or opened is what Jesus promised. There’s nothing judgmental in any of that. There’s nothing in any of that which suggests that even a church’s approval is necessary for personal validation.

Being the mind that I have, I actually have a dozen or so things going on at the same time with simulating results of those ideas so try to bear with me, I apologize if it gets confusing or off point.

What you are saying to me is that you see more merit in the Humanistic type Religion versus the Authoritarian type model.

I do to. While agree humanity as with all of creation is not perfect(nothing is, just look at the universe with many incomplete planets and stars that never fully formed for millions of years never ignited; failed planets and stars).

Indeed if the matter was perfectly spread out nothing in the universe would have even formed at all.

With that in mind, we are not so imperfect as to bit have the ability to come to morality without a higher authority dictating what it is because we humans are beyond all hope of achieving it for ourselves.

If it’s that then yes I have thought about it for a long time now(couple of decades).

It’s just much easier by our natural nature to follow an authority figure of higher power, it’s instinctive as a lot of research shows(what ever authority that is). We are born with it, it’s quite evident in children and most adults never quite get whined off the idea as much as we don’t like to admit.

There in there lies the rub, if we never break off of the authoritarian model, we can’t by it’s very nature grow.

We can’t, a person can’t grow while not trying to learn how to trust himself and others in finding our way.

It’s painful at times, but we can’t get from point “A” to “C”.

The authoritarian model temps to bypass a possible wayward people by automatically assuming your lost and need help from the get go to the end. It doesn’t want to see people possible become lost and thus takes away free agency by framing things in a “willfull” manor. You voluntary give away your free agency to the higher authority.

Which can’t be done, growth can’t happen in a model that requires complete a large form or complete form of dependency.

You can’t go from point A to C and achieve growth which is what the model does because it doesn’t like point B(growth).

Humanistic religion subject that we have to go through point B and become independent to grow.

It might be painful at times but ultimately we are not lost in the end because we aren’t completely helpless, we may stumble but we grow in the process and know good from evil by the fruit it bears without the need for authority to stipulate condition of the good or bad fruit produced.

Yes I really like the LDS humanistic model of religion versus the authoritarian model LDS model.

Because I am a rather partial to “the quest domination”.

I am the seeker, I never stop seeking, even when I have found I still seek.

Humanity is not perfect, but we are not so imperfect as to need to surrender our identity and integrity to obtain moral code or judgement. We can get there growing over time without trying to force the trees and bushes into growing a certain way.

We can appreciate our imperfection and strive and seek at the sane time.

Humanistic quest dimension I’m focused on helping others more then myself. Getting them where they want and breed to go. Rather then getting them to accept a predetermined way.

I believe humans can progress much better and quicker although sometimes painfully learning and helping in this way.