- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Recently I traveled to Hawaii with my family and want to share some observations of culture vs. doctrine. First, on the flight I sat next to a couple who had recently returned from a LDS mission in Hong Kong. They mentioned that every single calling in their assigned ward was filled by women except for the Bishop and 2 counselors. Clerk, Sunday School President, Mission Leader were women (as context – I’m a proponent of the seemingly easy change of letting women serve in those callings) The ward was apparently quite large and strong and consisted solely of female workers from the Philippines. Also interestingly, the Hong Kong temple opens once a month on Sundays.
Second, at the Polynesian Cultural Center and at BYU Hawaii it seems that Pacific Island culture is first priority followed by religious culture. I’m far from an expert but it seems that pride in heritage trumps religion on the islands. I could site other examples but I’ll list a few: tatoos, shunning of outsiders in everyday life even who are LDS, and BYU-H expecting performers (and/or performer willingness) to work for long periods of time without their garments. All of these things wouldn’t fly in the Wasatch corridor or Idaho.
I am unsure what conclusions to reach. It’s possible that the church is more flexible outside the US perhaps because international realities take charge. Perhaps the mid level leadership like Stake Presidents, Mission Presidents, and area authorities let it fly for whatever reason. Perhaps the islanders simply ignore religious culture from the US (as opposed to doctrine) and implement the things that work for them.
But I came home being reminded that the church isn’t really the same everywhere (contrary to what I hear often), that we as members sometimes grant our leaders power over us when we shouldn’t, and that there is probably more wiggle room than we in the US think.
Interesting, RR, especially the Hong Kong and women part. I, too, have no problem with women filling callings that don’t seem to need to be gender specific such as clerks and Sunday School presidency. A long time ago I served in the South Pacific and I agree, culture does seem to come before the church in many aspects. I also agree that the church is not the same everywhere as we’re taught and local culture does play a role in that. I actually don’t think the church is the same where I live (East Coast U.S.) as it is in the Corridor. And I think there probably is more latitude than we take (for some reason we don’t seem to take the mile when we’re given the inch).
When we lived in a small town in Texas, I noticed that converts who grew up Baptist were very uncomfortable with church dances. If they were in charge of any social event that was supposed to include dancing, the event somehow turned into a Square Dance/Hoe Down or all dancing was cancelled. I’m not sure they were even aware of their bias, but the thought of a regular dance was just unacceptable to them. When they gave talks, often their talks were more like bible-thumping sermons. Their cultural roots showed. In Brazil, we had converts who had been involved in Macumba (voodoo). They converted, but kept more of a belief in magic and bad spirits than was the LDS norm. Satan seemed just a little more vivid to them. Old JS era stories sometimes took on new life and meaning when they talked about them.
In one area of Texas, the Spanish Branch always meets from 9-12. It doesn’t ever rotate. Sunday afternoons are for extended family gatherings. If the church wants them to attend church, services HAVE to be in the mornings.
In East Africa, women do certain types of work. So at church, the women were passing the sacrament. The leaders were told that was not allowed, only ordained deacons were allowed to pass the sacrament. Next time regional leadership came through, the women were still passing the sacrament. The regional leaders were assured that the women had all been ordained deacons .. So it was okay.
Some of these seem like little things .. Some are larger .. But in the day-to-day workings of a ward, they add a different flavor and nuance.
I have also thought about how the Polynesian Cultural Center has both men and women not only wearing things that are more revealing than garment, the men are topless and the women have shoulders exposed with only, ummm, endowments, yep – only their endowments holding their top up. 
I have read many blogs and listened to podcasts with others from outside of the US and I hear over and over how us ‘mercans try to go and tell the rest of the world exactly how it is done (which for many = just how it is in Utah). Many don’t like it.
Quote:Looking Hard wrote: “have read many blogs and listened to podcasts with others from outside of the US and I hear over and over how us ‘mercans try to go and tell the rest of the world exactly how it is done (which for many = just how it is in Utah). Many don’t like it.”
Yes!
Who gets to decide what entails “modesty”. Which cultural standard will be used? The abdomen shows a bit when wearing an Indian Sari. Is it modest? Will temple garments be modified to allow Indians to wear traditional clothing? Indian culture is much more conservative than U.S. culture. Does that make a difference?
Too often we forget that the church is only .002% of the world population. (15 million members and 7.2 billion world pop)
So many of the issues with which we obsess in the US are being addressed in very practical terms elsewhere in the world – and the top leadership is not ignorant of them. I am firmly convinced we will continue to see movement in the area of women being authorized to participate more broadly not from doctrinal or theological debates (although the justifications here will be largely from those areas) but from practical necessities. Brazil was the catalyst for OD2; I don’t know the locations that will bring an OD3 or a more natural expansion, but I am sure I will see significant changes.
All very interesting findings. Similar to a Time article I once read that said I he reason the church have blacks the priesthood was the growth of the church on Africa. There were not enough white males to run the church. Could be similar in areas where there are few men. Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
Now that you mention it I feel like that was one of the things that we did as missionaries. Correct the native culture by teaching the “correct” way we should act at church. :clap: Stop clapping.
😮 I’m positive applauding in church would be a thing in many, many places.
I hate to even admit that in the past when we had a visitor from Hawaii get up and give a testimony I’d get peeved at:
Visitor: ALOHA!
Congregation: ALOHA!
Me:
🙄 The spirit is gone.👿 I sure did like to chase off the spirit with my attitude.
nibbler wrote:
I hate to even admit that in the past when we had a visitor from Hawaii get up and give a testimony I’d get peeved at:Visitor: ALOHA!
Congregation: ALOHA!
🙂 This is one of the exact things I was thinking of (especially when the congregation response isn’t vigorous enough) that would not fly on a regular basis in the Mormon Corridor. My gut reaction is that I also find it annoying but really there is nothing wrong with it and I’m just not used to it.For quite a long time I thought the Utah way was the “right” way until I lived in upstate NY probably not far from DJ where the handbook was occasionally referred to as a wishful thinking.
nibbler wrote:I sure did like to chase off the spirit with my attitude.
Isn’t that the truth. Thanks for putting it so well.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.