- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
i wrote a lengthy email to my bishop recently. explaining some of my struggles with our faith, and letting him know where i was at. he travels a lot for his work, so email was the best we had at the moment. i brought up some of the things that are in me, specifically about my gay friend, who has no place in our faith. our church sometimes says we do, but for someone who has had the same life partner for 17 years, and a daughter… despite living a wonderful family life (better and more christlike than mine), we do not have a place for gays in that life. we just don’t.
i brought that up and a few other things like it. his response to me is he cannot answer them. he relies on the spirit, and accepts he does not know everything, and i am being worldly in my tone….
i love my bishop. and i understand his answer. it is our doctrine. and i have believed it my whole life. and taught it to others in many a lesson. some of those things, like same-sex, have no answers it seems. only difficult questions.
but…
in the spirit of all truth eventually being circumscribed into one, great whole…
why can we not discuss it? this, in some ways, is the topic that bothers me most. not that joseph smith did allow priesthood to blacks, then brigham young rescinded it. no. its the fact that we are forbidden to discuss it.
and before anyone tells me we are not forbidden to discuss it, let me define that…
i cannot have this discussion with my bishop. he won’t have it with me. and many a church leader has given me that same answer he did. so if i feel need to discuss, even vent, or anything… i must do it outside of my ecclesiastical leaders. and if any of you tell me some leaders do have those discussions, i’d argue they are the vast minority, and not common.
so if i want to have it, i need to find my own place. mormon stories, stay lds, etc… many of which sites are riddled with anti-mormon sentiment… which i do NOT want.
i am mormon. and if i can reconcile my struggles, its where i will stay. and it appears to me to be too much to ask to have this discussion inside the church. and forgive me, but this site still feels like a back alley in that sense… not of the church. we are fringe, are we not? not because we label ourselves such, but you know our leaders would. and most of our mormon friends. the indoctrinated ones who will hear me ask about “adam’s belly-button” and cringe and run…
and i do NOT seek answers necessarily. not in regards to same-sex or whatever. but these are sensitive and frustrating things. and i think we as a faith need to be able to discuss it more openly. but oh, we do not. and cannot.
i have another gay friend, who to my knowledge, does not act upon it, and attends church… and all that… and has a testimony, and lives in torment feeling that he has no chance to stay in church and receive a fullness of joy as “we” do. he must be “changed” from who he is in the next life is he is good. or something. god will change him. i struggle with this notion. and i wish to discuss it. and i think church leadership is marginalizing people’s feelings, not in malice, but ignorance and simple disregard. and people are being devastated by it.
and so i go to my bishop with my struggles. with my questions. and am told to have more faith. fine. i need that. we all do. i am weak. i get that. i am struggling. i get that. i need more faith.
but i really feel, really truly feel, i should be able to go to my stake president or bishop or whoever, and have this discussion. and have it actually BE A DISCUSSION… and have people’s feelings heard and shared and talked about.
is there not some value and virtue in simply listening?? but no. in my experience, the church leaders are trained, and hard-coded, to NOT answer, NOT discuss, and tell us to keep praying and have faith. well, primary answer notwithstanding… for some people and some issues… it is not that simple. it isn’t. and their voices and spirits should be heard too. they need to be heard. and not just by those of us on this site and sites like it… but by the good hearted, good intentioned and loving leaders of this church who need to be listening.
but i am tired of having this brought up on mormons building bridged boise fb and having the majority of responses be anti-mormon. i need this IN the church. not just from bitter souls who’ve left the church and wish to take me with them.
or maybe i am just wrong. maybe i just need to shut up and pray and have more faith and tell everyone else i know who has questions to do the same. but if i am wrong, perhaps there is no place in this church for me either…
This is EXACTLY why there is a need for people like John Dehlin and Joanne Brookes…and sites like staylds and NOM. The apologist and extreme TBMs call JD and Mormon stories groups and those who look for a middle way to stay in the church wolves on sheep clothing and anti Mormon and apostates. Well the hell with them.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
yes. haven’t read much of joanna’s stuff yet, but plenty of john’s. agreed on all counts. but i worry. i worry that its people like john (not their leadership or priesthood or anything), but just that level of openness to thinking and listening… that is exactly what all faith’s need, but especially ours needs, to keep our membership strong. members treat them as heretics out of their own fear and misunderstanding.
yet wasn’t it joseph who taught, its not prudent or healthy for god to command in all things? we should not let the structures of the church stop us from thinking and feeling and using our own conscious and brains and will to act…
and to discuss a difficult topic does not mean agreeing with it or anything. yet there is value in the discussion. therapy in the sharing. and loving and charity in the simple act of … wait for it… LISTENING.
we need to listen to each other more. or even at all. just to listen. just to hear. and just that simple act, true listening with empathy and love, is exactly what helps us feel a christlike love for people. how can we love who we do not know or understand or listen to?
and again, i’ve just gotten my “vent on” … with you, who is agreeing. we need more of us here.
I think satire can be very illuminating… The Book of Mormon musical has a song that relates to this: Quote:I got a feeling,
That you could be feeling,
A whole lot better than you feel today
You say you got a problem,
well thats no problem,
It’s super easy not to feel that way!
When you start to get confused because of thoughts in your head,
Don’t feel those feelings!
Hold them in instead
Turn it off, like a light switch
just go click!
It’s a cool little Mormon trick!
We do it all the time
When your feeling certain feels that just don’t feel right
Treat those pesky feelings like a reading light
and turn em off,
Like a light switch just go bap!
Really whats so hard about that?
Turn it off! (Turn it off!)
:clap: In all seriousness, I think a lot of the unwillingness of some of our brothers and sisters to talk about tough issues is coming from a place of fear (a defense mechanism) rather than a desire to leave us out in the cold. They don’t want to leave Fowler’s Stage 3, and thinking about this stuff is a one-way ticket to Stage 4. It’s too bad Stage 5 people don’t have neon signs that can let us know it’s OK to ask
themthe tough questions. Anyway, mrtoad4u, I think you’ve found a good place to vent and find answers. It’s gonna hurt, so just give it some time, and chip away at things with your brothers and sisters here.
:angel: Quote:“Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.”
–Matthew 15:14
I think there is an important insight in your opening post — you can’t talk to Bishops and other formal leaders about faith issues. First, they are not trained theologians or philosophers. They are administrators first. All they can share is what their work has led them to know (expertise) and their talents from their life experience. That is why your Bishop said he just goes by the Spirit and takes things on faith. His vault is empty when it comes to your faith issues. In fact, he even descended into judgmentalism by telling you your comments were worldly. And, local leaders are trained to be guardians of the church, as well as the father of the ward. It is a dual role that is often in conflict. They also have a judgement role, which makes things even more difficult, as they take on their role as Judge in Israel to determine who will be given callings, whether they receive priviledges in the church such as access to ordinances, etcetera. Very hard to share divergent, unorthodox ideas with someone who has this triple role as it’s hard to know if he will come down on the side of the church, the individual, and if he will impose sanctions or restrictions on you for your divergence — or make you give displays of commitment so he can feel good about letting you back into the fold on full-fledged terms.
Talk about role conflict!! I agree with cWald that this is why there is a need for sites like these. And frankly, I think the church benefits from sites like these, notwithstanding their discomfort with them.
Here is how the church benefits: In my own situation, I learned quickly from reading posts here to keep my concerns and most of my angst to myself. I saw the consequences people experienced from being open with local leaders about angst and faith problems. I learned to work throught my own here in a safe environment. And then eventually got to the point I had a deep enough personal philosophy and coping mechanism that I could serve productively (apparently) in my Ward again, support my family and stay a member in decent standing. This imposed no effort on the local leaders to get me back — it was all done without their involvement. No activation efforts, no home teacher (stil don’t have one), no interviews…..
And so, the church benefits.
Take the other approach — come clean with my concerns, issues, and angst about the church by relying on the Bishop as my spiritual advisor. And see what is likely to happen. I would leave the interview with my Bishop believing he would have to make me prove a change of heart if I was to be full-fledged in the temple and serving in responsible positions again. He would have more work to do and frankly, such sanctions would really disturb my own faith, commitment and engagement with the church even further. Now that I have come essentially through the hard part of my faith transition over the last 3 years, I have not been much work for the local leaders, feel I can move back into full-fledged participation and even go to the temple should I choose to comply with all the TR questions (which I could do fairly easily). And have sidestepped the additional angst that would have occurred had I come clean about all my issues with the church and attracted their sanctions against me.
When I talk about restrictions and sanctions, I’m not talking about those imposed due to sin like fornication or adultery. I’m talking about sanctions imposed because they think you don’t have a testimony anymore, or are apostate. In my view, it’s hard to distinguish a person working through church angst and faith issues from a proactive apostate. They share similar sometimes negative attitudes toward the church, and their motives are not clearly on the surface for priesthood leaders to see — for the questioner/angst-overcomer, their motive is to relieve the tension they feel in their relationship with the church. For the true apostate, their goal is to hurt the church. And local leaders aren’t always very good at distinguishing between these two kinds of members. The leaves look similar, but the root structure is vastly different. Don’t let them see the leaves so there are no assumptions to make about the roots.
dear silentdawn, your sentiment is exactly what a dear friend of mine has expressed to me. exactly. and i see all those points and it has a clear logic. makes perfect sense to me. and yet…
when i talk with her about it, i express difficulty. and she and i reach an impasse. so let me bring it up here and perhaps you or someone here can help me past it.
my friend hears my response and tells me i am an absolutist … perhaps you’ll agree.
i have had this gospel and doctrines pounded into me since birth. i have studied it and followed it my whole life. i am indoctrinated. and the church.. it seems to me, is SOOO absolute. “if BoM is true, then JS prophet. if JS prophet, BoM is true. if, if, if, then ALL of it is true…”
ALL OF IT. 14 points? cannot be led astray by prophet?
even though i am coming to feel that it is possible that not only do these good men make mistakes, but they make errors that can be devastating… DEVASTATING to a minority of people in this church.
and to me, this is a faith issue. it flies in the gut instinct level of my faith. we may say in church our leaders high up are fallible men… but ALL of the subtext says, heroic men, perfect men, infallible men… our own leaders propagate this. and i get it. and the idea is not evil. but its still a distortion. and at what point does the distortion become something that touches this infallible, perfect doctrine? at what point does it come back to the “if BoM is true, then JS a prophet…” blah blah??
i refer to this as the upside down pyramid. that little catch 22, the perfect circle of JS and BoM stand at the point. upon which all else of our church sits on top of. that whole mess of all doctrines, both the ones that make perfect sense, and all those that make less for me (polygamy, JS the treasure hunter, blacks and PH, women and sexism, same-sex…) … all of that, ALL of it, that i am to accept cart blanche because of JS and BoM.
if, if, if…
and my dear friend then says to me… “eddie, nuance. nuance in the gospel.” to which i say, but our own faith, our own doctrines, preach this absolutist stuff. so how is it up to me? how can i just decide to keep certain things to myself and not tell a bishop or leader? have i not been told since my youth to tell my bishop and go to him with struggles of this very nature? and if he would impose sanctions on me, am i not sidestepping this by NOT going to him?
i agree with all you say. all of it. i am not trying to argue. i am trying to understand. because i do agree with you. and yet that very notion flies in the face of ALL i have known my whole life. and i may be absolutist…. all or nothing, in or out. right? but i argue that if i am, it is not just me–the church is absolutist … they teach and preach it the world over: prophet will not make mistakes in leadership, he is not wrong (14 points), all or nothing, in or out, accept or don’t…
sigh.
this is my struggle. what i am hearing from my friend, and what i’ve read above… seems to contradict all i have been told. and suddenly i say to myself, “then how are we any different than any other church?”
yes, perhaps i am absolutist in my thinking. but so is our church. and that whole upside down pyramid? its about to come crashing down for me. or rather, that is what is at risk for me in my faith.
because i cannot reconcile these 2 ideas yet… the idea of taking this journey alone, just me and god, and taking this journey as my own faith teaches me, which contradicts the other.
well, … i suspect i am not the only one to have these thoughts. and my dear friend sighs, and we take a break for a day or 2 and come back to the same wall again. or i do anyway. i cannot reconcile these 2 ideas. not yet. and if i can, i feel like i can do what so many on this site have done. namely, find a way to make peace with all this inconsistency and fallacy and contradictions… and move on and stay and be happy in staying.
and if i cannot… well, ostracism and black sheep status and stress for my daughters and apostasy (from my friends and families POV anyway)
help!!!
help? please. again, NOT trying to argue. my issue is i DO agree with you. and yet that poses a huge faith/testimony issue for me, because then everything unravels and i am left saying to myself, “i know i felt something, it was a spiritual something, it was a potent and powerful something, .. but did it mean what i have always been told it means?? JS and BoM … BoM and JS… this tight, perfect, infallible circle.. or tip of my upside down pyramid” it all crumbles.
all or nothing, in or out… no cafeteria mormons. impossible right? i know john D. says ALL mormons are cafeteria mormons. i heard it. again, i agree. but it DISAGREES with everything my leaders tell me! Hell, i have spent my whole life teaching the very same thing!!
Kkaaaaahhhhnnnn!!!!
Serenity now!!
ugh.
Frankly, I would suggest – strongly – that you take a deep breath – and then you go back into our archived posts, take some time and read them slowly. There is SO much available in older posts where we discuss pretty much everything you’ve just described. Please keep participating and commenting on current threads that interest you, but – seriously – I think you would benefit greatly from spending maybe half of your time here right now reading the older posts.
breathing and reading. breathing and reading… mrtoad4u wrote:dear silentdawn,and my dear friend then says to me… “eddie, nuance. nuance in the gospel.” to which i say, but our own faith, our own doctrines, preach this absolutist stuff. so how is it up to me? how can i just decide to keep certain things to myself and not tell a bishop or leader? have i not been told since my youth to tell my bishop and go to him with struggles of this very nature? and if he would impose sanctions on me, am i not sidestepping this by NOT going to him?
By elevating your own personal instincts/intelligence/respect for your own unique personality. Make listening to these things just as important as what hte church teaches, if not more important. There is nothing wrong with this — in fact, that’s how you get really strong meaning in your personal philosophy that is sustainable over time. REalize that you are progressing to a point that is beyond mere acceptance of everything you are taught in the black and white/absolutist terms we hear at at church, and decide what you really think. Act on what you really think while respecting the church culture and what you really think, simultaneously. This takes some thinking and soul searching and creativity, but it can lead to a uniquely powerful philosophy that keeps you connected to your family in the church without the angst I sense in you right now.
Get on your own personal clock and decide what YOU really think about the things you’ve been taught. In fact, consider starting with the idea that the priesthood leaders are infallible, always inspired, etcetera. Do you REALLY believe that? I personally don’t anymore because I have been a leader myself and realized that much of the time I was simply going off instinct — and I made lots of mistakes and decisions without any input from God at all. It’s highly likely that this happens with many leaders over time, who pacify themselves by believing a prayer at the beginning of a meeting is enough to put all their decisions in that meeting on the same plane as revelation or inspiration. When I hear people claiming the finger of the Lord is pointing to me to do something, I then say “that may be true, but I need a similar confirmation” for it to be inspired. Becuase, like most men, they make mistakes and sometimes claim things to be inspired when really they are simply trying to persuade people to help them achieve their goals. They are not evil, and are often sincere, but sometimes claim revelation when they personally haven’t had much evidence of it.
Does this mean I pray about everything? Definitely not. Some things I will just do because my heart tells me it’s a good thing for me to do. But if there is something requiring a lot of sacrifice and something I don’t want to do, I’m only going to accept their claim of revelation if I have that inspiration too.
When I made thsi realization, it became a lot easier to examine other beliefs we have and decide what I really thought about them.
Second, I think you need to deal with the fact that the logic “BoM is true, JS is a prophet, therefore Church is true” in a way that breaks the logic chain, while simultaneously granting you peace with staying with the religion. To do this, I suggest posting a thread on it so others can share what they think and you can begin the process of reconstruction until you are at peace again.
It is possible. And once on you are on your own clock, it makes it much easier to stay silent on your divergent ideas, or to present them in a way that is not offensive to others. You are at peace with your way of thinking and your relationship with the church, and can move and serve within it without feeling you have to do every thing the way the local and general leaders tell you to.
I don’t mean you are actively sinning on big commandments, but you respect your own channel to God. Respect your own right to study things out in your mind that the church teachings becomes a significant input into your decision-making. But it is one of many inputs, with your onw reasoning, your own personal impressions, and yoru life circumstances as equally if not more important.
mrtoad4u wrote:i cannot have this discussion with my bishop. he won’t have it with me. and many a church leader has given me that same answer he did. so if i feel need to discuss, even vent, or anything… i must do it outside of my ecclesiastical leaders. and if any of you tell me some leaders do have those discussions, i’d argue they are the vast minority, and not common.
so if i want to have it, i need to find my own place. mormon stories, stay lds, etc… many of which sites are riddled with anti-mormon sentiment… which i do NOT want.
i am mormon. and if i can reconcile my struggles, its where i will stay. and it appears to me to be too much to ask to have this discussion inside the church. . . .
and i do NOT seek answers necessarily. not in regards to same-sex or whatever. but these are sensitive and frustrating things. and i think we as a faith need to be able to discuss it more openly. but oh, we do not. and cannot.
I agree completely. I think the doctrine of the church does make room for discussion, but individuals personalities dictate what they are comfortable discussing for themself. I also agree some past opinions of leaders made public, whether you call it counsel or not, plays into the reluctance of many members.
While the way topics are initiated can go a looooong way toward how they are accepted and discussed, it is very true that you cannot discuss some things with some people. Sadly that’s just the way it is. Hopefully it is changing.
Great thread!! I love this topic and the honesty mrtoad is expressing, and the frustration on how to deal with it. mrtoad4u wrote:but i really feel, really truly feel, i should be able to go to my stake president or bishop or whoever, and have this discussion. and have it actually BE A DISCUSSION… and have people’s feelings heard and shared and talked about.
My first question is to ask yourself if you want the discussion….or if you want the discussion YOUR way.
Are you expecting them to listen and then have the same questions and feelings you do about the subject so you can discuss your feelings, or are you listening so you understand their view?
My brother has tried to have discussions with me, and I can tell, on some level, he doesn’t want to have them. They are not interesting to him. He doesn’t care about the issues I have. He doesn’t see things the same way I do. What I think is a major flaw in the church teachings is perfectly acceptable to him, and even inspiring to him in the ways he puts it together in his mind.
I asked my daughter who is at BYU right now if she knows much about the polygamy stuff, or if she wants to ask me questions about it. Her reply was beautiful. She said,
Quote:Dad, I know enough for me, so I’m OK with it. I don’t need to hear your ideas.
So, mrtoad. Why do you want the discussion? What are your hopes to get out of the discussion and why you feel the bishop or SP should be involved in those discussions if you can find people on this website or other places that you can have the discussion with?
Take a breath Toad. You’re going to be alright. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
thank you silent dawn! well said and awesome. and i’m working on it… and heber13, ouch. my motivations for asking? excellent question. good, good point. i want that conversation precisely because i do, in fact, want answers and for them to change. and in that, i need to be honest. i had not thought of that.
its true. i just cannot fathom that if any leader were to listen to some of the people i know who are gay, really listen, that their opinion would at least soften, if not change. i just cannot fathom it. yet, if they do not want to hear or change, or have no need or reason to do so, then why would they?
and in a way, how is my urge or need to have them listen and change any different than their stance to not listen, not change and have me fall in line and place nice?
sigh.
so in a sense, even if my intentions are pure, they are no less pure than anyone else’s.
heavier sigh.
and so what do i do, then? fight the good fight and it’ll happen if it happens, when it happens?
so hard for me to accept. i am impatient in many ways. as i see some dear friends who would be such a strength to this church, enriching and blessing all of us… be marginalized and disregarded. and perhaps this is what life is. to have “sorrow for the sins of the world” … to accept that in some ways, i may know what some do not, as i struggle to deal with the same fact that in other respects, others may know more than i, and be equally frustrated with me…
as ray has strongly urged, i have been reading a lot of y’all’s threads today. indeed, i am reinventing the same bloody wheel over and over again.
thanks for your patience–all of you.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.