- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
… I also have issues with how much works has been emphasized in the past to the near exclusion of grace (although we use “atonement” as a semantic substitution for “grace” more often than most people realize). I have no problem with that line of discussion at all – and I’ve written here in this forum about it myself. It’s the sweeping generalities that disparage all traditional believing members and label them in harsh and incorrect ways that will cause moderation – NOT the basic issue of an over-emphasis on works.
That needs to be made clear, I believe –
and it is not negotiable here. I don’t care how great a comment is overall; codemning the LDS Church, calling it un-Christian and labeling the general membership as happened in the comment in question will be moderated. This site is not all pretty bunnies and rainbows, and expressions of frustration are just fine (as this post and thread illustrate very well) – but nucleur bombs of condemnation aren’t OK. Period. Let’s try to steer this topic back on track. We can do a separate topic about works vs grace, or non-denominational protestant Christianity vs Mormonism. Heber, thanks for the kind words above.
:clap: and i do honestly try to be supportive of those struggling as many of you here do. to me this site is God in action (“what you have done unto the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto me”). this is EXACTLY what we need more of in the church … this type of support of those who are inactive or less active instead of letting them fade away into the sunset, or talking about them behind their back and calling them “apostates”, one of the things i believe John Dehlin has tried to do in his work online with Mormons of all parts of the Mormon spectrum.BLC
BeLikeChrist wrote:Heber,
thanks for the kind words above.
:clap: and i do honestly try to be supportive of those struggling as many of you here do. to me this site is God in action (“what you have done unto the least of these my brethren, you have done it unto me”). this is EXACTLY what we need more of in the church … this type of support of those who are inactive or less active instead of letting them fade away into the sunset, or talking about them behind their back and calling them “apostates”, one of the things i believe John Dehlin has tried to do in his work online with Mormons of all parts of the Mormon spectrum.BLC
I agree with you BLC. I think one reason it becomes a good support group for people like cwald is that there is no emphasis on active v less active. Everyone is simply a part of the group and ideas are shared, not concerns about activity rates or deviations. It doesn’t replace going to church, IMHO, but it provides a supplementary support group to augment our experiences at church and with families/friends.(BLC, you keep making such good posts, I can’t help but keep posting my agreement!!
The other good thing is that unless you go telling everyone about your doubts and concerns, and airing of thoughts online, there are no repercussions at the local level. If I said everything I said here in my Ward, I’d be raising eyebrows, I’m sure — cWald’s experience is a case in point. My hope, honestly, is to some day get myself back to the point the where I can serve in a leadership calling WILLINGLY without reservation and negativity, pay tithing and enjoy it. I detest the tension of having devoted so much of my time and money all these years to the LDS Church, having gained a testimony after a year of praying and study and Church attendance, as well as three solid days of fasting when I was a 20 year old figuring out if I should convert — only to find myself in a position now where I have a hard time applying my talent and commitment to the LDS Church because I’m having commitment issues. Add a TBM wife and now, kids, and it gets even more complicated.
Although I believe that some of our conversations here can encourage the kind of negativity I am hoping to purge from my soul, I find the benefits of being able to connect with and explore and really BE MYSELF are huge — and without local repercussions provided I keep my mouth shut at Church and to other members.
Quote:SD:
“I keep my mouth shut at Church and to other members.”
For a decade I followed that difficult pathway. Sometimes I left the church feeling physically ill, for not speaking my piece or offering a strong alternate opinion.
Of late, because of my advancing years, I have taken a different approach. I now openly question LDS doctrines/history I personally have difficulties with. I always do it on a one to one basis, in a respective tone with quiet delivery. I have found a dozen ward members who smile and either privately agree with me, or say something such as “interesting opinion.” No one has jumped my bones, or cried “apostate.” I sense a willingness to expand parameters and not all be “YES” men in the church. It is refreshing, it brings hope, suggesting more acceptance and exploration in spiritual things in the future. Then again, perhaps senility has final struck… or my twenty TBM descendants in two wards of the stake (holding forty callings at least) wins me a few brownie points of forgiveness. My five oldest grandkids are in the three BYUs, with three temple sealed spouses as well.
I once had a larger home here and rented rooms (nearby college), to returned missionaries. I ran into the stake president at about the tenth temple wedding reception (grooms from my house) and he said, “You Brother George, are talked about for getting our young men to commit to marriage.” I thought about my empty refrigerator and smiled at him, it’s funny how nothing to eat sends young men toward the kitchens of girlfriends (or their mothers). Take note you Bishops of the new single’s wards…
I think about these supposed “middle way movement” Mormons. If I was in the same ward with several my “stayer” friends here, I could see us getting together now and then. Maybe for kids’ birthday parties or movie nights, play some charades or Boggle, eat some food and socialize. Maybe sometimes we would trade stories or have philosophical discussions around the kitchen table. Maybe I make a comment in Sunday School that is not wrong per se but is non-traditional (such as that the church is not perfect, even though it is good). Maybe the teacher tries to correct me and SD or Heber or Brian or George back me up. Maybe we start to think we can influence the ward to a more tolerant perspective. Maybe we start to think of ourselves as a ward within a ward. Maybe in this situation we start to look down our noses at the “simple testimonies.” Maybe people start to join us. It wouldn’t be hard, Sambe brings a friend (John) to the BBQ and if John stays afterward for the good natured theological debate – who are we to kick him out? Maybe John’s parents complain to the BP or SP about all the “wild ideas” John begins experimenting with. As much as I would love for us to all live nearby and hang out together, I could also see where this could reach a sort of critical mass where it really could become a problem for the local church leadership. Perhaps that is what makes the internet such a perfect medium for those that wish to “stay.” We can get support and encouragement to continue to meaningfully participate in the Church, but without the local critical mass that might tempt some to try to change the local church environment. It can be a delicate balance sometimes.
Well I will come right out and say that for some things it definitely does need to reach enough of a critical mass that the church leadership takes it seriously. Some of the culture in the church is just plainly out of line with where it should be based on doctrine and some of the current doctrine should never have been interpreted as such. If that scares “the church” then so be it. They need to willing to admit that some things need to be corrected rather than shoot the messenger. Roy wrote:As much as I would love for us to all live nearby and hang out together, I could also see where this could reach a sort of critical mass where it really could become a problem for the local church leadership. Perhaps that is what makes the internet such a perfect medium for those that wish to “stay.” We can get support and encouragement to continue to meaningfully participate in the Church, but without the local critical mass that might tempt some to try to change the local church environment. It can be a delicate balance sometimes.
Roy, there is a lot of insight in your observation, I think.
Tom
Brown wrote:Well I will come right out and say that for some things it definitely does need to reach enough of a critical mass that the church leadership takes it seriously. Some of the culture in the church is just plainly out of line with where it should be based on doctrine and some of the current doctrine should never have been interpreted as such. If that scares “the church” then so be it. They need to willing to admit that some things need to be corrected rather than shoot the messenger.
Let’s say that we could all agree that the institutional church’s understanding of divine doctrine is imperfect, and that the culture is yet another degree removed from the ideal. How would we correct it? Who would be so arrogant as to claim to have such a better/clearer understanding of the divine principles and that the collective church would be better off following that individual (or group) rather than the current leadership?
Old-Timer wrote:Which part is the apostasy?:
“You are wrong and going astray, but I am right and not going astray.
Or…
Repent and change your ways to follow me instead of any other leader(s).”
Is it both? Or am I allowed to say the first one, as long as I don’t start trumpeting the second?
Both, frankly.
The first is egotistical and sets the person up as a paragon of righteousness as opposed to those who are sinners. That attitude, at the very least, is a sign of arrogance – and arrogance is one of the things that is a characteristic of apostasy. It’s the “going astray” part that is the key, however.
However, actually demanding that others see it a particular way that is not in harmony with the leadership of an organization and insisting that others leave that leadership and follow you instead? Yeah, that’s the heart of “full” apostasy – and it’s the same no matter the organization or “camp” that is being discussed.
If you’ll notice, in all of my comments, there is a common thread of “I see through my glass, darkly” – and it’s important to me to maintain that attitude, since it’s the best antidote to the type of pride that leads to apostasy of any kind or degree.
What if we had a time machine and
with the benefit of hindsightwe could return to a pivotal moment in the past and correct a “mistake.” Who’s to say that we would do a better job or set events in motion to make a better world than the one we have now? There are all kinds of unintended consequences and space time continuum paradoxes. (The Back to the Future Movies are “True!”) This would be a slippery slope. I too “see through my glass darkly,” I am exploring different ideas and mental constructs to find what resonates with me and helps me to move forward and what doesn’t. I try to follow the admonition of Paul to test all things and hold fast to that which is good. I attempt to do this all the while knowing that my understandings are limited. I am sometimes daunted by the responsibility of raising my children in “the way,” while my understanding of the way is sooo imperfect. I do this while trying to stay tethered to my Heavenly Father, my Savior – Jesus Christ, and the imperfect LDS church. I am a stayer. I agree with Tom and Roy. I personally would not like to get together personally, as much as I enjoy the thought-provoking ideas and community that you cannot find anywhere else. My main reason is that I’ve been nakedly candid about so many aspects of my life — things people at the local level have no idea about. Many would be shocked if they knew my true feelings. I would be embarrassed to meet most of you face to face, particularly those of you who know about some of my posts a year ago. There isn’t much I haven’t disclosed, and much of it is personal. However, I would get a real kick out of meeting you personally provided you didn’t know who I was!!! But that would lack integrity so I’d never do it.
Amazing how the most public place you can share thoughts leads to such naked self-disclosure. What a paradox…
Also, as far as a movement goes — I think cwald’s experience underscores the need NOT to develop any kind of a formal middle way philosophy. For me, the fact that Middle Way is even capitalized in the StayLDS How to Stay article is a bit of a red flag. A better word might be “find your own way” within Mormonism.
Quote:Let’s say that we could all agree that the institutional church’s understanding of divine doctrine is imperfect, and that the culture is yet another degree removed from the ideal. How would we correct it? Who would be so arrogant as to claim to have such a better/clearer understanding of the divine principles and that the collective church would be better off following that individual (or group) rather than the current leadership?
I think it’s important to recognize that you can’t if you are marginalized in the Church. If you are openly vocal about what is wrong, that will not be appreciated, and you will lose ALL INFLUENCE to effect change. You become a disgruntled sideliner with no personal or referent power to change anything. HOwever, I have seen brethren be highly successful creating what I call “local doctrine” that is fully blessed by the leadership!!!
Here is the example. We had a highly spiritual, committed gentleman who gave firesides a lot in one of my early Wards. He introduced the concept that “it’s easy to receive revelation about how to serve other people, it’s very hard to receive revelation for your own problems”. This principle got circulated, repeated, and shared in all kinds of Stake and Ward meetings. Everyone believed it. I believed it. Then I went on my mission and started preaching that, and no one bought into it. I lacked influence, plus it was just personal opinion. It died on my lips.
So, the lesson — if you want to affect change, you have to buy into the culture and the rules, and serve others to the point where you are given opportunities to speak with authority. This gentleman had no real interest in changing the Church culture, but he inadvertently exposed the methodology.
I have hopes that I will emerge eventually with a stronger better philosophy void of the angst I feel right now. Who knows if it will ever happen, but should it lead to Stake or Ward leadership again, I will certainly espouse certain attitudes toward the people I lead:
a) Acceptance of those people who have doubts or cultural concerns.
b) Deep appreciation for service; never taken for granted.
c) Prompt releases with thanks and private accolades to those who served faithfully in their callings.
d) Efficient use of the time of others; de-emphasis on proactive reactivation; proactive support for those who spontaneously come back to Church
e) A commitment to solid Ward programs first and foremost
f) Personal commitment to groups that are not in the mainstream: singles, intellectuals, the married but childless, etc
g) Assertion to Stake leaders who get overzealous in their measures of “success” for wards; put them in their place using gentleman’s language and fast, firm, fair and friendly statements prepared in advance, as our former Bishop did.
h) Generosity with Church resources for those who truly need them; maintenance of high ideals we claim in being the true church, and the willingness of God to perform miracles to help His people fulfil their goals.
i) A de-emphasis of temporal concerns (and I know this will be a challenge, as you can never
completelyturn your back on the temporal concerns of the Church). Roy wrote:I think about these supposed “middle way movement” Mormons. If I was in the same ward with several my “stayer” friends here, I could see us getting together now and then. Maybe for kids’ birthday parties or movie nights, play some charades or Boggle, eat some food and socialize. Maybe sometimes we would trade stories or have philosophical discussions around the kitchen table. Maybe I make a comment in Sunday School that is not wrong per se but is non-traditional (such as that the church is not perfect, even though it is good). Maybe the teacher tries to correct me and SD or Heber or Brian or George back me up. Maybe we start to think we can influence the ward to a more tolerant perspective. Maybe we start to think of ourselves as a ward within a ward. Maybe in this situation we start to look down our noses at the “simple testimonies.” Maybe people start to join us. It wouldn’t be hard, Sambe brings a friend (John) to the BBQ and if John stays afterward for the good natured theological debate – who are we to kick him out? Maybe John’s parents complain to the BP or SP about all the “wild ideas” John begins experimenting with.
As much as I would love for us to all live nearby and hang out together, I could also see where this could reach a sort of critical mass where it really could become a problem for the local church leadership. Perhaps that is what makes the internet such a perfect medium for those that wish to “stay.” We can get support and encouragement to continue to meaningfully participate in the Church, but without the local critical mass that might tempt some to try to change the local church environment. It can be a delicate balance sometimes.
I don’t think it has to be a divisive thing at all. I don’t accept that the divisiveness of middle-wayism is inevitable or destined. I think the key to avoid that problem is not to obsess about doctrine and procedure, not even address doctrine at all because that is rarely the critical factor — it’s relationships and how you relate to each other and the whole ward. I emphasize ward because this really is a very local, one-on-one kind of thing and it seems that it is most crucially apparent at the ward level.
A statement you wrote in the quoted block above — “Maybe in this situation we start to look down our noses at the simple testimonies.” — is exactly the sort of thing we want to avoid and shun at all costs. Also to be shunned is the idea that others have to “join us.” That is also too divisive and it doesn’t have to go that route. It should be a more organic, informal process that is non-threatening to all concerned and respects wherever they are on the continuum of belief.
BTW, this is an incredibly long thread … it seems to have really touched a nerve with many people.
Old-Timer wrote:I don’t want the LDS Church to become a more mainstream Christian Church. I want it to remain the unique, peculiar, paradoxical oddity that it is.I agree totally. The elements of Mormonism that attracted me to it originally back in the early ’90s, when I was first investigating it, are just those unique elements that differentiate it from mainstream “churchianity” (a term I hear a lot in some quarters.) If anything, the LDS church has already gone way too far in the direction of accomodationism. This is not true for all Mormon sects, but we’re talking LDS on this board and that is what is most relevant to 99% of the people here.
- The topic ‘An ominous developement for Middle Way Mormons’ is closed to new replies.