- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Shawn, this was a “meeting in a box” that the church gave out, and the Bednar quote (and accompanying diagram which is in the post) were exactly as he said. This is the church’s new focus, one that our SP shared a few weeks before the meeting, and honestly it could be a whole lot worse. Since most of this guilt stuff just bounces off me, it hurts me less than it could if I weren’t past feeling. But I’m one of the failures he’s talking about. The chart in the post was what E. Bednar shared in the video. That says exactly as he said, that when youth leave the church, the cause is “weak gospel teaching and modeling in the home.”
I see the diagram now. I honestly didn’t notice it before. However, there is no quote from Bednar. Saying “he made a statement to the effect that… ” is not the same as a quote. Was the clip Jon G. refers to shown to every ward? I missed church yesterday. The video has been out for awhile online. I just can’t find it. I remember r/exmormon was flipping out about this months ago. Here’s a link to the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJsDydvpxGQhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJsDydvpxGQ” class=”bbcode_url”> Heber13 wrote:This approach reminds me of the times the bishop called everyone together to talk to all the youth about a particular problem one kid was having, without naming names or pointing fingers (and also without directly approaching the individual that needed to hear a message). We all got a dose of guilt without being sure what exactly it was we did that was not good enough.
It is a passive aggressive culture.
My sister and I both agree that in geographical pockets, the culture is shame based. That is what I see you referring to Heber…and it certainly exists.
My sister left the church when she was a teenager, and she has no desire to EVER return: she hates the teachings of going to hell for everything, the use of shame to enforce and control behavior, and what she saw at the time was an utter disrespect and disregard for women. To her, it was a group of white chovanistic men who controlled everything, and if they wanted, could have multiple wives as well (or at least taught that some day they would),..while women were nothing but prizes to be captured and controlled. She will have nothing more to do with that,..and yet, that was her experience.
I read a book (partially read it) called “Act in Doctrine” by Bednar that had some things so incredibly one-sided, so generalized, that the book was rather stunning in a negative way, at least to me. This generalization idea is not knew nor is it unique or even rare. Happens a lot.
Thanks for the link, DarkJedi. I watched the portion with Elder Bednar and transcribed some of it:
Quote:In other words, brothers and sisters, multi-generational families are a rich source of the spiritual nutrients that are necessary to produce posterity of promise. The cycle of next-generation church growth can be interrupted for members who are born in the church as well as converts. At what points in this cycle of multi-generational growth is the cycle typically broken, and why? Hopefully, you now begin to see the connection between Sabbath, home, and what we’re describing right here. The biggest losses occur between baptism and receiving the endowment. And of all the things that we know, of all the reasons that contribute to that rupture, first, foremost, and most powerful is weak gospel teaching and modeling in the home. Thus, living the Savior’s gospel in the home is essential in creating and maintaining these multi-generational families. (Beginning at 3:39)
I see now why some people are upset and I’m sorry for my comment about throwing Elder Bednar under the bus. However, it could be that he was not in the least referring to parents who do actually try to teach and live the gospel. He could be referring to parents who really don’t even try much to teach or live the gospel. Again, though, I can see why some people are upset.You’re right Shawn, he could have been talking about parents who don’t have FHE or “keep the Sabbath” or don’t have family prayer or whatever. The topic was keeping the Sabbath, so the implication was that not keeping the Sabbath (and also by implication not having gospel instruction at home on Sunday) is directly related to children leaving the church. This is however, not what he actually said, he used a much more generic “weak gospel instruction and modeling in the home.” I see why some people can be upset, too. Contrast that with my own family where I was inactive during for the 10 years starting with when the oldest was 14 and the youngest was 7. The oldest, who would have arguably had the most instruction, is semi active. I have a son on a mission and another with a call. The youngest is in high school now, but attends and participates (including early morning seminary). My wife did do “family prayer” with the children but we did not have FHE. Sundays actually never changed much for me from my TBM days to inactivity to now – but they have never included a time of gospel instruction (I always figured 3 hours was enough). If Bednar is right, my kids should all be inactive and the family in the ward that always held FHE, kept the Sabbath, does family prayer should be doing what my kids do. There is a family in our ward like that with similar aged kids. All, including the one still in high school, are inactive. If Bednar is right that shouldn’t be the case. I know there are people who look at me as the prodigal son and look at my family and don’t believe it.
I shared the link to the blog in the OP with my SP. I do share things with him sometimes, and he likewise with me. He hasn’t responded – but he does have a kid on the road to not serving a mission, not going to BYU, etc., and he admits that. I think that blog may strike home with him.
I find Bednar to be amazing in his lack of being able to see anything other than black or white. There is no grey or how to manage less than the “ideal” situations in his talks. There is only perfection and examples of people suffering due to not having perfect obedience (fear motivation). His view of the gospel always seems to be coming from fear. This is another example of “be perfect in obedience or else!!” If children do falter, well parents (moms) you messed up in some way (more fear and shame). It is unfortunate that he seems to only see and use fear when describing the gospel. Quote:it could be that he was not in the least referring to parents who do actually try to teach and live the gospel. He could be referring to parents who really don’t even try much to teach or live the gospel.
While this point is possibly valid, sharing this video in a 5th Sunday lesson isn’t exactly reaching the target audience if so. Plus, it bears some further explanation. What exactly is “weak modeling of the gospel”? Is it things like shopping on Sunday or is it things like being controlling and judgmental? Is it having FHE or is it spending quality time with our kids? Is it checking the boxes to be seen as doing all the right things or is it having a deep love of Jesus’ actual teachings? Is it reading the manual when teaching a lesson, asking the same standard questions and getting the same standard answers or digging deeply into the scriptures, enjoying the paradoxes in the parables, and acknowledging the doubt that comes with curiosity? The real problem with any communication is in the interpretation. While I don’t know what E. Bednar’s intent was, his messages are often imprecise and used as cudgels against those who aren’t just like him.
Dax wrote:I find Bednar to be amazing in his lack of being able to see anything other than black or white. There is no grey or how to manage less than the “ideal” situations in his talks. There is only perfection and examples of people suffering due to not having perfect obedience (fear motivation). His view of the gospel always seems to be coming from fear. This is another example of “be perfect in obedience or else!!” If children do falter, well parents (moms) you messed up in some way (more fear and shame). It is unfortunate that he seems to only see and use fear when describing the gospel.
I agree with this as well. The book “Act in Doctrine” was difficult to read–I ended up throwing it away because I felt like thinking about yourself or your own good was a serious sin. As long as you always and ONLY look outside of yourself to help others, sacrificing your own needs and wants for the good of others,..only then can you be Christ like.
hawkgrrrl wrote:While this point is possibly valid, sharing this video in a 5th Sunday lesson isn’t exactly reaching the target audience if so.
Yes, HG. Exactly. By not making it clear…it leaves the entire congregation wondering what exactly is the message and to whom, and less edifying.
Quote:D&C 50:22
Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand one another, and both are edified and rejoice together.
I’m not sensing the message was delivered and received on the same level of understanding, which causes confusion and disharmony. Those are not fruits of the spirit.
hawkgrrrl wrote:While I don’t know what E. Bednar’s intent was, his messages are often imprecise and used as cudgels against those who aren’t just like him.
Someone has to be blamed. It certainly isn’t the children who decide to go wayward….so blame the membership because they missed that one FHE back in 2012 when they were not perfect.
Thanks for this post Hawkgrrrl & to DJ for the video. The best part of this story is this person stood up for himself & other members in the congregation.
We need to do this more. It can be done in loving, straightforward manner.
When done correctly, you get:
Quote:I cannot adequately state the feelings and power in that room. A group of saints took ownership of their faith for a moment. It was not a rejection of the teacher or Bednar so much as it was staking an individual claim to the grace of God.
Quote:However, we watched a clip of David Bednar addressing some general authority group talking about the demographic that most frequently leaves the church and he made a statement to the effect that if teenagers (the aforementioned group) leave the church it’s because of inadequate gospel teaching and living in the home.
Sitting in the class when I heard that statement I thought to myself while teens will always have their agency I can accept that example does play a roll. If by “inadequate gospel teaching and living” he meant that the law gets stressed over love, invalidating and minimizing the true gospel of atonement/grace/charity where young people will feel supported and enabled I can see the point. It is the perversion of Christ that elevates checklists and tradition, and can make young people feel stifled instead of loved. The gospel does need to be taught and modeled properly in the home and at church, but we’re bumbling humans. The reactions of parents in that class demonstrates that our church can give real opportunities for spiritual nourishment, and it may happen more often if members were more comfortable with speaking their minds, but I think the hesitancy and scarcity does add power to the times when it finally happens.
It is challenging for those whose children “turn out good” (whatever that means) to understand what it is to have a “wayward” child (whatever that is. Each person has their own definition.) If all your children are “good”, you’ve no point of comparison and you would have to conclude “well, it was all me.” I’ve no idea how Elder Bednar’s children have turned out (he has two sons, right?) but my guess is that their lives are pretty much what he wants them to be. What else is there to conclude? My children are not “wayward” (as yet) but they are very different and I have two children who struggle socially and academically and two who excel in both of these areas (and one child kind of in between). Yet, they come from the same genetic stock and were reared in the same family. The Church seems to take a “blank slate” philosophy with children (despite all our talk about preordination and preexistence). The idea is that our children are little pitchers that we have only to fill up with gospel principles and church activities to create the fine upstanding members of the Church we want them to be. But the truth is far, far more complex. I like this quote from Stephen Pinker’s The Blank Slate:
Quote:What all this suggests is that children are shaped not by their parents, but in part—but only in part—by their genes; in part
by their culture, both the culture of the surrounding society and the children’s own culture, which we condescendingly call their
peer group; and in large part by sheer chance—chance events in the development of the brain in utero, such as whether some
neurons zigged or zagged at a particular day in brain development, and perhaps chance events in life, such as whether at
some point you were chased by a dog, or inhaled a virus, or were dropped on your head, or got the top bunk bed as opposed to
the bottom bunk bed. When many people hear these results, their first reaction is to say, “Oh, so you mean it doesn’t matter how I treat my kids?” Of
course it matters! It matters for many reasons. One is that it’s never all right to abuse or neglect or belittle a child, because
those are horrible things for a big strong person to do to a small helpless one that is their responsibility. Parenting is, above all, a
moral obligation.
One last personal example. At this point in time, it is unlikely that my son will be going on a mission (a decision I’m okay with). There are several reasons why that may not be the case but I can’t ignore one fact: none of the friends he has are going on missions. I have a feeling if his social group were different, his decision would have been different as well.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.