- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
mczee wrote:
Our branch president counselor was teaching this and he had children who has left the church. He even said he that he wish he tried hardier in teaching his children about the gospel better.
I could tell it was really painful for himand the guy is amazing individual and very strong in the church. I wrote a long email him about how I disagree with Bednar’s message and how he shouldn’t feel guilty about it. I even sent the link over to let him know how hurtful his message was. I love that you did this. There’s an example of Sabbath-keeping, I say – relieving some of his pain.
The interesting thing to me about this is that this wasn’t simply rank-and-file members making this idea up or saying this on their own, it was coming directly from an official lesson with David A. Bednar saying it. Do these guys even think about what some of their half-baked ideas really mean if we consider the full implications of them or do they just assume members will accept it simply because they said so? Even from a TBM perspective, what about Cain, Laman and Lemuel, etc.? Weren’t they supposedly taught the same way as Abel, Nephi, etc.? Did God himself not teach Lucifer right? What happened to the idea of agency and people being punished for their own sins? Good for the author for pushing back against this idea in this case but I worry that in most cases many Church members just quietly listened to this guilt-trip and felt bad about any of their children that already fell away from the Church. Personally I think this whole push to keep the Sabbath day holy is just another way of trying explain why the Church is becoming increasingly difficult to sell nowadays because from the leaders’ perspective it couldn’t possibly be something wrong with the Church itself so they have to come up with something else to blame it on. But to me this answer is mostly symptomatic of what is wrong with the Church, namely that it is an unreasonable pain and hassle for too many members and the supposed obligation to put up with all these heavy demands and expectations is based on highly questionable truth claims. The whole nagging guilt-trip approach sort of reminds me of the saying, “The floggings will continue until morale improves.”
I’m so glad the author of the article stood up and was couragous. We haven’t had this training yet in our stake, it’s coming though. I’m sure it will be presented to the stake leadership first and I plan on being the voice of alternative perspectives. My parents did all the checklist stuff (FHE, prayer, scripture study) my two brothers left the church in high school, they are never coming back. My parents have been models in that blood and family are thicker than water and church affiliation. I see Elder Bednar’s words as broken promises and they ring as hollow as they are. If this is the best the church can come up with to stem the tide of those leaving, they are in dire straits.
This is a more complex issue than we like to think sometimes, and it is a much more complex issue than someone like Elder Bednar might be able to understand, given such a black-and-white view. It also is important to understand and acknowledge that his view is not “The Church’s” view, even if he was the one who addressed it this time. It isn’t how others in the Q12 would have framed or said it.
Leadership roulette applies to all levels in all organizations, including the Church.
I do not say that to excuse him in any way. I don’t agree with the implications of what he said and how he said it. I just want to point out that we shouldn’t condemn his generalization by generalizing in return.
This isn’t the first time this has happened and it won’t be the last. Back in the day, Seventies were ordained & served on a stake level. We were called to be missionaries, all the time.
Then the change was made that a Seventy was a general authority, called by the first Presidency.
The Seventies on the Stake level were moved to High Priests.
The reason given by some GA’s was Seventies on the local levels were not doing missionary work & those doing it were
effective in their callings. It created a lot of hurt feelings. Many of us worked very hard & our baptismal rates were comparable
to the FT Missionaries.
There have been times when I’ve given a talk or lesson at church & put my foot in it. I wish I could of taken it back.
We do expect more from a GA. They still can make mistakes. I like very much how the individual in this example, spoke up.
I wish I was more like that.
Gerald wrote: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.
Supposedly, we have always existed. We were intelligences and were organized into spirits. If that’s true, we must have developed many traits prior to being born on Earth.Old-Timer wrote:This is a more complex issue than we like to think sometimes, and it is a much more complex issue than someone like Elder Bednar might be able to understand, given such a black-and-white view…
It also is important to understand and acknowledge that his view is not “The Church’s” view, even if he was the one who addressed it this time. It isn’t how others in the Q12 would have framed or said it…Leadership roulette applies to all levels in all organizations, including the Church…I do not say that to excuse him in any way. I don’t agree with the implications of what he said and how he said it. I just want to point out that we shouldn’t condemn his generalization by generalizing in return.I don’t know; I could see blaming parents in general for their children falling away from the Church possibly being Bednar’s isolated opinion or at least a case of him wording it in a way that came across as especially insensitive compared to to the way other members of the quorum of 12 apostles or Church Presidency would have put it but I still think the overall lesson and push to “keep the Sabbath day holy” are absolutely an official Church program coming from the top sort of like, “Hastening the Work.” It looks like they (the majority and/or most influential Church leaders) see the failure to successfully pass LDS traditions and devotion to the Church on to future generations as a serious problem and think that harping on keeping the Sabbath day holy is part of the solution to this problem going forward.
For example, the chart for this lesson specifically shows “Weak gospel teaching and modeling in the home” as breaking the chain in the expected cycle of expecting members to get married in the temple and have children and raise them in the Church. Personally I don’t see why they think focusing on keeping the Sabbath day holy will help because I don’t believe it has much of anything to do with the primary reasons why so many Church members and especially young adults are falling away from the Church to begin with. My guess is that the most common reasons why members don’t remain active in the Church are simply because they don’t like it and/or they don’t believe it’s that important or worthwhile. So trying to emphasize strict Sabbath day observance doesn’t really do anything to address the real question of why Church members should have that much trust in the Church to begin with and depending so much on a sense of obligation to motivate members is still problematic and this general guilt-trip approach could easily backfire in many cases by making many existing members feel even more burned out than they already do.
I have a counter suggestion. I think the families that have the most staying power are the ones that have the most LDS kitsch in their homes on display. That’s seriously probably about the same thing as families with a marked Sabbath observance. One thought I keep having is that at some point in our growth we have to embrace the lukewarm members more than we do. I’m all for talks on making Sunday a day of rest and families, but it’s hilarious when the way to do that is through more planning and list making and creating of more rules and hoops to jump through. We switched from the business of trying to live the teachings of Jesus to trying to improve the church’s stats. In some cases those are incompatible goals.
hawkgrrrl wrote:
One thought I keep having is that at some point in our growth we have to embrace the lukewarm members more than we do.Maybe the LDS church just isn’t set up for this. Lukewarm members usually don’t pay a regulation tithe or have temple recommends. i can’t off-hand think of another mainstream religion that has this kind of “all in” status that is beyond regular attendance, service, participation. But I think we need to adjust pretty quickly to a new reality.
hawkgrrrl wrote:I have a counter suggestion. I think the families that have the most staying power are the ones that have the most LDS kitsch in their homes on display.
My MIL wins this contest. Judging by the amount of decorations that she sends to us as presents, I assume that she is trying to pass on the kitsch tradition to the next generation.
Ann wrote:hawkgrrrl wrote:
One thought I keep having is that at some point in our growth we have to embrace the lukewarm members more than we do.Maybe the LDS church just isn’t set up for this. Lukewarm members usually don’t pay a regulation tithe or have temple recommends. i can’t off-hand think of another mainstream religion that has this kind of “all in” status that is beyond regular attendance, service, participation. But I think we need to adjust pretty quickly to a new reality.
I agree that the LDS church appeals to a very “DIY” portion of the population. Some are even turning to the LDS church despite some of our crazy doctrines because of the commitment that we achieve from our members and youth.
I believe that the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists are the most comparable religions to our own.
DevilsAdvocate wrote:My guess is that the most common reasons why members don’t remain active in the Church are simply because they don’t like it and/or they don’t believe it’s that important or worthwhile. So trying to emphasize strict Sabbath day observance doesn’t really do anything to address the real question of why Church members should have that much trust in the Church to begin with and depending so much on a sense of obligation to motivate members is still problematic and this general guilt-trip approach could easily backfire in many cases by making many existing members feel even more burned out than they already do.
I totally agree, DA. It seems the approach is to remind members to stay faithful and increase devotion. It just feels like their approach is “Keep doing what we are doing. It may feel like we’re losing, but keep doing it.” This requires trust and faith to double down despite experience.I could see that work for a group of people. For some, the more they try it, the more it will reinforce their feelings and it will lead to positive results in the home. If you’re having a hard time being motivated…really devote yourself to it and it will become more important to you. That could work for some.
But as HG and Ann mention, it doesn’t seem like there is a Plan B for the ones that want something more practical. What if I don’t feel comfortable being “All In” right now? Then what? Their response seems to be…”See Plan A. We promise it will bless your kids”.
:think: No exaggeration, but I was specifically told by a bishop that my actions will forever impact future generations. And if I chose to divorce and they fall away from the church, I will be held accountable for that.
That was all I needed to hear to know I need to be careful how I allow church leaders to make me feel, and to ask myself what I truly believe about the gospel. It is not a problem for them to teach the Sabbath Day will bless us. But they go on to draw inappropriate and irresponsible if/then connections about promises and outcomes. And when they do, they offend.
Thanks – Quote:I think the families that have the most staying power are the ones that have the most LDS kitsch in their homes on display.
:clap: Just baptized my laptop with my caffeinated beverage.
Quote:My guess is that the most common reasons why members don’t remain active in the Church are simply because they don’t like it and/or they don’t believe it’s that important or worthwhile.
Ya Think?
I mentioned earlier the active people in my ward attending the uplifting Sabbath Day Fest have never been guilty of jet-skiing in the afternoon. And the jet-skiers, they weren’t at the meeting. Results – Tie. Sabbath Dayers the same, Jet-Skiers the same.
mom3 wrote:I mentioned earlier the active people in my ward attending the uplifting Sabbath Day Fest have never been guilty of jet-skiing in the afternoon. And the jet-skiers, they weren’t at the meeting. Results – Tie. Sabbath Dayers the same, Jet-Skiers the same.
:thumbup: Some elders did a very astute skit at a mission conference in my mission. It was poking fun at the “sales” nature of our role as missionaries. They had given their sales pitch to the investigator who then balked at some of the requirements. In response they countered with, “Hey, that’s our Celestial Kingdom package. We have another package that might suit you better. It’s our Terrestrial Kingdom package, and you can also get that package with baptism. Here’s what that entails. . .” I think we need a few more Terrestrial Kingdom package members or to make it at least OK to be one.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.