- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Old-Timer wrote:
Just a personal request: Can we not use “court of love” here? Used by some, it’s sappy; used by others, it’s mocking. There is no good usage for the term, so let’s just call it a disciplinary court, ok?
I think the formal term is “disciplinary council”. Court is too judgmental and harsh.
You’re right. It is council. cwald, I really dislike “court of love”. It’s not an official name anywhere in church records, and I’ve heard it used WAY too many times in a mocking, derisive way.
Look, I’m not laying down any mandate as an admin. It’s just a personal pet peeve, which is why I asked as a personal request. I just really dislike the term. I’m not going to mention it again if anyone wants to use it.
Quote:I think the formal term is “disciplinary council”. Court is too judgmental and harsh.
Are you kidding me?
Ya know I have to be honest, this one is starting to hit a nerve with me. Why are we going to insist on mincing words? It’s another aspect of my tribe that drives me crazy — let’s all “beat around the bush” and make sure everyone stays political correct, rather than just calling a spade a spade and getting to the heart of the issue. “Disciplinary council.” “Disciplinary court.” “Don’t call it this or that.” Please. What are we trying to hide here? (SD – I know you were being facetious.)
It is a “court”, the HC are judges, the SP is the High Judge who makes the final ruling, the HC will almost ALWAYS vote unanimously to support his verdict, and the person who is being “judged” will have to live with the consequences. Period. Done deal. Then, every TBM on this planet will say that it was all done for that persons benefit to help them repent and return to the fold and that the judgment was done out of LOVE for that person, hence, the unspeakable term…which I guess we can’t say here. Yeah, it isn’t an official term – but it certainly a cultural one that I remember, very unfondly I might add, from the 80’s. A spade is a spade.
I guess I’m just little frustrated Ray, this is the second time in a week I’ve heard the “don’t say that” phrase, or it’s forbidden to use that “word” on this site, and I’m really just not sure how this approach helps anyone work through their issues with the LDS church.
However —-I’ll get over it – and respect your personal request.
Cwald, if it helps any, I hate to feel like we are walking on eggshells here, but I also feel like we really have to 1) avoid being off-putting to traditional believers with a tone that resembles the ex-mormon boards at all and 2) practice diplomacy in the way we are out of all our closets. That said, I agree with Ray that on a forum like this where we all generally agree that disciplinary councils/courts are often a travesty, using the term “court of love” amounts to a gratuitous poke in the eye. And I personally don’t see eye poking as conducive to staying LDS. Anyway, that’s my two cents. cwald wrote:Quote:I think the formal term is “disciplinary council”. Court is too judgmental and harsh.
(SD – I know you were being facetious.)
I can accept that interpretation of what I said, because after I wrote it, it occurred to me that really, it IS a court. As you say there are judges in Israel, charges read, punishment assigned, a defendent, witnesses, you name it. There is even a group of members who act in favor of the “defendent” like the defence counsel in a legal court.
Regarding the use of language, I do agree that the words we use to describe certain things carry silent implications that can drive behavior in ways we may not want to go.
For example, the TBM moniker started becoming a pejorative term for me with its Truly Brainwashed Mormon or True Blue Mormon meaning, as well as some of hte comments I’ve read about the term on New Order Mormon. The term had this impact on me — I would hear people make comments like “The Church is perfect but the people aren’t” or “Tithing is 10% of gross or you’re going to be burned at the second coming”, I started viewing people who make those comments as a TBM outgroup that isn’t seeing deeply into the issues like I am. I had to check myself as that’s a bad way to think — as the site indicates, being State 3 is a good place to be if you can be there happily, and we should treat people in that state with respect.
So, being respectful in the name, such as traditional believer, is better for maintaining an attitude of respect for people who accept the Church wholesale.
As far as “courts of love” goes — the term reminds me of the Ministry of Truth in George Orwell’s 1984 — punishment is hard to reconcile with love because it hurts — and at times, we don’t even agree with it. The term “Court of Love” is at loggerheads with teh pain and anguish such courts cause, notwithstanding their “good” intentions. So, I can see why people use the court of love moniker sarcastically.
But I have a question regrading Carol Lynn Pearson. She has been involved in a lot of feminist activities over her career, and in the video you posted, several women she associated with were subject to Church disciplinary councils and excommunicated…this seems inconsistent with me…..why has she managed to walk the tightrope relatively unscathed? In the video, she spoke out against the Patriarchy and other traditional LDS ideals, but still, Desert Book carries many of her books….anyone know why?
cwald, as I said, there hasn’t been any mandate here to not use any particular word or phrase or acronym. I just don’t like separating us vs. them or using phrases that generally are used as mocking ridicule. We are here to work through things and discuss things, and that includes venting – but mocking just isn’t constructive. I’m trying to internalize charity this year, and “court of love” doesn’t take me there. It’s a personal request, not a mandate. It’s a pet peeve; that’s all – and let’s all drop it now.
Wow, guys! I apologize for the threadjack. I didn’t intend for us to veer into this territory at all. I was happy to edit my original comment. I don’t want to offend anyone either. If you see anything I post that might be considered offensive and you don’t want to ignite a firestorm, please PM me. SilentDawning wrote:She has been involved in a lot of feminist activities over her career, and in the video you posted, several women she associated with were subject to Church disciplinary councils and excommunicated…this seems inconsistent with me…..why has she managed to walk the tightrope relatively unscathed? In the video, she spoke out against the Patriarchy and other traditional LDS ideals, but still, Desert Book carries many of her books….anyone know why?
This is what I was getting at in my first post. It seems amazing to me how Carol Lynn Pearson, John Dehlin, Hugh Nibley, Gene England, Terryl Givens to a lesser extent, and a few others have managed to soar above the fray and keep their standing intact while others, notably the September six, have suffered. It seems rather incongruous to me. Obviously diplomacy helps, as well as how you say things, but sometimes you read what they say without the benefit of non-verbal cues or gestures, and sometimes it seems pretty harsh.
It’s cool. Part of being grown-ups is the ability to have this type of conversation constructively and not have it drive us apart or get contentious. cwald knows how much I respect and admire him – but we always are going to have some things that some of us see differently than others. As I said, it’s cool. I think it’s well understood that she isn’t “out to get the Church” – even if it’s just as understood that she wants to see changes. I don’t read or hear or sense venom or threats or immediate demands from her (putting herself “above the Church”, if you will) – and that is very different than many other high profile figures over the years. I really respect her for that. It’s all good. 
George wrote:I mentioned Carol Lynn Pearson to my TBM ex (I had just watched the five amazing interviews). She immediately dismissed Ms. Pearson, as “a crazy lady.” I wondered if her attitude reflected what RS leadership might be offering up?
My mother use to be a huge fan of CLP. She loved her poetry and had had all of her books. Many years ago my mother attended an event that she was speaking at. When she came home she threw out all of her books! My mom told me that she was very saddened to discover that CLP had become evil, weird, and forgotten what her role as a woman should be. This of course only made me curious about her, so I have followed her activities over the years and come to greatly admire her strength and courage. She is a neat lady.
I am fortunate. When I mention my rant on this CLP thread this morning to my closeted Fowler stage 5 wife , she perked up. Apparently she has been reading CLP for YEARS now, and is a big fan. Who would have “thunk” it? She even has one of her books on my shelf – “Goodbye, I love You.” I suppose I should give it a try? Her book, Goodbye I Love You, really opened my eyes to the gay situation in the church. I highly recommend it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.