- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
This post is sort of a tangent to the thread on Meyers/Briggs personalities. I am an E
NFP (occasional ENTP) and my husband is an I NTJ (occasional ISTJ). We have been discussing lately the concept of “core motivators” – as Hawkgrrl pointed out in the related post, the main motivator for NFs is values, while that for NTs is truth (and for STs is tradition). Each of us is going through a process of questioning aspects of the church. For me, an NF, my concerns have been largely things that are against my core values. For instance, the Prop 8 embroglio was hurtful to me in terms of my relationship with the Church, as is the Church’s explicit teachings on gender roles. However, I do have enough T in me that I do also get bothered by historicity issues. For my DH, his concerns have largely been about the ultimate truthfulness of the Church. For example, learning about the gap between what is taught (white-washed truth) and what is historically accurate (factually true) has been devastating for him, and he often expresses feelings such as, “If I can’t trust God to tell me the truth, what can I trust?” It is not sufficient for me to say, “Maybe it is true in terms of your spiritual progression.” He feels that God would not “lie” to him if something wasn’t historically true. However, he is enough ST that the nature of the traditions and the rituals of the Church really tie him into it. Here is the question. How does one help an NT with their shaken faith, particularly when their core values are different? For me, it is easy to perceive how I can stay in a Church that is not fundamentally “true” – the people are Christ-like, the values bring one closer to God, etc. – and to leave what doesn’t mesh with my internal moral compass. It doesn’t much matter to me whether or not the temple literally seals us to God, so long as the ritual is uplifting and spiritual to some. It doesn’t matter whether the Church is truly “restored” as long as it is in harmony with what I believe to be morally acceptable. However, for my DH, this rationale doesn’t jive – if he remains in this church, it will be because there is a fundamental truth to the legitimacy of the priesthood, because JS was definitively called of God to be a prophet, etc. I am having a terrible time trying to help him in this process, because he is a “truth person,” but I largely see things as a “values person”. Furthermore, it is clear to both of us that this process is going to spill on down to whether or not he can accept Jesus Christ, since he needs to know whether He was literally the Son of God, etc.
For any of you NTs out there or those who love them – how do you help an NT on their spiritual journey in a helpful, meaningful way?
Very interesting topic, thank you! I have two direct answers…but as always, you must know that I’m weird! Okay? First, I don’t think it is yours, nor anybody’s, duty to “help” another’s spiritual journey…except to support him/her in it — as long as it is not terribly harmful to him or others. IOW, if a person decides he must kill somebody else to be spiritual, we must intervene there. Of course it is always supportive to discuss things with the other, but avoid value judgments (not easy to do in Mormondum). Where it can be a challenge is when/if you believe your spouse must believe or do certain things for YOU to get to (the highest degrees of) heaven…but I think that is being downplayed these days. What I’m trying to say here is that in my experience, when a person feels he has “license” to study and worship what works for him, it seems things work out best for everybody.
Secondly, I think you are right that your “type” (and his) makes a difference as to how this all works out. More and more we are seeing there are people going to the LDS church like you…and many here on this forum, that see the value of the church, but may not be the iron rod tbm that some think we all should be. Recognizing the differences is helpful…and discussing them. I think the purpose of personality profiling is to help us get along with those that aren’t like us, not judging them to be wrong, but just different.
The bottom line, IMO, is in things of the spirit, we must each find our truth, whatever that is, and when we find our peace, everybody benefits.
Rix wrote:First, I don’t think it is yours, nor anybody’s, duty to “help” another’s spiritual journey…except to support him/her in it — as long as it is not terribly harmful to him or others.
I don’t think its so much feeling like I need to “help” him along – he is his own person, afterall. But my DH and I are like two pieces of a whole, and we discuss
everything. We don’t even own a TV set because all we want to do is talk, analyze, and process things. He started this process because of mydisaffection. It would be impossible for me to not try to do what I can to understand him, and to offer comfort where I can. I wouldn’t expect (or want) him to stand idly by while I wrestled with the problems of my core values being threatened. Likewise, he derives benefit from discussing with me where there is/isn’t truth. I just struggle with seeing things from his perspective, and I know that when I consistently bring things back to the question of values, I am not showing empathy for him. I guess I wonder how NTs manage… find their way in “staying LDS” even when the “truth” as they have come to define it is no longer there. I know he wants to stay LDS, is it really that wrong of me to look for ways to encourage him in this?
Just listen. I don’t think you have to find answers for this person. Perhaps the answers are within him so you could direct your support in the form of questions that help him search within. Supporting and validating the journey doesn’t require that we completely agree with what another thinks or how they come to their conclusions. It sounds like the two of you think differently. Making it safe for him to question and figure things out in his own way and in his own time would be good too. I think I am a truth person too. If the church isn’t true and it doesn’t have the priesthood authority …..well, that just turns the whole foundation of my life on its head! I guess I can empathize with your DH. I mean why struggle so much if this is just another church made by just another guy who had an idea……
As an NT, I would say that what is enormously appealing about the LDS church is the idea of constantly seeking to know and understand truth, and there are compelling models to be considered and understood that render life more meaningful: – pre-existence and post-mortal life.
– pre-Christ Christology: the idea that Christ was overtly worshipped before his mortal life.
– the concept of eternal progression; the idea that humanity has the seeds of godhood within.
– the nature of personal revelation and the role of inspiration in daily life.
– Mormonism itself as a social system; it’s very effective at raising kids, growing leadership, and creating better lives.
These are concepts mostly unique to Mormonism that are often simply accepted (unquestioningly) by members, but they are revolutionary concepts worthy of further discussion and consideration in one’s own quest for enlightenment and personal spiritual direction. I would think most NTs would find them fascinating to contemplate and discuss.
MadamCurie wrote:
I guess I wonder how NTs manage… find their way in “staying LDS” even when the “truth” as they have come to define it is no longer there. I know he wants to stay LDS, is it really that wrong of me to look for ways to encourage him in this?It sounds like yous guys are doing well with communication…I think that is a huge advantage over others going through a spiritual transformation. And it sounds like you’re both smart enough to recognize that you (and most of us couples) have different ways of deciding what is best for you. Heck, it’s amazing we men and women EVER get along…seems we are so different!
But I see this from both your perspectives (I think I have about 50/50 NT and the value one). When I first studied the “other side” of church history, I got the anger and confusion most do. I talked to people I trusted on both sides, and came to the conclusion that most end up believing what they want to believe…to stay in a comfort zone. At first that didn’t make sense to me, but years later it makes absolute sense. Most of us are doing the best we can with what we’ve been given.
Anyway, the way I see it, I think you encourage him to do whatever he is comfortable with. Maybe he “stays,” maybe not. I think the more important step for both of you to take is to adapt to the individual changes and revel in each other’s journey.
Those are some great concepts for discussion, Hawkgrrl. DH brought some of those up last night, and I think that the suggestion that we discuss them in more detail is a great one. They are revolutionaryto our church. Any recommendations for other books or sources on such topics? Additionally, is it possible for an NT to accept the true historicity of the Church, and likewise accept that such doctrinal teachings are inspired?
Other suggestions for what an NT finds compelling about the church?
hawkgrrrl wrote:Mormonism itself as a social system; it’s very effective at raising kids, growing leadership, and creating better lives.
I hear this a lot…especially here in “Zion.” And as one who grew up in Utah, I felt the same way. I even think I benefitted a lot from a leadership/communication skills standpoint from my mission and leadership callings I had. But there is one negative that I think many today are doing a good job of overcoming…with their kids. Again, I’m weird, remember.
There is/was a definite “we are better than they are” attitude. It’s hard to avoid when you have the “one true church.” And it tends to divide the kids in school. I don’t like it. But, with work and a proactive approach of getting kids involved in non-church activities helps a lot.
I would just like to see continued emphasis on tolerance and respect of different beliefs.
MC – Quote:is it possible for an NT to accept the true historicity of the Church, and likewise accept that such doctrinal teachings are inspired?
Absolutely. I am quite certain that a few members of the Q12 are NTs. I could be wrong, of course, but I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that Dieter Uchtdorf is an ENTJ (he was a Lufthansa pilot – requiring decisive leadership) or that Henry Eyring is an INTP (he was a research scientist, IIRC). Even a doubting NT might have a tendency to see the possibilities, even if they consider those possibilities unlikely. To an NT (especially an NTP), the quest for knowledge is more important than drawing conclusions. Theories are more interesting than reality anyway. NTs don’t tend to be very literal, preferring models and theories to experience.
I would think NTs would like to include discussion from outside Mormonism as well as within. Concepts like world religions, eastern philosophy, world mythology, psychology, sociology, etc. Time and Newsweek often do interesting articles on the psychology and biology behind religious belief and experience. Fascinating stuff. I would also suggest The Power of Myth by Joseph Campbell and Bill Moyer.
Rix –
Quote:There is/was a definite “we are better than they are” attitude. It’s hard to avoid when you have the “one true church.” And it tends to divide the kids in school.
This is a definite Utah phenomenon, IME. How easily the persecuted become the persecutors once they are in the majority.
Great responses, everyone, thanks. Here is another question: Hawgrrl, you indicated that NTs tend to “lean agnostic/atheist”. What keeps the NT from going that route, if not truth and accuracy? Quote:NTs tend to “lean agnostic/atheist”. What keeps the NT from going that route, if not truth and accuracy?
That’s probably impossible to answer. It’s certainly highly subjective. I guess I would say that MBTI is just one set of information about a person’s preferred way of being, and people are still much more complex than type.
I can think of many things that would cause an NT to be a believer rather than an atheist, but I also would say that even as a believer, they are probably a more questioning, agnostic type of believer (or a more scientific believer) than an SJ, SP, or NF would be. They might never be content to go on assumptions or tradition or feelings. But generally, what would cause an NT to be a believer would be:
– a conclusion based on an internal logical argument that aligns with Mormon theology more closely than other theologies
– a spiritual experience that is interpreted as a logical argument given the claims of Mormonism and the nature of spiritual matters
It seems that barring those, it would probably be more likely that an NT would have a more agnostic type of belief – an openness to the possibility that it is true without asserting too many assumptions into that definition of truth (e.g. God exists because his non-existence cannot be proven). If you polled atheists, you would undoubtedly find that many are NTs (given that NTs are only 3-5% of the population, that’s saying a lot), but there are also many NTs who are believers as well, just more in line with their ratio to the general populace. Very few organizations cater to NTs – fields in science, engineering, academia, research and strategic planning do. The only church I can think of that might be designed for NTs is Christian Scientist, but I doubt it has maintained an NT feel over time. NTs theorize and discuss. SJs organize and administer. That’s why most churches have an SJ feel.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.