Deceived

[Anonymous]

I have struggled of late with a faith crisis that I think was initially spurred by being treated poorly by ward members. That is no longer a significant part of my faith crisis, it is so much more complex than that. Anyway, the other day as I was driving home from work, I had a very distinct thought come to mind (I hesitate to call it revelation. I like to believe I have good thoughts all on my own without interference from the Divine)…the thought was simply to love my fellow ward members and to be patient with them for they are the “deceived” and not the deceivers. It’s helped me to understand those I associate with at church a bit. I’m thinking it helps me with the golden rule. As I judge less, perhaps I can feel less judged? It gave me hope for that at the very least. I just wanted to share with people that might appreciate the thought. 🙂

[Anonymous]

roobytoos, thanks for recording that here. I need reminders that patience is a virtue.

[Anonymous]

Much of the way I cope with church/church people is this same way. I don’t call it being deceived, necessarily (I’m open to the idea that I’m the one deceived), but finding the peace in allowing others to believe what they will while I believe what I do is freeing. I do still struggle with it from time to time, I have little problem with seeing the belief of another as simply different from what I believe. It is, in fact, very much the same as how I view people of other religions.

Thanks for sharing, I do appreciate the thought. And you also make a good point that our faith crises are not simple.

[Anonymous]

roobytoos said:

Quote:

…I had a very distinct thought come to mind (I hesitate to call it revelation.

Any time I feel that I’m being taught a spiritual lesson, no matter how basic it may seem, it is still a personal revelation for me.

Don’t hesitate, accept it for what it feels to you. Thanks for posting.

[Anonymous]

I have found a lot of differences in the ward. There are some that are deceived, some that are deceivers, some that seem to really get it, and some that think I’m deceived.

I don’t think you can lump everyone in one group or you’re deceiving yourself.

Truly…the idea of being patient and loving to others is what it is all about. Thanks for the thought about helping to reduce angst about judgments. :thumbup:

[Anonymous]

I read an account on a blog the other day which touches on this premise a bit. The blogger was telling about her struggle with Prop 8. She lived in California and was praying to know what to do, support the churches stand or her hearts stand. As she was praying she felt the words – love even the ones who are different from you. When she first finished the prayer she assumed she knew who she was supposed to love, as the day wore on she realized it was a much broader impression. No matter which way she voted or participated, some one would be different from her and she was to love all of them. She said it was the hardest thing she has ever had to do.

Your impression sounds very similar – kindness, respect, and courtesy to everyone, no matter if they see it your way or their way.

As Hawkgrrl often says, “It’s being an Adult with God.”

Thanks for sharing, we all need the reminder to love our fellow men.

[Anonymous]

mom3 wrote:

I read an account on a blog the other day which touches on this premise a bit. The blogger was telling about her struggle with Prop 8. She lived in California and was praying to know what to do, support the churches stand or her hearts stand. As she was praying she felt the words – love even the ones who are different from you. When she first finished the prayer she assumed she knew who she was supposed to love, as the day wore on she realized it was a much broader impression. No matter which way she voted or participated, some one would be different from her and she was to love all of them. She said it was the hardest thing she has ever had to do.

Great story. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

A lady I confided in during one of my early commitment crises (a TBM TR-holder) said “You’ve seen a side of it most members’ haven’t”. She was very non-judgmental, and I think her perspective was healthy.

That man in a white shirt and tie, who oozes black and white thinking all over the pulpit, may well be someone who had TBM parents who were B&W. He may have received nothing but positive experiences in the church, and may have consistently received church kudos given his personality fit with the church. Well, his perspective is different than mine. He may well think the way I do, if he had my personality and life’s experiences in the church.

I tell myself that now and then.

I take comfort in the fact I can relate to the fringe-types in the church — when so many others can’t.

[Anonymous]

I was once told something very similar by a TBM leader, SD. Reading this reminded me of the following quote, relevant to this conversation. Elder Holland is speaking of the prodigal son’s older brother:

Quote:

Feeling unappreciated and perhaps more than a little self-pity, this dutiful son—and he is wonderfully dutiful—forgets for a moment that he has never had to know filth or despair, fear or self-loathing. He forgets for a moment that every calf on the ranch is already his and so are all the robes in the closet and every ring in the drawer. He forgets for a moment that his faithfulness has been and always will be rewarded.

I think those who have never had major challenges to their faith or in life in general are very much like the older brother. Likewise, some have had these challenges are like him. They either don’t know or forget that they have not experienced what we have. Part of how I cope with others at church has to do with this idea – I have not had their experiences, neither have they had mine. They may not understand what’s it like to not feel the Spirit even though someone has tried because it hasn’t happened to them. They may not know what it’s like to not have prayers answered or feel like prayers bounce off the ceiling because it hasn’t happened to them.

[Anonymous]

In thinking about people that are deceived I think about Assumptive Realities and the somewhat different but related concept of Functional Illusions.

These Illusions and Assumptions help us to function. They help us to build communities and meaning from our lives.

I remember in a grief class learning about the loss of the assumptive reality and building a new one. I wondered why anyone who had experienced the trauma of having their assumptive reality crash around them would want to build another. Would it not be safer to just live in reality?

1) It is not that easy. Our very identity and how we understand ourselves and relate to other people is laced with assumptions and illusions. By nurture, nature, or a combination of the two – we are built to structure a parrallel world in our own minds that is only loosely based on the hard proven data world outside of us.

2) I too have assumptions and illusions. The bumper sticker says “Don’t judge me because I sin differently than you.” Perhaps it could be changed to say “Don’t judge me because I assume differently than you.”

3) Many assumptions can be healthy and helpful.

Knowing this, I try to be a little bit more deliberate in the assumptions that I choose (and model for my children). I have hope in concepts and virtues that are so beautiful that I want them to mean something – to have significance. I lend my own tiny voice to those that I believe are helping society live out these ideals in a better way. I sometimes encounter people that have assumptions that I believe to be harmful to varying degrees (ISIS and skinheads seem to be on the extreme end of what it means to be harmful). I have hope that as groups, communities, countries band together to seek after our more beautiful ideals then these violent and extreme groups will grow increasingly marginalized – increasingly out of touch with what it means to be a citizen of the world. Perhaps these hopes are just another version of living in a fantasy land. I am ok with that. It is a fantasy land of my own make and choosing. I hold the keys to change or alter it if and when it becomes neccessary.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

Feeling unappreciated and perhaps more than a little self-pity, this dutiful son—and he is wonderfully dutiful—forgets for a moment that he has never had to know filth or despair, fear or self-loathing. He forgets for a moment that every calf on the ranch is already his and so are all the robes in the closet and every ring in the drawer. He forgets for a moment that his faithfulness has been and always will be rewarded.

Perhaps this is just the contrarion in me. I personally dislike the quote in a Mormon theological context. It just seems a little too smug and self-congratulatory. I fear that we might welcome people back but only from the comfort of our elevated positions. How do we respond when our father reallocates the remaining inheritance into equal shares (as in the parable of the laborers)? What is to be the prodigal son’s place in the family once the party is over? There is a conflict here between justice/fairness and mercy/forgiveness. According to some of our illustrations this face off could only be settled by a mediator or intercessor to step in our our behalf. I would like to imagine that the dutiful brother is eventually moved by love from his position of demander of justice to the point where he willingly shares his portion of the inheritance with his brother – making him the Christ figure/Savior upon Mt. Zion for his brother. Is that not what we believe Jesus (our elder brother) has done for each and every one of us?

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

Feeling unappreciated and perhaps more than a little self-pity, this dutiful son—and he is wonderfully dutiful—forgets for a moment that he has never had to know filth or despair, fear or self-loathing. He forgets for a moment that every calf on the ranch is already his and so are all the robes in the closet and every ring in the drawer. He forgets for a moment that his faithfulness has been and always will be rewarded.

Perhaps this is just the contrarion in me. I personally dislike the quote in a Mormon theological context. It just seems a little too smug and self-congratulatory. I fear that we might welcome people back but only from the comfort of our elevated positions. How do we respond when our father reallocates the remaining inheritance into equal shares (as in the parable of the laborers)? What is to be the prodigal son’s place in the family once the party is over? There is a conflict here between justice/fairness and mercy/forgiveness. According to some of our illustrations this face off could only be settled by a mediator or intercessor to step in our our behalf. I would like to imagine that the dutiful brother is eventually moved by love from his position of demander of justice to the point where he willingly shares his portion of the inheritance with his brother – making him the Christ figure/Savior upon Mt. Zion for his brother. Is that not what we believe Jesus (our elder brother) has done for each and every one of us?

I do think Elder Holland and his colleagues can sometimes be a bit smug, self righteous, and even condescending. They are, of course, not the only members guilty of such behavior – I suppose it’s really hard not to be if you believe the one true church theology.

As to the parable, it’s one of the things in scripture that’s actually not meant to be literal. Like most parables (and other short stories), we only know the events that took place in the story itself, but not after. I suppose they lived happily ever after. I’m certainly open to the idea that scripture can have different meaning to and different interpretation by different individuals. I take the father’s statement “all that I have is thine” coupled with the earlier division of the estate (before the father’s death, mind you) as indication that the younger son won’t get a new inheritance – he had his and he wasted it (the definition of prodigal). While the father was clearly forgiving, I’m not sure the Christian/LDS ideas of a mediator come into play in this particular parable, or perhaps the father is representative of Christ. I don’t believe the older son fits the idea of a mediator because in our theology the mediator had to be perfect and sinless – and the older son was guilty of at least jealousy and anger. I’m not sure the older son is demanding justice, although I can see where that idea comes from and the younger son was unquestionably the receiver of mercy. Other than we don’t know what happened after the events in the story (and it’s not a true story anyway) and the sin thing, my biggest sticking point with the older brother being compared to a Christ figure comes from the beginning of the story where the inheritance was divided – the older brother now has it all, but he didn’t always, and the father now has none whereas our father still has it all.

Frankly I’ve never really gotten how we can all get all the Father has, anyway. The only way I have been able to reconcile that is that we are all like Him and have the same things He has, but not His things (and I realize it’s not about things, I just don’t have a better word).

[Anonymous]

Thanks for your willingness to entertain my thought process DJ. Yes, I was taking some liberties with the story. Stories are cool like that in the way that they are pliable.

Yet you are correct. This particular parable does not address what exactly is meant by forgiveness but letting consequences (like a squandered inheritance) remain. One of the cool things about the bible is its theological inconsistencies. Different sections and different parables leading to opposite conclusions. I have certainly heard the interpretation that the atonement only squares us as far as adam’s transgression, saves us from death, and provides us with the tools for repentance so that we will not be eternally held to account for every mistake (if we make use of the tools).

What then differentiates us is our righteousness and accomplishments. This view of the atonement certainly justifies the 3 degrees of glory and the Mormon emphasis on works.

This view fits very nicely with some biblical passages and not well at all with some others.

I suppose if I claim the freedom to eat my prefered food of mercy and forgiveness from the buffet, I can hardly begrudge someone else for selecting heavy side portions of justice and rewards according to their works.

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

He may have received nothing but positive experiences in the church, and may have consistently received church kudos given his personality fit with the church. Well, his perspective is different than mine. He may well think the way I do, if he had my personality and life’s experiences in the church.

i agree with sd

there is no substitute for experience.

Roy wrote:

3) Many assumptions can be healthy and helpful.

i think so too. As long as the assumption isn’t false or bad…these can be like myths that can help raise our minds to another level. Reminds me of Joseph Campbell’s words.

Quote:

“Mythology is not a lie, mythology is poetry, it is metaphorical. It has been well said that mythology is the penultimate truth–penultimate because the ultimate cannot be put into words. It is beyond words. Beyond images, beyond that bounding rim of the Buddhist Wheel of Becoming. Mythology pitches the mind beyond that rim, to what can be known but not told.”

― Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

Thanks for your willingness to entertain my thought process DJ. Yes, I was taking some liberties with the story. Stories are cool like that in the way that they are pliable.

Yet you are correct. This particular parable does not address what exactly is meant by forgiveness but letting consequences (like a squandered inheritance) remain. One of the cool things about the bible is its theological inconsistencies. Different sections and different parables leading to opposite conclusions. I have certainly heard the interpretation that the atonement only squares us as far as adam’s transgression, saves us from death, and provides us with the tools for repentance so that we will not be eternally held to account for every mistake (if we make use of the tools).

What then differentiates us is our righteousness and accomplishments. This view of the atonement certainly justifies the 3 degrees of glory and the Mormon emphasis on works.

This view fits very nicely with some biblical passages and not well at all with some others.

I suppose if I claim the freedom to eat my prefered food of mercy and forgiveness from the buffet, I can hardly begrudge someone else for selecting heavy side portions of justice and rewards according to their works.

Do you think it’s generally true that we want justice for others (like the older brother does) and mercy for ourselves (like the younger brother does)?

Your thoughts about the atonement are interesting. I’m not sure they’re purely Mormon theology, but parts certainly do fit our theology. If those ideas are true, my own view of things is off base – I think I see it much more like what Pres. Uchtdorf described in his grace talk last month. I am certainly much more of a grace personality than a works personality (maybe I’m lazy, sinful, or offended). I have certainly given some thought in the past to what happened with the brothers – we really are left hanging.

[Author]

Posts