- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I liked these suggestions from Hawk’s post: Quote:We need new ideas, not status quo.Many church programs were created by prior generations in response to various problems. Some ideas, like Roadshows and Gold & Green Balls, have come and gone. Other ideas seem to have a stronger hold, but that doesn’t mean those programs are the right ones for today. If we are so concerned about younger generations leaving, where are the focus groups? How are we encouraging people to speak openly about why they are leaving? Referring them back to their stakes is not going to get the message through. A good focus group is directed and guided by sound principles.
We need to focus on Christ’s teachings and applying them in our lives. While this is a focus, it often gets lost in other pet topics such as “family” and “obedience.” While these secondary topics may be fine as a supplement, they are not the main event. In a recent Gospel Doctrine class I was in, the teacher asked what the main focus was of the gospel, and believe it or not, about 80% of the respondents said “The Family.” The teacher was looking for “The Atonement.” Many weeks at church, so am I, and not finding it. These side topics have become a sort of doctrinal kudzu, taking all the energy we could be devoting to improving our discipleship and instead focusing it short of the mark.
Admit mistakes.Not admitting mistakes undermines authority far more, particularly to this generation, than does admitting them. That may not have been the case in older generations, particularly those who fought in wars. Military experience says “you follow orders or people die, son.” Obedience is expedient in war. But not all obedience is equal, and our lives are mostly lived in peace time. When we refuse to admit flaws and mistakes and put on a mask of perfection, it is seen through. Only one is perfect, and it’s not us.
Service missions. People learn to follow Christ when they serve others. If we changed the focus of our missionary works on service first and teaching second (or never), young people would find the experience worthwhile and attractive even if they have doubts. Investigators would want to be a part of our efforts and would feel the gospel in action in their lives through serving others. Trying to teach the gospel when you are struggling with your own testimony is difficult. Gaining a testimony through service seems more likely than gaining one through saying you have one and hoping that it becomes true (or the mantra that the testimony is found in the bearing thereof). A testimony of the “church” absent a love of Christlike service isn’t much of a testimony for a person professing to follow Christ.
More diversity.We need diverse perspectives in all decision making bodies, not tokens. When all decisions are made by white males over 50 living in the intermountain west, they come from a position of understanding that one perspective very well, while not understanding other perspectives very well or even being aware to consider them. There’s nowhere to go but up on this one. Unfortunately, it’s difficult to see how those who are barred from these decision making bodies can get their perspectives out there. How do women, gay people, singletons, intellectuals, and liberals explain their experience? For now, we blog.
More than once I thought it was strange that people thought an LDS mission was “service”. Red flags popped up whenever I heard it. I remember thinking — all this missionary work is for US. Sure, there were a few people on my mission whose lives were a train wreck, and for whom the basic commandments created a real shift in their lives for the better. But the majority were “elect” — good people to begin with who were simply seeking truth and wanted to live a good life according to a true philosophy. So, we were simply attracting the salt of the earth, their 10% of their gross, and their time and labor.
We even had limits on how much service we could do to others because it would interefere with proselyting time. The sales effort was more important than helping others. So I agree with service missions particularly.
Further, some youth/young adults are NOT salespeople by nature. I wasn’t — I was a teacher, but not a sales person, so a service mission might be a much better fit for certain young people than a straight proselyting missing.
Roy wrote:Yes, it is condescending and generalizing. However, it is not terribly different from what I might expect an LDS church leader to say.
I respectfully ask for someone to explain how this kind of declarations are all that different from what church leaders say all the time?
I keep thinking about this question Roy — I think what is particularly off-putting is the fact that he made us out to be fickle weaklings with his taffy-pull comments. People aren’t exactly sure what he meant but one interpretation was that he was calling us “candy-assed” members. It means you’re being a “woos” (the two “oo”‘s pronounced like book, perhaps alternately spelled as “wuhsss”).
In any case, his comments were derogatory. And they don’t communicate the kind of respect I have even been used to from local members. His comments were a step down, even worse than the average local leader.
Hawk also said: Quote:I suspect in time Tyler Glenn will come to regret the anger of his video and the wound he sought to inflict in the manner of his expression, not because his anger is not justified, but because he is at heart a good person. I likewise hope that E. Holland’s flash of anger will give way to introspection, because despite his claimed “Irish” temper, he likewise is a good person.
That doesn’t mean they don’t both offend me right now, or that I can’t reject their views. It’s just something that’s worth saying because we’re all human.
I also think the characterization of leavers as weaklings has got to be put to bed for good. It’s so often not true and there’s an Internet full of their stories for everyone to peruse.
Yawn. I think JH is just expressing his annoyance at those who leave. I just choose not to pay attention to him when he rants. Or really at any time. If you think about it here is a guy who has spent his entire life devoted to the church. It is not possible in his mind that it is not all good. Even if he has some questions, he believes the scope and majesty of the church is so powerful as to override any trivial issues someone may have. I have more sympathy for him than anger.
Cadence wrote:Yawn. I think JH is just expressing his annoyance at those who leave. I just choose not to pay attention to him when he rants. Or really at any time.
I’m always disciplining myself NOT to write off what the leaders say entirely, even when they have weak moments like JRH did. But I don’t hang on their words either, and I’m perfectly willing to accept their advice if it makes sense — and perfectly willing to write it off as ridiculous if my conscience says so.
SilentDawning wrote:Cadence wrote:Yawn. I think JH is just expressing his annoyance at those who leave. I just choose not to pay attention to him when he rants. Or really at any time.
I’m always disciplining myself NOT to write off what the leaders say entirely, even when they have weak moments like JRH did. But I don’t hang on their words either, and I’m perfectly willing to accept their advice if it makes sense — and perfectly willing to write it off as ridiculous if my conscience says so.
I think that is true of any person in some kind of leadership. If we develop an opinion of someone that they never have a good thing to say we may miss when they actually say something. Of course the real trick is to learn when it is pure BS.
Everyone is more complex than a quick and easy description can provide. Elder Holland said something beautifully inclusive in a quote referenced in HPG today. It truly was beautiful.
Elder Holland gets hyperbolic when he gets emotional, so I choose to chalk it up to emotionalism, dismiss it, and try to remember his many good statements. Honestly, I try to take that same generally charitable view with everyone – although it is harder with some people than others.
Cadence wrote:SilentDawning wrote:Cadence wrote:Of course the real trick is to learn when it is pure BS.
Good point! And that is where the conscience comes in. At least if my conscience labels leader BS as true BS, then if I get hurt by ignoring it, I have no one to blame but myself. That’s easier than feeling the church leader is to blame.
Elder Holland recently addressed students at BYU and gave advice on how to become better saints. 1) be obedient (childlike)
2) forgive others
3) “be still and know that I am God.” IOW have faith
In regards to this third point, Elder Holland said, “When you are being hammered on the anvil of adversity, when your soul is being refined with severe lessons that perhaps can be learned no other way, don’t cut and run, don’t jump ship. Don’t shake your fist at your bishop or your mission president or God. Please stay with the only help and strength that can help you in that painful time. When you stumble in the race of life, don’t crawl away from the very Physician who is unfailingly there to treat your injuries, lift you to your feet, and help you finish the course.”
I parked it here because of the recurrence of the them of jumping ship.
I thought about Elder Holland’s recent quote overnight. I agree with him that when going through major adversity is not a good time to make drastic life changes. Where I disagree is in the presentation that the LDS church and the access to God gained through the LDS church are the “only help and strength that can help you.”
I get it. Elder Holland sees anyone that stays in the church as succeeding and anyone that leaves the church as failing. However, even then, it seems quite hyperbolic to say that this is the “only” source of help. I don’t think Elder Holland really believes that. Surely needed medication, a good counselor/therapist, and friends and family can also be a source of help. I suppose if I were to modify that sentence I would word it as follows:
“Please stay with the
source ofhelp and strength that wants only tohelp you in that painful time.” bolded changes are mine. I believe that this change keeps the spirit of what Elder Holland was trying to say.
He could have left it at, “When you are being hammered on the anvil of adversity, when your soul is being refined with severe lessons that perhaps can be learned no other way, don’t cut and run, don’t jump ship.” No need to include those parts about being salty towards church leaders. The phrase stay on the ship carries a lot of baggage; it’s associated with staying with the church, which to me is unrelated to what I feel should be the heart of the message.
I like Jim Valvano’s (basketball coach from when they still used large rocks as basketballs), “Don’t give up… don’t ever give up.” In reference to fighting cancer. Maybe that’s the lesson. Life is hard, no one escapes life unscathed, just stay in the fight, keep at it. If you have to shake your fist at a bishop to stay in the fight, shake your fist at a bishop. If you have to shake your fist at god to stay in the fight, shake your fist at god. God will understand… but stay in the fight.
It’s understandable that a church leader will want to make life’s battles about staying active in a church but life is so much larger than a church.
Impermanence is a blessing and a curse. The good times will not last, they won’t, but the bad times won’t last either.
In my case, a lot of my adversity was caused by the church, especially on the mission. My one regret from my mission was sticking it out the whole two years instead of bailing when I realized I was miserable.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.