- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I would argue that most in the church say they can’t tell a difference (between powerful emotional vs spiritual experiences) at least from my experience. However, there’s a select few I’ve encountered that maintain there is a difference, and that explaining it is only possible in emotonal terms because that is the closest we can get to describing a metaphysical thing, but that spiritual communication is something distinct, a sort of sixth sense that you only know when you experience it. Apparently it takes time and practice to develop (never mind what to say to converts), but the spiritual communications are distinct, according to those who make that claim. But for me, it’s all emotional and subject to influence by expectations, hopes, desires, culture, experiences, etc. Until I experience something that I can clearly say, “ok this is different. Now I understand,” I just don’t think I’ll accept that there is a difference that only some get to experience and not someone like me who’s dedicated over 30 years to this church and trying to feel those things.
DoubtingTom wrote:
I would argue that most in the church say they can’t tell a difference (between powerful emotional vs spiritual experiences) at least from my experience. However, there’s a select few I’ve encountered that maintain there is a difference, and that explaining it is only possible in emotonal terms because that is the closest we can get to describing a metaphysical thing, but that spiritual communication is something distinct, a sort of sixth sense that you only know when you experience it. Apparently it takes time and practice to develop (never mind what to say to converts), but the spiritual communications are distinct, according to those who make that claim. But for me, it’s all emotional and subject to influence by expectations, hopes, desires, culture, experiences, etc.Until I experience something that I can clearly say, “ok this is different. Now I understand,” I just don’t think I’ll accept that there is a difference that only some get to experience and not someone like me who’s dedicated over 30 years to this church and trying to feel those things.
I could have written this same statement. I do think there is a difference but I haven;t figured out what it is. A feeling of peace apparently is at least part of the difference, but it presents the same problem – I feel peace at times other than when I pray, go to the temple, etc. So how do I know this is Spiritual peace? I’m sure I need peace sometimes, and I can connect to the “my peace I give unto you” idea. But sometimes I need more than peace.
Some people, particularly men, think that when you bring them a “problem” you want something from them or you want them to solve the problem. Then they get frustrated because they are thinking you expect something from them that they may not know how to do. This just sounds like that kind of situation. He’s not capable of or hasn’t learned how to listen to someone explain their situation without trying to fix it. He only knows the “solutions” that have worked for him, and so he assumes you just aren’t doing the things he did or your problem would be gone. It’s a failure to listen, a failure to empathize, and ultimately, putting his own feelings ahead of yours. But it is a very common human failing. We call these folks “leaders,” but they weren’t selected for their pastoral skill. I’m sure he has other fine qualities. hawkgrrrl wrote:
Some people, particularly men, think that when you bring them a “problem” you want something from them or you want them to solve the problem. Then they get frustrated because they are thinking you expect something from them that they may not know how to do. This just sounds like that kind of situation. He’s not capable of or hasn’t learned how to listen to someone explain their situation without trying to fix it. He only knows the “solutions” that have worked for him, and so he assumes you just aren’t doing the things he did or your problem would be gone. It’s a failure to listen, a failure to empathize, and ultimately, putting his own feelings ahead of yours. But it is a very common human failing. We call these folks “leaders,” but they weren’t selected for their pastoral skill. I’m sure he has other fine qualities.
I agree, Hawkgrrrl, and I think it has more to do with the business model of church leadership than anything else. Most of our “leaders” are in fact business leaders where their job is solving problems.
hawkgrrrl wrote:
Some people, particularly men, think that when you bring them a “problem” you want something from them or you want them to solve the problem. Then they get frustrated because they are thinking you expect something from them that they may not know how to do. This just sounds like that kind of situation. He’s not capable of or hasn’t learned how to listen to someone explain their situation without trying to fix it. He only knows the “solutions” that have worked for him, and so he assumes you just aren’t doing the things he did or your problem would be gone. It’s a failure to listen, a failure to empathize, and ultimately, putting his own feelings ahead of yours. But it is a very common human failing. We call these folks “leaders,” but they weren’t selected for their pastoral skill. I’m sure he has other fine qualities.
I learned this one a long time ago. My daughter called me frustrated the other day with some things in her life. I just kept prodding and listening, and it went on for a very long time. I then asked her “Do you feel you’ve emoted enough about the problem, to the point you are ready to problem solve, or would you like to keep talking about how you feel about it longer?”.
I didn’t mean that sarcastically, it was a sincere question — acknowledging there is a period when you have to get out your emotions, and don’t WANT to problem solve. She burst into laughter and told me I was really funny. I am not sure why it was funny, but she then moved on to solving the problem, and the conversation ended satisfactorily.
YOu gotta let the steam out of the balloon before you get down to problem solving!!!
I also think anyone who is paid to solve problems for a living should know that. When that employee comes into your office mad about something, you do more harm than good if you don’t let the emotion period take its course.
SilentDawning wrote:
I also think anyone who is paid to solve problems for a living should know that. When that employee comes into your office mad about something, you do more harm than good if you don’t let the emotion period take its course.
I don’t disagree with that, SD, but not all of our leaders are about solving people problems at work. My ward is home to a facility that uses many engineers. In fact, until our current bishop every one of them since I have lived here (30 years) were engineers. The problems they are trained to solve and the problems they work on every day don’t involve people. They don’t have employees coming into their office mad about something. Sometimes it was painfully obvious these bishops (and most often counselors as well as EQPs, HPGLs, YMPs, etc.) had little clue how to work with people and preferred their cubicles and computers. The good news is that this company has downsized and recruitment is difficult for this location so while my ward has correspondingly shrunk, the likelihood of having an engineer leader has also shrunk.
DarkJedi wrote:
SilentDawning wrote:
I also think anyone who is paid to solve problems for a living should know that. When that employee comes into your office mad about something, you do more harm than good if you don’t let the emotion period take its course.
I don’t disagree with that, SD, but not all of our leaders are about solving people problems at work. My ward is home to a facility that uses many engineers. In fact, until our current bishop every one of them since I have lived here (30 years) were engineers. The problems they are trained to solve and the problems they work on every day don’t involve people. They don’t have employees coming into their office mad about something. Sometimes it was painfully obvious these bishops (and most often counselors as well as EQPs, HPGLs, YMPs, etc.) had little clue how to work with people and preferred their cubicles and computers. The good news is that this company has downsized and recruitment is difficult for this location so while I ward has correspondingly shrunk, the likelihood of having an engineer leader has also shrunk.
Good point about the engineers. We have an engineering program at our college, and the engineers are notorious for having weak interpersonal skills.
My former boss and I (both of us women) led huge global organizations, and I used to joke to her that a specific one of my team members was like a pet dog who brings you a dead bird and drops it on your doorstep thinking how proud you will be that he’s such a great hunter. No, it’s a dead bird. I will be irritated and grossed out and now I have to clean it up. So I realize it’s not just men who feel like this at times. And sometimes people really are bringing you their “problems” to solve. It varies. Leaders sometimes become weary of the onslaught of problems and the accompanying second-guessing and naysaying that comes with it. That doesn’t make it right.
But again, there SHOULD be a difference between corporate leadership and pastoral care. And yet in either case, a good leader helps the person figure out how to solve their own problems and just removes obstacles to do it. In this case, though, I’m not sure you & the SP agree what the problem is. The SP thinks the problem is your lack of testimony. You think the problem is the disconnect between what you are teaching / saying & what you believe. That’s a subtle difference.
In fairness I think many people do bring their problems to the bishops and to a lesser extent their SPs. Many of us here are converts and many were at least somewhat active or affiliated with another church where pastoral care and counseling was just that. The difference, of course, was that the pastor or priest there actually has some training in counseling and how to help people solve their own problems. We’ve discussed this here before – that’s the problem with our system, our bishops and SPs are not professionally trained pastors. I suppose we could call them rent-a-pastors? 
hawkgrrrl wrote:…one of my team members was like a pet dog who brings you a dead bird and drops it on your doorstep thinking how proud you will be that he’s such a great hunter. No, it’s a dead bird. I will be irritated and grossed out and now I have to clean it up.
Love the analogy!!:thumbup: Heber13 wrote:
hawkgrrrl wrote:…one of my team members was like a pet dog who brings you a dead bird and drops it on your doorstep thinking how proud you will be that he’s such a great hunter. No, it’s a dead bird. I will be irritated and grossed out and now I have to clean it up.
Love the analogy!!:thumbup:
Yep. As a lower manager in a huge corporation, I am constantly having to talk my people down from, “escalate this to your boss!” I remind them that my boss has 6 other people reporting to her and she expects me (and them) to solve as many problems as possible and only bring her ones with some effort already put into solving first – and suggestions on how to fix.
In the church you only raise issues up to the bishop and occasionally the SP. No going above that. I kind of vented (under the name of Happy Hubby) in the comment section of a
blogIt is this thread of comments that support my suggestion of cutting the SP some slack. Lousy ones are lousy, but none of them asked for their call, most of them have no training and very little interpersonal skills, and they still have to be their families provider, the Pastor of a church, and keep all the balls in the air. It sucks when we have a crappy one or crappy interaction. But if paid bosses can be jerks – and plenty of them can and they get seminars, directives, and HR assistance, there is little doubt a sucky SP or Bishop or group lives in our leadership. I’ve had myself on multiple levels.
I would love for there to be better training, more assistance for them, just look at the crap they are supposed to divinely guide people in. Even with training I would screw it up.
I suppose while we’re on the subject it could also be pointed out that there is a teaching or belief among many members of the church that because the bishop and SP are called of God, set apart, and hold special keys they are always inspired to help individuals and their families with their problems. I think I have heard this from even the highest echelons and the GC pulpit (noting that sometimes we hear things there that weren’t really said there and sometimes that’s good and sometimes that’s bad). That can also put an unfair burden on these individuals and even an unfair expectation on the individual himself. And, sadly, it could create a situation where the bishop/SP might believe that because he or she “felt the Spirit” any counsel or advice given was therefore necessarily of God – even when what he felt was his own emotion and even if he felt nothing at all. I am certainly not making any excuses for these guys or apologizing for them. It is what it is. My personal belief in long experience with them is that like the rest of us they are more uninspired than they are inspired. They’re not as special as some of them think they are.
Part of the issue too is whether the SP or Bishop truly believes that God intervenes on a daily basis in the everyday things of life or not. ( http://www.zionsbest.com/people.htmlhttp://www.zionsbest.com/people.html” class=”bbcode_url”> That was a bit of an aside, but my point is that some leaders truly feel that God intervenes in their daily lives and daily decisions, while I have never felt that way – that all these little decisions have a right/wrong answer. I do feel that we can self meditate and come to personal inspirations about what is best for us or or kid’s lives, but for me, that’s not necessarily communication from God but merely good introspection and insight into our own and other’s lives. Anyway, for those that think God directs everything, that may be comforting, but also can be paralyzing when God’s will is not manifest, or also lead to judgmental responses when they make a decision or remark that is truly offensive, but they felt it was what the spirit told them to do.
Sorry, that felt like rambling, but I don’t have time to fine-tune those thoughts. Hopefully makes sense.
LookingHard wrote:
In the church you only raise issues up to the bishop and occasionally the SP. No going above that. I kind of vented (under the name of Happy Hubby) in the comment section of ablog
IMO there’s already a problem with church culture. Supposedly the home teachers are supposed to solve most problems their assigned families have but it has been my experience that home teachers will go into a home, ask if there’s anything they can do to help a family, the family says they don’t need anything, the very next Sunday the family is waiting outside the bishop’s office, then during the next PEC the bishop calls for the heads of the home teachers. Why aren’t they doing their job?
I’ve seen this play out often.
I think who holds the purse strings factors into the discussion but I also think that there’s no going above BP or SP because if there was people would go directly to them with all their problems.
hawkgrrrl wrote:
Some people, particularly men, think that when you bring them a “problem” you want something from them or you want them to solve the problem. Then they get frustrated because they are thinking you expect something from them that they may not know how to do.Guilty. I’m also a man
(I just checked again to make sure)I’m getting better.
:thumbup:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.