- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Someone made a comment in our Sunday school class this past week, that when a person has the spirit, they have a special glow about them, and when they fall away from the truth, their countenance changes. I wonder sometimes how real things are we like to talk about in class, or if there are just phrases we like to repeat or describe so we feel good in or worship services. Countenancecan be described as:
Quote:The general appearance of a person’s face, which often reflects spiritual attitude and state of mind.
do you think there is a real and physical change to a person’s countenance depending on their spiritual condition, or is this just something people like to say?If it is, is it based on having the spirit, or inner happiness, or obedience to commandments? Is it a physical light (or glow)?
Finally, can you recognize it in yourself? Have you ever though your countenance has darkened, or brightened? Or, again, is that just how others describe you based on their judgments?
Yes, I believe in that concept – but I attach it to the internal peace that is evident in those who are living according to the dictates of their own consciences. I think authenticity (as Ray suggests) is visible. But I think Mormons typically have a naivete that you can read in their faces. Mormons that have lost that naivete have experienced a change of countenance. I’m currently in the bible belt. Last week, I met a couple from another town at a work function that I was hosting. Later in the week I traveled to a work appointment with them at their home. I noticed a book on their bookshelf (Way to Be, by GBH) and asked them if they were LDS. To which they replied yes, and then they asked me the same thing. To which I replied yes, also. He (a former bishop and current temple worker) then proceeded to tell me that they could tell that there was something different and good about me and that they were wondering that first night if I was LDS. Here’s the kicker… Yes, I am LDS, RM, TM, hold current TR, etc. However, I no longer believe… zero, zilch, nada, no way, no how, and most of the time wonder how I ever believed in the first place — bada bing, bada boom. My shelf flat out crashed and broke into a million pieces. I play the part when I need to, and really struggle with having any use for it at all the rest of the time. I also recognize that it may still be right for other people and I fully support them in that. It’s just no longer my thing.
One can have a bright countenance all the time without being LDS. If you’re a mean, evil person, who does truly bad stuff, then I think that darkness can shine through regardless of what religion you are. But, I also think that people can hide or mask it too.
People are quick to judge someone’s “countenance” by other things they see in their outward appearance. My friend looks like a total biker dude… beard, long hair, etc. He is the nicest guy–totally devoted and faithful to his wife and kids, generous, helpful, kind, accepting, and is a better mormon non-mormon, than many members of the church that I know. How can this be since he doesn’t have “the truth” of the gospel in his life. I think people see what they want to see most of the time and ascribe it to fit their particular belief, regardless of seeing it for what things really are.
I like and agree with what Ray said.
Awesome post. People see what they want to believe, myself included. I also agree with Ray.
There is merit to what people say — they perceivea difference in people of the same flock versus those that aren’t. they call this ‘having the spirit with you’, but it’s really not about anything supernatural, it’s about flocking, a natural interconnection between people of the same family, tribe, culture, or…in birds, flock. without going into details, we have the ability to communicate emotional messages through our non-verbal signs that are so subtle, that we consciously don’t pick them up — but our subconscious minds do. as we grow up in a family, culture, and tribe, we pick up subtleties of behavior that are endemic and unique to that tribe. We don’t consciously do this, it’s just in the communication protocols we use between us. Our subconscious minds associate a degree of comfort with a person who emotes the same communication protocols we are used to from our tribe. This could be so subtle as a head nod or eye-contact-connection when certain words or even non-verbal cues are sent out. They’re too subtle to catalogue.
Joseph Smith knew of this connection. He used eye contact very persuasively to connect himself to others — he had an energy that people could connect to. Great con-men and religious icons alike have this unique ability. And in the church, cultural uniqueness has been cultivated to a tee: the whole set of protocols that you will recognize a mormon – the utah accent to certain words – a white shirt – coverings over parts of the body where the garment is – the ‘smile’ under the white shirt – the word of wisdom – no swearing – certain deference to heirarchal authority – verbal and non-verbal responses to specific terms and concepts — these all communicate to a person that you’re one of the tribe.
When we are with a trusted member of the tribe, we emotionally perceive ‘comfort’ with that person. We have the ‘feeling of knowing’ that allows us to initially trust that person — this is all biological, a mechanism to allow the flock to stay together for protection. Our entire countenance changes, and our perception of the others’ countenance changes when we are in a connected situation with a member of the flock.
Mormons seek that connection, because they are encouraged to NOT connect with those who are ‘against the flock’ — all this is natural and biological. It’s an evolved trait that mormons from Joseph Smith have exploited very well. Just because you’ve left, you can’t change the underlying non-verbals and clues you send out over night. But the moment you reflect unorthodox thinking, the other person’s amygdala — the seat of these specific biological emotions, flips from ‘comfort’ to ‘fear/hate/reject’, and presto! you’ve lost the spirit.
This isn’t about what people ‘think’, it’s about what they feel at a primal level about those who are or are not part of the flock.
What an intresting discussion. I think as a general rule, your life does eventually show itself in your face. On the other hand, looks can be decieving as we know how some child molesters or serial killers have looked so innocent and wholesome and their neighbors said they were always friendly nice people. Some playboy bunny or Pent house models can look so sweet and innocent. On the other hand, often when women are pregnant, people will say they glow. Actions speak louder than words, so I guess I will go by actions first. bridget_night wrote:On the other hand, often when women are pregnant, people will say they glow.
I remember watching a program on the discovery channel that talked about the changes in a woman’s body during pregnancy. I believe that it said that the hair is more full and vibrant during pregnancy. It also said that the lips receive more blood flow and are more red and full. I remember this because it speculated that these responses may serve the purpose of making the female more attractive to her partner, and thusly motivating him to stick it out until the “bitter end.” “Bitter end?” I said out loud, “She’s having a baby, not dying!!!”
The point is that even this maternal glow seems to be an evolved biological response.
I remember my mother always complaining about the depictions of characters in the BOM animated films. The righteous ones were attractive the evil ones weren’t. Nephi and Sam are GQ, while Laman and Lemual are balding and portly. She felt that it sent a false message.
Heber13 wrote:Finally, can you recognize it in yourself? Have you ever though your countenance has darkened, or brightened? Or, again, is that just how others describe you based on their judgments?
In the beginning of my faith transition DW said that she noticed me being short with the kids and she tied it back in her mind as a “fruit” of not fully embracing the gospel. This really irritated me.
ATVjunkie wrote:I think people see what they want to see most of the time and ascribe it to fit their particular belief, regardless of seeing it for what things really are.
Yup!
Wow, what great responses. Thanks for your thoughts on this. I agree with so many of these thoughts. I will try to respond to a few. Old-Timer wrote:Yes, I believe in that concept – but I attach it to the internal peace that is evident in those who are living according to the dictates of their own consciences.
I think that is part of it, but not entirely. Other parts are:
ATVjunkie wrote:People are quick to judge someone’s “countenance” by other things they see in their outward appearance.
doug wrote:People see what they want to believe, myself included.
wayfarer wrote:This isn’t about what people ‘think’, it’s about what they feel at a primal level about those who are or are not part of the flock.
bridget_night wrote:looks can be decieving
Roy wrote:DW said that she noticed me being short with the kids and she tied it back in her mind as a “fruit” of not fully embracing the gospel.
All of these responses have to do with the other people’s judgements of our countenance, not only our inner peace, but as we all know, I might have inner peace and 5 other people can look at my “countenance” and filter it through their lens, and conclude 5 different things about me. If my bishop knows details of my faith crisis, does he judge my countenance as dishonest or faking it or truly feeling more at peace as I work through my process? Does my wife think I’m lazy or uncaring and read my countenance with that lens? Does a stranger that doesn’t know me suspect I’m strong spiritually with no problems or questions? …all of these are based on
theirperceptions. wayfarer wrote:we have the ability to communicate emotional messages through our non-verbal signs that are so subtle, that we consciously don’t pick them up — but our subconscious minds do.
This reminds me of Malcolm Gladwell’s book… Blink. If anyone has not read that book, I highly recommend it, and have often wondered if Gladwell’s descriptions of microexpressions partly explain spiritual experiences people have, in this church and in any other religion or outside of religion.
Gladwell talks about psychologist John Gottman’s study where they video tape couples for 15 minutes, and can accurately predict which couples will last in their relationships, and which will not. It was fascinating, Gottman states that there are four major emotional reactions that are destructive to a marriage: defensiveness, stonewalling, criticism, and contempt. Among these four, Gottman considers contempt the most important of them all. By interviewing the couples and watching videos, skin conductance levels and oral history narratives encodings are the only two statistically significant variables.
Gladwell is suggesting that perhaps our “gut feelings” or “hunches” are really based on microexpressions our brains can’t process fast enough to recognize the data as logical reasoning, but it is still based on perceptions and processing at a high speed, not gut feelings some unknown spiritual force inside of us.
This is interesting to think that perhaps what we sometimes think of as “the spirit”, or the “countenance” of others … and we can’t explain it so we just slap supernatural explanations for lack of a better solution, maybe there is some science to it, just that we can’t explain it yet.
So maybe countenance is based on microexpressions, and is based on our internal peace being expressed in outward physical expressions in our facial expressions or body language, and then, it is perceived by others unconsciously but processed through their filters leading them to a conclusion about our countenance. It is often accurate, but not always understood why.
Heber13 wrote:wayfarer wrote:we have the ability to communicate emotional messages through our non-verbal signs that are so subtle, that we consciously don’t pick them up — but our subconscious minds do.
This reminds me of Malcolm Gladwell’s book… Blink. If anyone has not read that book, I highly recommend it, and have often wondered if Gladwell’s descriptions of microexpressions partly explain spiritual experiences people have, in this church and in any other religion or outside of religion.
Gladwell talks about psychologist John Gottman’s study where they video tape couples for 15 minutes, and can accurately predict which couples will last in their relationships, and which will not. It was fascinating, Gottman states that there are four major emotional reactions that are destructive to a marriage: defensiveness, stonewalling, criticism, and contempt. Among these four, Gottman considers contempt the most important of them all. By interviewing the couples and watching videos, skin conductance levels and oral history narratives encodings are the only two statistically significant variables.
Gladwell is suggesting that perhaps our “gut feelings” or “hunches” are really based on microexpressions our brains can’t process fast enough to recognize the data as logical reasoning, but it is still based on perceptions and processing at a high speed, not gut feelings some unknown spiritual force inside of us.
This is interesting to think that perhaps what we sometimes think of as “the spirit”, or the “countenance” of others … and we can’t explain it so we just slap supernatural explanations for lack of a better solution, maybe there is some science to it, just that we can’t explain it yet.
So maybe countenance is based on microexpressions, and is based on our internal peace being expressed in outward physical expressions in our facial expressions or body language, and then, it is perceived by others unconsciously but processed through their filters leading them to a conclusion about our countenance. It is often accurate, but not always understood why.
I’m a big Gladwell fan — as you probably can tell. I had a chance to meet him briefly, found him to be a bit aloof, but his work is amazing.There is a lot to be said about the countenance in ancient texts. There is a book of meditation and breathing exercises called
Inner CultivationNeiye, Inner Cultivation wrote:When the whole mind is centered,
it cannot be concealed or hidden,
it is apparent from your body’s appearance,
it is apparent by your skin color.
With good energy (Qi), when you greet others,
they will be kinder than brothers and sisters
With bad energy, when you greet others,
they will harm you with force of weapons.
Qi (pronounced ‘chee’, more or less) is translated “Energy”, but it is often also translated ‘spirit’, because the symbol refers to the etherial nature of a gas. Deep breathing, and allowing the sense of near hyperventilating circulate within your body enhances your mental and emotional state. well that’s the theory at least. When you do get to this state of euphoria, it can be quite positively ‘energizing’, meaning that your countenance literally changes, your body is more erect, your facial expressions more engaged, and your skin is more alive-seeming, by virtue of enhance oxygen circulation.
The idea is that if you are a positive person, as you greet others, they respond in kind. When you feel like crap, and full of internal anxiety and hatred…when you are truly grumpy, then when you greet people, they respond in kind as well.
In
my latest bloghawkgrrrl wrote:I think Mormons typically have a
naivetethat you can read in their faces. Mormons that have lost that naivete have experienced a change of countenance. YES! I have noticed this too. I wanted to add that a long time ago I noticed this among very devout Catholics too. I saw it as an almost child-like aura. In my mind, I connect it to personality types who are very focused on their sins (or perhaps guilt), obedience for the sake of pleasing parent-like authority figures in their life, and who are more dependent on others for validation.
It isn’t like everyone in Mormonism or Catholicism is like that. I don’t even think it’s close to a majority, but there are enough to be very noticeable. I don’t think it happens very much in other religions that don’t have the strongly highlighted, rigidly hierarchical, priest-penitent relationships at their core — like the constant interviews with Mormon Bishops and confessing to Catholic Priests, and being judged so directly about your “worthiness.”
It puts some people into a permanent child-like naivete. Permanent at least until they bust out of that. Then their “countenance changes.”
Why oh why do we Mormons take some simple even profound imagery and twist it into some kind of “spirituality detector”? Alma 5:14 is one of my favorite scriptures but seems to me to be consistently badly misinterpreted. Alma was referring to change in our hearts or, more accurately, a change in the way we think about things and the things that we consider important which ultimately results in a change in our BEHAVIOR. When I was in high school, I knew a kid who was a definitely on the road to being a “bad kid.” Then the next year in school, that all changed. He came back really a different person…a person devoted to the gospel and to the Church. I heard later that he had had a spiritual experience over the summer similar to Alma the Younger’s (in that it changed him dramatically…no angels involved as far as I know!) Eventually, he became a seminary teacher. This young man looked exactly the same but what had changed was his behavior and way of interacting with those around him. My late grandfather was one of the most spiritual men I knew and you could tell NOT because he glowed with some kind of “inner light” but because he smiled a lot and was kind to people and looked you in the eye when talking to you. We don’t see a “glow”. We see faces and behaviors and make an interpretation. I agree, Gerald. That was a great way to say in concrete terms what I tried to say in more abstract terms. We sense niceness and goodness, but a lot of that is because true niceness and goodness “acts” – not just how it “looks”.
I kind of believe there is something to the countenance theory. I see it…at school, at work, myself…. What i have concluded though, is it does have something to do with spirituality and the gods…but absolutely nothing to do with the “church.” Because there is no correlation. Some have it at church, some don’t. Some non members have it, some don’t.
Does that make sense? I guess I kind agree with what Gereld explained. There is something there…but it has nothing to do with church membership, and the church doesn’t understand it or teach it correctly.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.