Helping kids know the un-correlated version

[Anonymous]

Orson wrote:

mackay11 wrote:

I’m supposed to baptize my son later this year. I’m not sure I want to.

I was in that exact position several years ago, extremely frustrated and emotional about all things church, feeling cornered and pressured, thinking there was no way I would be able to baptize my child in a few months while being honest about it.

Today I am extremely glad I didn’t do anything too rash, the wrong action at that time could have left a scar on our lives that would have only exacerbated the situation and made continued activity more difficult. I did perform the baptism. I figured if there was a loving God that understood all – there is no way he would condemn me for this action and that I wanted to show love and support to my family.

That is a tough line to walk. In one case, you baptize him and are teaching him that it’s all good, turning a blind eye to the ‘un-correlated version’ if you will. On the other hand by not baptizing him you he has to face some realities at a way younger age. I have a little over 2 years to figure this out for my oldest child. So far the baby blessings have been easy ones as a baby blessing is just a fluffy event compared to an ordinance.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

In one case, you baptize him and are teaching him that it’s all good, turning a blind eye to the ‘un-correlated version’ if you will.

Not at all. I know that’s the emotional view for many in the early stages of disillusion, but it absolutely doesn’t have to be the case. In fact, I would argue that baptizing someone with the full understanding that you have a responsibility to help them find their own path is every bit as powerful and meaningful an expression of love as any other view or “orientation” driving the same decision for someone else.

In all cases, the only things that will happen officially at baptism for your son are that he will become an official part of the faith community and be told to receive the Holy Ghost. The first thing isn’t a bad thing, in and of itself (and I think it is a very good thing in the majority of cases), and the second thing is a wonderful concept and principle. There is nothing, and I mean NOTHING, intrinsic to the ordinance that says “it’s all good” or forces anyone to ignore any particular interpretation. Seriously. I baptized all of my six children, and none of them think “it’s all good” and none of them have a “correlated” view of things. Some are closer to that than others, but they all see some things differently than each other and those around them in the pews and classes.

[Anonymous]

So your advice would be to view it as a rational step our building block then? I am glad that I have a couple of years to settle in before that.

For those who have gone before… at what age would you start removing the gloss from the stories they learn. I worry about confusing my youngsters with different stories at home and at church.

[Anonymous]

ihhi wrote:

So your advice would be to view it as a rational step our building block then? I am glad that I have a couple of years to settle in before that.

For those who have gone before… at what age would you start removing the gloss from the stories they learn. I worry about confusing my youngsters with different stories at home and at church.

I’ve started now (6, nearly 8, 10). I’m trying to do it in a way that builds on what they learn in primary. I don’t want to be a constant source of contradiction, but don’t want them being given the impression of something that isn’t entirely accurate

[Anonymous]

I like “building on” rather than “contradicting” – although there are times I have contradicted something that someone else has said in a meeting or class of some kind. I’ve tried to do it with humor and a specific reinforcement that I love the person who said it, but I’ve done it, nonetheless.

I mentioned here in a thread a long time ago an example of a former church leader who said from the pulpit how proud he was that his son chose to date only other members. This was in “the mission field”, and my teenage daughters at the time were the only active members in the entire town in which we lived. There were no Mormon young men in their high school – or within a 20 miles radius of their house. You better believe we talked about the impractical nature of that personal opinion on our way home from the meeting, but I stressed how much I loved and respected the person who made the statement – and I was completely sincere in those statements. He is a wonderful man, and I learned a lot from my time associating with him.

I’m my kids’ parent, and, more than anything else, I want them to learn to think for themselves, to wean themselves from needing to borrow my light (or that of anyone else) and to construct their own faith. I hope deeply it is within Mormonism and the LDS Church, but if it isn’t, so be it. I’m trying to train them to be adults, and part of that is crafting their own beliefs and perspectives while not ridiculing and rejecting those who craft differently than they do.

I’d rather they start that process early, in their natural “developmental” stage when things still are being molded, than have to pick up the pieces when a less mature, more rigid paradigm shatters later in life.

[Author]

Posts