- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
lol I don’t feel attacked. Besides, that speaks to what I was trying to say. People that would attend such a meeting feel like they are already exposed, more orthodox members think the meeting itself is reinforcing people’s doubt. That’s probably not going to change. Also, there’s doubt and there’s doubt… if that makes sense. People that have questions may not be ready to be exposed to certain perspectives, milk before meat works on the doubting side of the equation just as much as the believing side.
I’ve approached leaders a few different times. It didn’t work out so well. In one case a leader expressed frustration with recent RMs going inactive due to doubts. I offered a simple “I may know a bit of what they are going through, I’d like to help where I can.” Nothing more, nothing less, not trying to spark off a revolution or anything, that was the extent of what I said. I felt like I was sticking my neck out… it got whacked at. Again, maybe offering help like that means more if it comes from someone with more clout.
My experience is that it’s almost a requirement to work at the individual level. I think it really helps if there was an established friendship from before, the connection cannot feel like an assignment. It’s ultra hard going into the home of an inactive person with doubts that you don’t know from Adam and gain that level of trust… and you have to gain trust on both sides.
Reconnecting with old friends may be a good place to start.
Good luck.
Great discussion. 1) Bill Reel did a similar presentation for his local leadership that acknowledged that some doubters may have legitimate concerns while still leading with faith. Great ideas and real experience to benefit your project.
http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=3888&hilit=presentation 2) You could also offer to the leadership that you are available to meet with strugglings members one on one. I agree that it is normal to feel a definate need to talk to somebody about these issues. If there are no safe places in the church they may seek out other venues.
Just my thoughts.
I just saw a comment by LookingHard that we missed when it was written. I have approved it and just wanted to mention it to everyone, since it wouldn’t have been visible until now. Old-Timer wrote:I just saw a comment by LookingHard that we missed when it was written. I have approved it and just wanted to mention it to everyone, since it wouldn’t have been visible until now.
Thanks Ray. I fully get this is a volunteer supported board and I knew eventually my comments would get approved. I won’t be a troublemaker!Having just joined, I will go and put in my “history”, but I want to take a good few minutes this weekend to do a good job of it. I don’t want to do a superficial job of it.
This whole discussion just makes me so sad. This attitude within the church is what is driving me away. I cannot think of another organization out there who expects blind obedience and faith in leaders without any ability to question any decision. My prayers do not confirm all things related to the church. I would like to discuss that. Where do I go for THAT discussion within the framework of the church? I could sure stir up a Gospel Essentials class!
amateurparent wrote:This whole discussion just makes me so sad. This attitude within the church is what is driving me away. I cannot think of another organization out there who expects blind obedience and faith in leaders without any ability to question any decision.
My prayers do not confirm all things related to the church. I would like to discuss that. Where do I go for THAT discussion within the framework of the church? I could sure stir up a Gospel Essentials class!
I think that’s the point exactly, AP. Gospel Essentials (or Gospel Doctrine for that matter) are NOT the places to do that. I think we have almost all experienced that loneliness and despair of having nowhere to turn with our questions and uncertainties. We are very fortunate to have this forum, and some of us are fortunate enough to have leaders who know true charity and try to understand the mercy of Christ. Most probably don’t have either of these things, although our forum is certainly findable (it took me quite a while, though). That’s what I think SBRed wants to offer – a place safe place where those who need it can go, and I think we all get that – but as pointed out we also recognize the pitfalls and dangers of doing so where it might not be fully accepted.
As I’ve been reading through this thread, I keep wondering if there’s a way to create something similar to the 12 step recovery groups that the church has, but for those who doubt. Those are very confidential and there is no expected/required outcome. I’ve known people who have attended those, and nothing is reported to any priesthood leaders. They do have someone who’s called to oversee or run them, but they are required to keep everything completely confidential, ie – no reporting back to the bishop. Not sure if it could work, but the idea sounds good in my head. Every time I think of the goal Sunbelt has, I keep coming back to the confidentiality issue. And it then leads me to the conclusion that sending people to StayLDS is probably the best thing. The only thing that I don’t like about sending people here is the fact that they often get exposed to further concerning issues that may hinder their coping. For example, I came here due to leadership indifference and abuse. Doctrinal, historical, or cultural norms weren’t a huge issue for me, although I realize now they were latent.
Being here ignited them and to some extent, fueled my disengagement. Nonetheless, I’m happy where I am right now, so I don’t regret coming. If you were doing the outreach to less active, then at least you could focus on the issues of the individual without introducing new ones.
Also, I also think that if someone presented what Sunbelt is proposing (local support for doubting people), then people would say “we have a program for that, it’s called the Home Teaching program”.
The other concern i have about local support is what happened in Cache Valley a while ago. There were people meeting as “middle way Mormons” and it was perceived as a movement that was counter to the church.
Which I think we all realize is only effective on a limited basis. And its oriented toward Traditional Mormonism in my view.
Now, how about this — you do the local support group concept, but you do it across stakes. For example, SunBelt makes himself known in other stakes that are about 45 minute away from his own stake. There is a feeling of anonyminity when you are not acting within your own boundaries. The cross-stake communication also mutes official channels as its harder to talk to leaders in other stakes given our local organization, which doesn’t have a mechanism/forum I’m aware of to discuss cross stake matters. The structural barriers promote confidentiality.
Just brainstorming, as I’m prone to do…
My experience is that sharing your real feelings with other believing members irretrievably changes my relationship with them for the significant worse. I would be hesitant to share, both in front of members and in front of leaders, who are indeed the ones who will be the portkeys for future membership status. I do like MockingJay’s suggestion and the “cross stake” option suggested by SilentDawning. I was just listening this AM to Bill Reel on his interview a few years ago on FAIR where he said (paraphrasing from my feeble memory), “going to look for answers even on Fair will expose you to more questions.” Ah, such is the slippery path.
I started reading Rough Stone rolling as my bishop said it would be good for the whole bishopric (which I am a part of) to read and help “inoculate” the youth. I figured it was from an active LDS member, but a blunt and truthful history. I didn’t get so rattled by it as when I started looking for some other answers and ran across Mormon Stories. That has introduced me to MANY topics, but also helped me figure out (to some level) on many issues.
I love the intent behind this thread. The desire to minister to others, wanting to share lessons learned from pain I’ve gone through with someone else who is sure to go through the pain, to pay things forward. All noble and good things for each of us to try and do.
I am not sure it can be done successfully. IDK, depends on the makeup of the leaders and those interested and how it is done. I believe this has been tried for decades and decades. My parents in the 1970s held some study groups in our house after my dad was released as bishop. They became discouraged and I think church leaders even publicly discouraged groups gathering to dig into deep doctrine, but to stick to correlated materials and church meetings.
While the intent is good…here is why I don’t think it can be done successfully…
The church and it’s basic correlated teachings are a good foundation for people to develop faith and a relationship with God and a sense of identity and culture with family and local community members. It is an organized religion, and as an organization has common agreed upon standards.
Individually, we progress…and at some point, the journey takes us to a path for us to choose to follow to continue to grow. There is a personal journey that can’t be taught or prescribed by an organization. It doesn’t have to replace the organization, but it is personal experience, and then the individual has to decide how that impacts how they function within the organization. I don’t think correlating it works, not even in the spirit of love and support in a group setting.
Christ instituted baptism and the sacrament for all followers, and taught lessons on the Mount of Olives that apply to all. He did not prescribe or require others to go into the wilderness for solitude and fast for 40 days. That was a personal journey, and was symbolic of our personal journeys we’ll have.
If we use Fowler’s Stages of Faith model, churches work within Stage 3. Stages 4 and 5 are not taught, but experienced.
I think the best approach is to be prepared and to be looking for those who may need a friend, and when moments present themselves, you reach out individually. Like the guy walking along the beach flinging starfish in the ocean, you make a difference to them one at a time.
Quote:My experience is that sharing your real feelings with other believing members irretrievably changes my relationship with them for the significant worse. I would be hesitant to share, both in front of members and in front of leaders, who are indeed the ones who will be the portkeys for future membership status.
SS … Exactly.
A member came to me and said, “Meet The Mormons made me uncomfortable because those people were so different. They must be inactive”
If church propaganda makes members uncomfortable, imagine the discomfort with a local group of church policy/ history discussion. The culture isn’t set up to handle discussion. Discussion and questions have too often been treated as heresy. The culture needs to change, but that doesn’t happen quickly.
Thank you everyone for your thoughts on this topic. Although I wish it weren’t so, I may have been a bit to ambitious in my desire to help those with doubts or going through a faith transition. As I have thought more about it, I don’t think my Stake Presidency would be willing to have a class or meeting group that would require anonymity. As I have re-played the conversation we had on the topic, I feel that I may end up putting myself out there too much if I make such a suggestion.
However, I am contemplating putting together some of the materials from Bill and some other thoughts and share them with the Stake Presidency, and will let them know that I am willing to talk/meet with anyone if they need someone to talk to. I don’t think I will say anything more than “I have been there, I understand where they are coming from, and I feel like I can do some good here.”
I don’t know what the outcome of that conversation might be with the SP, and I have been trying to weigh the potential outcomes:
1) SP starts to ask me questions and probe deeper. There are some things that I would just have a hard time answering and I don’t want to lie to anyone. So if he asked me, for example, do you believe the Priesthood is the power of God and the only authority of God on the earth to act in his name, I don’t know how I can answer that honestly without being released there on the spot (since the one true church concept is difficult for me my answer would dance around and be something like – I believe the Priesthood is a tool for God’s children to serve others and to become more like Him…(anyone have a suggestion for a better answer than that?) Sorry a bit of a tangent – so outcome of scenario 1 is being released.
2) SP says thanks but no thanks, but I’m scrutinized a bit closer: potentially released in the future
3) SP says thanks but no thank and I go on my merry way
4) SP says thanks and I am able to help.
I don’t really know if I am having any type of broader influence in the wards where I work and speak. I have no idea (probably not). So I weight whether the potential of being released is worth the potential good I might be doing being in a Stake calling. Anyway, just thinking out loud, if anyone has any additional thoughts would love to hear them.
-SBRed
Sunbelt, I think it is good that you are thinking this through a bit before jumping – even if your intentions are good.
I am thinking of doing something the same with my stake president. I am in a bishopric right now and my bishop is very supportive of more of these issues being discussed from a faithful perspective. I even gave a 5th Sunday lesson to the adults on “shaken faith syndrome” and told everyone I had experienced a faith crisis. I have let the bishop know how emotionally wrenching this was. I think he is sympathetic to me, but a little bit of judgment of a few open NOM’s in our ward.
I just happened to have grown up with our current SP. When I was a youth I was about as TBM as they come. So both my bishop and my SP know me as “one of the ones that is always helping others move, at scout camp/high adventure, etc….) So I don’t feel like I am placing my neck on a guillotine by doing so. Sounds like you have the potential for more risk.
My main question that I am considering is if I ask my bishop to talk with the SP, or I do it myself. I am thinking at this point of asking the bishop what his take would be.
SunbeltRed wrote:I don’t think I will say anything more than “I have been there, I understand where they are coming from, and I feel like I can do some good here.”
I think that is a good approach, SBR.A few weeks ago in Gospel doctrine, our teacher talked about serving others, and caring for others, I think the lesson was based on Job and how his friends talked to him, and some friends came to just sit with him, and events surrounding the story.
I was impressed by the teacher who made one small comment in his response to caring for others, about not judging but just loving, and said, “I’ll admit, I have gone through my times in life when I had serious doubts and studied a lot of church history. All I can say is that I learned more from those experiences, and I think we all go through different trials to help us grow, and i those moments, we just need a friend to come sit with us, not tell us what they think…”
I wanted to talk to him after class…wondering how far down the rabbit hole he went. I didn’t…I just tucked it away as another evidence that in our information age, lots of people are exposed to these same questions that try our faith.
But I liked how he didn’t make a lot of fanfare about it…he simply made the statement and that he got through it, and I think that by example, he can do good by being an example that it isn’t so bad to have times when we question things. The other part is that he has social capital in the ward. People respect him because he teaches uplifting lessons, and thought provoking…he is real. He is not a threat to faithful members’ faith or controversial. It can work that way, and I see some people seek him out with questions because of it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.