- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
OK, so, a very kind person has been visiting me every 6 months or so even though he’s not my home teacher. He seems to really like me, for some reason, often citing the time we spent in priesthood leadership years ago, how great it was, how he liked how I got things done. He seems truly charitable in visiting me. He made a comment last week that I found disturbing though. I tried dismissing it but it keeps coming to mind as I go about my day.
He commented that when the priesthood leaders talk about me, he has to “cover his ears”. Unquote.
I asked him to elaborate, and he wouldn’t, with this kind of deer in the headlights look on his face — as if realizing he’d opened a can of worms. That tells me it’s not good, anyway.
My initial reaction right now is that I’m not too thrilled about that kind of reaction from priesthood leaders. It subtracts from any progress I’ve made in promising to go back to church soon.
My perspective is that we have a kind of self-serving church that conscripts us, refuses to release us on reasonable timelines, duties us into a lot of tasks that are mundane and subtract from the joy of life. Tends to ignore our personal needs when organizational interests are in conflict with those personal needs…As a result, I have felt used many times in my church service. My history is a litany of times the church has really let me down on issues like adopting a child, serving a mission — all non-financial, but extreme and distressing. They were the cumulative triggers for how I feel now.
In spite of that I remained active for many years until the last few. And in spite of my current perception of the church, I am willing to go back into church attendance, to get involved with our young men’s program organizing activities in an unofficial capacity to help my son. Also to support my wife and daughter Maybe pay tithing eventually and prepare myself to go to the temple so I can be there with my daughter on her special day someday.
How would you feel reintegrating with a Ward whose priesthood leaders have such a probable negative view of you? How might you proceed?
SilentDawning wrote:OK, so, a very kind person has been visiting me every 6 months or so even though he’s not my home teacher. He seems to really like me, for some reason, often citing the time we spent in priesthood leadership years ago, how great it was, how he liked how I got things done. He seems truly charitable in visiting me.
He made a comment last week that I found disturbing though. I tried dismissing it but it keeps coming to mind as I go about my day.
He commented that when the priesthood leaders talk about me, he has to “cover his ears”. Unquote.
I asked him to elaborate, and he wouldn’t, with this kind of deer in the headlights look on his face — as if realizing he’d opened a can of worms. That tells me it’s not good, anyway.
There are a couple of things I would try. They are:
1. Go back to friend & ask him to explain what he meant. IMO “friends” don’t drop a bomb & walk away without explaining what’s going on.
2. Go to the leadership of the ward & ask. Project the attitude that you’re trying to understand what’s going on & how you want to make improvements where necessary. There are consequences when the church talks about you behind your back. One is: you don’t confide in people who you thought were “friends”.
This has always been a hot button with me.
Leave it alone. No good will come from pursuing this. Your friend gave you a gift. He let you know that the leadership was discussing you — and he was trying not to be involved. So .. You learned that your friend is attempting to be neutral. You already knew that you were a topic of discussion. All inactive people are to a certain extent, so this shouldn’t be a surprise.
amateurparent wrote:Leave it alone. No good will come from pursuing this.
Your friend gave you a gift. He let you know that the leadership was discussing you — and he was trying not to be involved. So .. You learned that your friend is attempting to be neutral. You already knew that you were a topic of discussion. All inactive people are to a certain extent, so this shouldn’t be a surprise.
They do discuss — I supposed now when I see a leader I will wonder what is behind the mask…and one would hope the discussion is kinder than what is implied by the covering ears comment. Nice to know he’s on my side though, this friend of mine.
As far as the gift goes — I thought you were going to say the gift was the truth. I see that as a real gift.
My thought, after posting, is that I need to NOT let these people interfere with the things that matter — helping my son get some character training, helping my wife and daughter feel happier in their lives with an active father/husband. Also, that my assessment is largely correct — the perspective of the leaders is that we are there to serve the church — personal interests are second. This only strengthens the boundary-setting philosophy I have…particularly if there is the appearance of kindness when I behave in ways the leaders want…
SilentDawning wrote:My thought, after posting, is that I need to NOT let these people interfere with the things that matter — helping my son get some character training, helping my wife and daughter feel happier in their lives with an active father/husband. Also, that my assessment is largely correct — the perspective of the leaders is that we are there to serve the church — personal interests are second. This only strengthens the boundary-setting philosophy I have…particularly if there is the appearance of kindness when I behave in ways the leaders want…
I would probably let it drop. I cannot imagine anything good coming from confronting them. I think that they will either deny it or detail step by step how you are lacking in your priesthood and covenant responsibilities. I find it very unlikely that the leadership would apologize and be more careful in how they discuss people in their planning meetings.
How would I react? Probably… 1) I total expect it and assume my family is being talked about in those confidential leadership meetings (that are often not confidential). I might wonder what I would prefer…being forgotten or being talked about?
2) It still stings because it is never fun to hear something other than positive stuff.
3) Remind myself I don’t do things to please others, so…whatever. I’m on my journey. Should they make it too difficult for me to feel spiritually uplifted at church i’d stop going, but it would take a hell of a lot more than just knowing leaders talk about me and want me to do things they way they think it should be done.
4) Accept that others will have their opinions, and theirs is based on their experience, so…it doesn’t make them right. In some cases, it motivates me more to just show them how loving and serving I can be…even if I don’t do it their way…and maybe some of them connect those dots…that the orchestra sounds richer.
5) Finally…I’d be grateful for a friend in the ward who told me about it. That means I’m not alone. I would appreciate knowing he covers his ears instead of joins in on the discussion about me. I’d probably do more with him, and look to cover his back when opportunities arise. Leadership changes, so I would build capital with as many like-minded individuals as I could in the ward, so that when one voice expresses “concern” about me, others can provide clarity.
It seems to be part of their job and stewardship to talk about people in the ward and what they can do to help. They are talking about others too.
SilentDawning wrote:My thought, after posting, is that I need to NOT let these people interfere with the things that matter — helping my son get some character training, helping my wife and daughter feel happier in their lives with an active father/husband. Also, that my assessment is largely correct — the perspective of the leaders is that we are there to serve the church — personal interests are second. This only strengthens the boundary-setting philosophy I have…particularly if there is the appearance of kindness when I behave in ways the leaders want…
I agree with this thought. While I’m not totally there yet, ideally I would go to church and worship in my own way with my own understanding of the gospel irrespective of what others are doing, saying, or thinking. The biggest reason I’m not there yet is of course that they do speak – in meetings and classes. What I’m really trying to say is don’t let this interfere with you doing what you think is right. Ignoring is easier send than done, but try to move past it, realize they are fellow travelers who are trying to do what they think is right, and do what you need to do.
Roy wrote:I would probably let it drop. I cannot imagine anything good coming from confronting them. I think that they will either deny it or detail step by step how you are lacking in your priesthood and covenant responsibilities. I find it very unlikely that the leadership would apologize and be more careful in how they discuss people in their planning meetings.
I didn’t really have any intention of confronting them about it. I expect they will talk about less actives, although I didn’t expect it to be negative the way my friend implied the discussion leans.
My reason for posting was more, how to deal with it internally. It disurbs me very deeply, this two-faced approach to less actives. Yet another indication of the hard fisted, egocentric church I’ve come to know. As my non-member father told me once — when you are towing the party line, they like you, when you aren’t serving at full tilt, they are negative about you. I think Elder Nelson’s talk about God’s love being conditional is well-typified in this situation I’ve presented here.
My Bishop wrote to me last week asking me where I as at with the church. Apparently they are making changes in the Ward and would like to know where I stand so they could consider me for certain callings.
I said I would return when they get our building fit for occupancy (not as a demand, just knowing it’s almost done — makes a good goal date to return without the terrible commute we have now). Indicated a few things I was willing to do, as well as needs my son has for more activity outside the home that he I would help with in YM’s as a parent.
He never responded. That disturbed me too.
I will tell you this — it’s gotta change for me to feel completely one with the church again. No more will I be an unpaid employee serving wherever they conscript me. My interests are important too, as are the needs of my family. I am tempted to let them know how this comes across — write to me because YOU have a need, and then when I share my needs and aspirations, you have no interest in overlapping discussion about how we can both come away from the table feeling fulfilled at the same time.
At the same time, I guess I should have more compassion. I was an egocentric priesthood leader once. Negative about people who had made covenants but had no interest in serving. Went out visiting inactives and if they didn’t respond almost immediately, I dropped them, just like missionaries do. Looking entirely for short term results that got people back in pews and callings. Didn’t think much about how to overlap church and individual interests. Didn’t even think to ask less actives what they needed. If they came out with negative stuff about the church I felt defensive and offended, much as I have seen other leaders do.
The fact that this attitude is everywhere tells me it’s a cultural problem, not the faults of these people individually. Do fish know what’s in the water? Are we even aware that air exists when we breathe it? Such is the effect of cultural norms.
One thing that happened that smarted a bit was my friend said “I don’t care what the reasons are for your not coming to church. I just want you to come to church again”.
That also typifies the types of attitude that I find disturbing. They just want the textbook behavior, and don’t even want to address the concerns. If they came to me and said, come back when you’re ready, and when you do, let us know how you’d like to serve, if at all. And if there is any way we can help you with your son, let us know. We care about him too. Having you there to help with the YM, even in an unofficial capacity would be a boon to us. And by the way, if you ever feel you want a calling, I’ll give my word that we’ll release you within a week of your telling us it doesn’t work for you anymore — all we ask is that you finish up anything you might have in the works when we release you. And by the way, I don’t agree with the ways the church has let you down in the past. Easy for me to say, as it’s not my pride and I don’t have the power to fix the problems, but I understand how those experiences might have led you to the spot you are at right now. At least you and i can take comfort in the fact that God’s judgments are just, and where there has been injustice, I hope and believe there will be allowance. Let me know when you’re ready SD…
That would put pressure on ME to step up, in a good way. Warm, inviting pressure.
Their current approach — complain about the guy in meetings, go after him when a calling is needed, and then ignore him when he expresses needs or gives a lack lustre answer — only makes the thought of serving and being active a cold, prickly experience. Already I feel like receding into hard inactivity. If it weren’t for my son and my family that’d be it for me right now. Better to light a warm fire, and spread the table, and leave the door open to invite everyone.
They also don’t realize they are competing for my time with all the other good things out there. Little do they know how woefully inadequate the experience stacks up against other volunteer experiences I can pursue…
SD – I once found myself very hurt and offended in a social situation and considered breaking the relationship off, but then “selfish” me came to the fore, and I realized that “hurt” me needed to take a backseat. I had reasons to stay, things to gain from keeping the friendship. It was a real step forward for me. Good luck! If you care, you should say something to the leaders in question. Don’t return with passive aggression, but let them know what you’ve stated here: that you’re trying to create your own path to peace within the Church — which you understand isn’t the normal prescribed path — and hearing that they’re speaking negatively about you makes it much harder to find your own peace. If you can do this without anger or passive aggression, it will give you so much power in the relationship. They’ll understand that when they are feeling negative feelings toward you, there are only two options: a) keep their mouths shut or b) talk to you directly. Seems like a great first step towards a better working relationship.
If you don’t care, then ignore it.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
If you do go talk to him, remember he most likely is starting from a position of “I’m right, and have the backing of the church to support my position.” And “you need to humble yourself”. I doubt he will be “I’m open to enlightenment. Please show me what you’ve learned.”
Just the way it is, usually.
Heber — I don’t believe I’ll get anywhere talking to them. I think the best thing to do is stick with my plan. Serve on my own terms. I guess I’m trying to get over the two-facedness. I didn’t think it existed. At least I know the truth now. So, I will have to deal with it.
I should take the advice by this great writer who talked about How to Win with the Boss from Hell. It is meant to be a book about surviving in the workplace with a really bad boss. The first principle is to fly under the radar, and the second principle is to ignore the bad boss’s annoying behavior. I think the last second principle applies here…
SilentDawning wrote:I should take the advice by this great writer who talked about How to Win with the Boss from Hell. It is meant to be a book about surviving in the workplace with a really bad boss. The first principle is to fly under the radar, and the second principle is to ignore the bad boss’s annoying behavior. I think the last second principle applies here…
The first principle can as well… but as I’ve found, only up to a point.
It might be possible to fly under the radar but flying under the radar might require more than people in our position want to put in. E.g. if you are attending the 3 hour block every Sunday and accept some menial calling you likely won’t be the subject during PEC/ward council. You’d be another functioning cog in the machine and leaders would look elsewhere.
I realize that approach doesn’t always work, we might not want our worship to take on the from where we are only out to appease others and leaders may still choose to gossip regardless of what we do or don’t do.
I can tell you that you’ll probably be a topic of conversation whenever you don’t accept callings. That alone will put you on the radar. Boy do I have a “how would you react?” story for that one.
SilentDawning wrote:I think the best thing to do is stick with my plan. Serve on my own terms.
That’s a good plan.
That’s the way to go SD. Show them you’re just fine the way you are. They can think what they want. nibbler wrote:SilentDawning wrote:It might be possible to fly under the radar but flying under the radar might require more than people in our position want to put in. E.g. if you are attending the 3 hour block every Sunday and accept some menial calling you likely won’t be the subject during PEC/ward council. You’d be another functioning cog in the machine and leaders would look elsewhere.
My experience is that if they know you are committed and have modest talent or experience, the existing leaders start asking for you. You might be flying under the radar as far as the Bishopric go, but the Bishopric has to keep fielding/rejecting requests from the ward leaders for your help in their quorum or auxiliary. This puts pressure on the Bishopric who feel they always have to be at you to push you further to going to the temple, paying your 10% and taking on more and more time consuming callings.
What I find funny is that when you are on the outs, they are nice to you to your face — handling you with kit gloves and being accommodating. But after they think they’ve got you, and you want/need things, it’s a business relationship where they deny you access to resources you think you need to do your calling, deny requests to hold certain kinds of activities or do certain programs or initiatives — even getting time in certain meetings.
My recent experience shows me the business relationship is really what is driving this existing crop of leaders. Trust No One. (just kidding with those last three words, sort of).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.