I’m Loosing My Grip

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

Quote:

What do you do when you feel God has given approval followed with opportunities but others thru their prayer and revelation have received a different direction for you?

Follow what you believe God is telling you – what you feel is right at that time. Period. If He really wants you to do something, He will confirm it somehow to you – whether of not He impresses someone else, as well.

…the Priesthood line is for the governance of the Church, while the Personal line is for individual and family guidance. NOBODY has the right or authority to receive personal revelation for you, except you. Inspiration within spheres of responsibility does not over-ride personal revelation – and “revelation” can be whatever you feel and think is best for you. It doesn’t have to come with burning bushes or bosoms.

This is very important. I think it gets confused among the membership. Church leaders receive inspiration to accomplish their position, they may feel inspired that a particular member would work well in a particular calling, that is their right.

The individual receives inspiration/revelation to direct their personal life, when called to a calling they should ponder and seek confirmation that accepting that calling is the right thing to do for themselves and their family.

The leader is not entitled to that personal portion, but has to extend callings based on his own stewardship. I don’t know why “never refuse a calling” has crept into our culture, but I can’t see it holding water when you carefully consider how revelation is supposed to work. It would obviously be different if leaders were entitled to personal revelation for their flock, but that framework would completely negate the plan of agency. It is truly astounding how illogical some traditions can become.

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

…the Priesthood line is for the governance of the Church, while the Personal line is for individual and family guidance. NOBODY has the right or authority to receive personal revelation for you, except you. Inspiration within spheres of responsibility does not over-ride personal revelation – and “revelation” can be whatever you feel and think is best for you. It doesn’t have to come with burning bushes or bosoms.

Orson wrote:

This is very important. I think it gets confused among the membership. Church leaders receive inspiration to accomplish their position, they may feel inspired that a particular member would work well in a particular calling, that is their right.

The individual receives inspiration/revelation to direct their personal life, when called to a calling they should ponder and seek confirmation that accepting that calling is the right thing to do for themselves and their family.

The leader is not entitled to that personal portion, but has to extend callings based on his own stewardship. I don’t know why “never refuse a calling” has crept into our culture, but I can’t see it holding water when you carefully consider how revelation is supposed to work. It would obviously be different if leaders were entitled to personal revelation for their flock, but that framework would completely negate the plan of agency. It is truly astounding how illogical some traditions can become.

I am dumbfounded. Where would I learn these principals if not here? These are legit principals right? I plan to incorporate these into my life and relationship with the church AND explain why. It’s the way I see to reconcile the past and move forward. I am going to take responsibility for turning over my agency, for not seeking confirmation of my personnel revelation, for not following my inspiration. But I can’t accept responsibility for not knowing or for not pointing out that leaders inspiration cannot override my own personnel revelation. I am going to need some acknowledgement from those involved that there has been something missing. I don’t know how I’ll be received. Accept and love your callings is what I predict. This could identify my impasse. I do believe I have been searching for this, trying to identify what I feel is “wrong” for some time. I can’t predict what response I will receive next discussion with my bishop.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

I am going to need some acknowledgement from those involved that there has been something missing.

Serious question:

Why?

I don’t know you well enough to know the answer, but I think you probably were raised with a near “leaders are infallible and need to be obeyed” philosophy, but that is exactly what “unrighteous dominion” means in D&C 121.

Contemplating the “why” of our expectations is important – and not giving up our agency even by requiring acknowledgment also is important. If they can’t give you that acknowledgment, it doesn’t mean you are justified in acting differently than you would without it. So, I would advise you not to require it in the first place – and, ideally, not even seek it, unless you absolutely have to try.

Again, do you know why you feel like you need that acknowledgment?

[Anonymous]

Kipper wrote:

I am going to need some acknowledgement from those involved that there has been something missing.

I get it. It would be so great to be acknowledged and validated. To be told that your current understanding and decisions are accepted. In some ways an FC changes the church from a place of comfort and belonging to a foreign environment where one needs to don all sorts of protective equipment (coping mechanisms)to survive. That is a very difficult shift.

Remember the emotionally distant mother?

Roy wrote:

I recently have been listening to some meditation CD’s to help with some anxiety. One exercise is to imagine that your mother is speaking – what follows is a sincere apology for shortfalls and a declaration of love, acceptance, and support. What might be the benefit of this? I believe it is an exercise in letting go of some of the hurt of the past in order to better face the present – even if the hypothetical mother might never change. Sometimes there can be some good comparisons between the church and an emotionally distant parent.

Sometimes we need to give ourselves permission to live, and feel, and be the way we do because nobody else is going to. Imagine that we work so hard to please this parent that barely acknowledges us. Then when we finally decide that the secret all along was to be our own person and live our lives we take that decision to that same stoic parent and ask him/her to bless our decision….to ratify our emancipation. I don’t know that there would be anything wrong with explaining your perspective that you can’t maintain the same effort anymore and you feel justified in backing off from some committments, but I wouldn’t expect an apology. If the leaders feel that you are no longer useful they may give you what feels like the cold shoulder (something similar happened to SD). That can be hard. In some ways, it can be necessary to develop a thick skin of self-awareness to survive post FC. It seems to be more and more infrequent when someone might say, “Your a good man, Charlie Brown!” It can be a lonely, solitary road.

I don’t have everything figured out yet but I am honestly following my consience.

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

Then when we finally decide that the secret all along was to be our own person and live our lives

Well said Roy. And sometimes we find that keeping that distant parent in our lives is better than cutting them off entirely because we were hurt or disappointed or they broke our trust. Sometimes there is growth by accepting them for who they are, and realizing something about ourselves in the process.

As Wendy Ulrich put it:

Quote:

We come to accept our spouse or our parents or the Church, and we come to accept ourselves. We allow God to run the universe, and we become more content to let go of things we cannot change. A deeper, more mature love begins to emerge, with fewer power struggles and less disengagement. We do not need to see all the answers, and we do not need perfection by our standards in order to not be embarrassed or ashamed of our Church, our partner, or our God.

#271524

[Anonymous]

For me I read the book “Following Christ” and it revolutionized my understanding of the atonement. As I understand it, all are saved that enter into and keep the covenant in good faith – this essentially removes the constant threat of “one wrong step and you could blow it” mentallity. It was so liberating that I was sharing it with fellow members. A missionary was asking me how I could believe in “easy grace” and referenced certain scriptures about “working out your salvation with fear and trembling.” Anyway I looked up those scriptures in my institute manual and I found that church leaders had made comments very much in support of a works based model. The fact that these statements were included in current institute manuals is a good indication that these comments were not isolated statements but were still considered authoritative church understandings. I was crushed.

Anyway, I can understand having an epiphany and then wanting someone in authority from the church to validate that. I would have been overjoyed if my bishop or SP had said, “Roy you have really come to some mature and insightful observations. I wish we could be more open about how deeply Christ accepts us in our honest shortcomings. So many are motivated by the lower law of commandments and not the higher law of love. Congratulations on your breakthrough of understanding – I will now recommend your candidacy for the second anointing.” Ok so just kidding about that last part – (only partially kidding though as that would have been awesome) But I can seriosly understand the need for validation.

[Anonymous]

Kipper, I really understand your feeling the need validation and even an apology of sorts. But I doubt that is going to happen, maybe, but doubtful. I go in and out of needing everyone to understand and agree with me. Then other times I am OK with my new found faith and I don’t care what others think. I have been living what works for me and my boundaries as far as church calling for a couple of years. A good rule of thumb is that I only do one church thing a week MAX outside of church. (Even that these days is too much so I may have to reevaluate.) I turned down a calling recently, it felt great to feel inspired. I really and sincerely prayed and expected the Mormon God in my head to MAKE me do it. But after praying I KNEW I shouldn’t. So I said no. Now I am one of “those” 80% that I so harshly judged less than a year ago! OH NO! The horror… 😆 but it isn’t that bad b/c at least I feel more balanced and in control of what I want. I hope you can decided what works for you and be at peace with it.

Roy, I liked your meditation idea

Quote:

I recently have been listening to some meditation CD’s to help with some anxiety. One exercise is to imagine that your mother is speaking – what follows is a sincere apology for shortfalls and a declaration of love, acceptance, and support. What might be the benefit of this? I believe it is an exercise in letting go of some of the hurt of the past in order to better face the present – even if the hypothetical mother might never change. Sometimes there can be some good comparisons between the church and an emotionally distant parent.

I am an Emotional Release Facilitator and we use a technique very close to this (and the process is in the Alpha state that one goes to in meditation). In a personal process I actually had President Hinckly come and declare explanations even apologies to me. It really helped and because I was connected to a higher version of myself (aka: left brain more quiet) I was able to hear the intent of the things said. It was really healing. I often have to go back to the inspiration I received to relieve anger. I think this is a great idea for those that are hurting and feel deceived and/or taken advantage of.

Church,

I also could relate to what you are saying about missing out on fun. I am way more open with others outside of the church, but when I am with my husband I feel like we can’t relate or we will offend Jesus and I always worry someone is offending my husband. I will write more on this later b/c it is late. But I have suppressed a huge “fun loving, loud laughter” part of me and wondered so where do loud people like myself fit in this “white man” church.

[Anonymous]

Gosh, I am so impressed with the level of responders and feel as if Heavenly Father is flooding me with, I don’t know, information is not an accurate word but I am being positioned to saturate myself with information that will help me understand myself and the church better if I can just place everything in order. It’s like, here are your tools, now go to work. I am keeping a “journal” of sorts and it will be paragraphed in a way that makes sense to me. It may take awhile. I couldn’t possibly quote and respond to all replies that hit home, create new understandings, build knowledge and offer resources but thank you all. I am going to spend a lot of time listing and going over things that I can learn from.

I do understand what I should not demand or expect in another interview, but here’s why I hope:

An apology can only come from a friend, someone who can step away from authority briefly and is willing to be on your level at least for a minute to identify with your feelings. Not an apology as in repentance that we did something wrong to you. I don’t need that.

I hope there is an understanding that what I have learned came after thought, consultation (I consider you my consultants ) and prayer. Understanding can be impactful as an apology. And please understand that there was agency involved that I turned over.

There has to be some sort of validation. Otherwise I may be looked at like “he doesn’t get it yet”. Because that is close to what I came away with last time. There was one way perspective. That repeated would be cause for stepping out to reassess.

There should be respect and understanding for my life goals as long as they don’t take me away from a Christ centered life and my will to progress and constantly worship Heavenly Father.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

Otherwise I may be looked at like “he doesn’t get it yet”.

I really do understand what you are saying, but . . .

That’s not going to change with some people, regardless of how well you get it. People almost always think others don’t get it if they don’t see things the same way. It’s just human nature. There are some people in wards I’ve attended who respect me but believe deeply that I don’t get it. I’m cool with that, since my take is that all of us “get it” to the best of our individual ability – and since I also believe that NONE of us really get it even close to totally. “We see through a glass, darkly” and all that.

Finally, “should” is a terrible taskmaster that leads to and calcifies unrealistic expectations. Think about it: Most, if not all, of the worst things about humanity and our social interactions are created by “should”. Yes, there are some communal shoulds that are necessary – but I believe strongly in a minimalist approach to “should”. There is a huge, important difference between wants and needs, and “should” should apply ( 🙂 ) only to needs, not wants.

[Author]

Posts