- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
OK – the subject isn’t isolated only to Mormons, as the real title is “Going to hell with Ted Haggard (Christians Eat Their Own).” I heard this on the radio the other day and thought I would find the related article and post it here. I do think that Mormon’s do eat their own, maybe even more so than other Christian Sects. Everyone who has any hardcore, “inviolable” expectations for their children eat those children, in the sense of the article, when those children don’t live up to those expectations. It’s not even close to being a Mormon phenomenon – and it’s no worse in the LDS Church than it is in uber-rich, atheist families where children are groomed from birth to take over the family inheritance and then walk away, in whatever way, from that upbringing. I know; I’ve seen it first-hand among many of my friends in college from extremely privileged backgrounds. It’s true also of so many converts to the LDS Church at the time of their conversions. Disappointment is a terrible, universal taskmaster.
In saying that, I’m not dismissing the issue within the Church. It’s real, and it’s important to eliminate it to the greatest extent possible. I’m just saying that it’s not unique to us, in existence or degree; it’s just more obvious to us within our own community, since we see and feel it so much more keenly than we do within other communities that are not as close to us.
So, the core question for the mission of this forum might be:
Quote:How do we recognize, address and deal with this natural tendency within our own community without allowing it to push us out of that community?
“Mormons eat their own” seems like another way to say things that have been said and repeated around stayLDS for some time. I know that Ray is fond of using the “according to the dictates of their own consience” clause and has mentioned how this is often not applied to members.
Another quote is the one that talks about two types of people that are successful in the church – the saints and the liars. Not a lot of room for penitant sinners.
As Mormons we have very high standards. In a way this can be good because young people can rise as high as they are able. Unfortunately, I don’t believe we are very forgiving to individuals that can’t seem to meet our standards. Free agency is such a big part of our doctrine that I believe this gets interpretted to mean that everyone could meet the Mormon standard if they really wanted to. This is why Elder Packer argues against natural homosexuality by saying “Why would a loving Heavenly Father do that?” This is also why a young missionary told me that their smoking cessation program was 100% effective for those that really wanted to quit. I suppose you could say that Mormonism is 100% effective for those that really want exaltation.
😈 Old-Timer wrote:How do we recognize, address and deal with this natural tendency within our own community without allowing it to push us out of that community?
For me it has been to develop my own comfort level with myself and my God. I am neither validated nor threatened by people in the church. I try to participate in whatever degree I am comfortable and do so in an unobtrusive manner.
For the institution, I would like to see the day when people could attend church without a TR and be accepted, welcomed, and asked to participate to whatever extent they might desire.
Nice discussion. Just to be clear, I think the StayLDS site is very helpful in relieving the pressure of “eating their own”. I have seen some very good discussions here where there could have been some eating, but instead there was kindness.
I posted the link because I thought it very interesting.
I realized after re-reading my comment that I hadn’t mentioned that I also think the linked article is interesting and worth reading. Sorry about that. For the people who don’t like to post links, here is the key to the article: As background, Wikipedia says this about Ted Haggard, a minister:
Quote:
In November 2006, escort and masseur Mike Jones alleged that Haggard had paid him for sex for three years and had also purchased and used crystal methamphetamine.[1] A few days later Haggard resigned from all of his leadership positions.And the story.
Quote:
A while back I was having a business lunch at a sports bar in the Denver area with a close atheist friend. He’s a great guy and a very deep thinker. During lunch, he pointed at the large TV screen on the wall. It was set to a channel recapping Ted’s fall. He pointed his finger at the HD and said, “That is the reason I will not become a Christian. Many of the things you say make sense, Mike, but that’s what keeps me away.”It was well after the story had died down, so I had to study the screen to see what my friend was talking about. I assumed he was referring to Ted’s hypocrisy. “Hey man, not all of us do things like that,” I responded. He laughed and said, “Michael, you just proved my point. See, that guy said sorry a long time ago. Even his wife and kids stayed and forgave him, but all you Christians still seem to hate him. You guys can’t forgive him and let him back into your good graces. Every time you talk to me about God, you explain that he will take me as I am. You say he forgives all my failures and will restore my hope, and as long as I stay outside the church, you say God wants to forgive me. But that guy failed while he was one of you, and most of you are still vicious to him.” Then he uttered words that left me reeling: “You Christians eat your own. Always have. Always will.”
We do eat our own. I’ve been had as a light lunch in my Ward. My hopes of leadership are out the window since I resigned from a high profile calling and stopped coming to church. They’ll never trust me again. Get your membership record annotated for church discipline or some other infraction, blacklisted from certain callings forever.
When i read a book recently that said “non-profits are places of healing”, I realized fully what it meant — they are places people go when wounded in both the workplace, and in religions.
Great article and comments. We hold ourselves and others to such high standards. And there is more than a little schaudenfreude that permeates our relations with other members of the Church, particularly those in leadership positions. I listened to a talk by Joanna Brooks where she made the point that we Mormons are really hard on each other. I have to agree. I see it in my own behavior as I talk (complain) about some of the foolish things other members sometimes do. Whether it’s unique to Mormonism or widespread is beside the point, it is something that we all need to work on whatever our faith. As a direct result of reading and posting on this site, I have found myself trying to be more forgiving of others’ trespasses (I’m not always successful) and more tolerant of the many ways that we express our devotion to God and man. The article is also great reminder to me that sin does not necessarily render a person unfit to serve God whatever others may think. Thanks, Jazernorth, for posting this story. I also feel the need to remind everyone that it’s not just the ultra-conservative, classically traditional, orthodox members who do this. I’ve read and heard things from more liberal, non-traditional, heterodox members toward their opposites in the Church that are just as scathing and dismissive as that which is directed at them. I saw the following first in relation to a different topic (I think here at StayLDS years ago), and I like to take this approach whenever how we act and treat each other is discussed:
Quote:“Lord, is it I?”
It’s really easy to see negative things in others; it usually is much harder to see those same things in ourselves, even when some of them are stronger in ourselves.
Great article! Thanks for the link. Food for thought and actions. It reminded me of a meeting I was in. The discussion turned to how to help this family where some horrible wrongs were done by the father. We worried about the kids and wife and what actions we could do to help their situation, which was horrific(in my opinion). At the end of the conversation, our Bishop said “and about Brother Blank”and he paused…I vividly remember the negative thoughts I had and fully expected the Bishop to say something similar to my thoughts. Instead he said, “he is a child of god. How can we express God’s love to him?”. This Bishop would never condone the behavior of this man, but I will never forget the shame I felt. This Bishop truly is the most kind, christlike man I have ever met.
This is a great thought to apply in my life and how I react to those around me. Again thank you. And thank you StayLDS, I feel like I am spiritually fed here. Maybe someday I will dare make an introduction.
I found the book that was talked about on the radio show: http://www.amazon.com/Why-Eat-Our-Own-ebook/dp/B00DTFNSE8 They had a brief discussion about it, on my drive home (that is because they wait until I’m in my truck to discuss important matters).
I’m going to purchase the book to read it (says $14.95 for the paperback). I don’t have a kindle, so I can’t get the “borrowed” or digital version.
Now, if only I can recognize when I’m eating another person ….. ahhh, the challenge at hand.
Mmmm, Mormons. (Done in the voice of Homer Simpson)
😆 Old-Timer wrote:I also feel the need to remind everyone that it’s not just the ultra-conservative, classically traditional, orthodox members who do this. I’ve read and heard things from more liberal, non-traditional, heterodox members toward their opposites in the Church that are just as scathing and dismissive as that which is directed at them.
I saw the following first in relation to a different topic (I think here at StayLDS years ago), and I like to take this approach whenever how we act and treat each other is discussed:
Quote:“Lord, is it I?”
It’s really easy to see negative things in others; it usually is much harder to see those same things in ourselves, even when some of them are stronger in ourselves.
I think Ray makes a good point. I think over the years I’ve learned to eat the leaders, so to speak. it wasn’t always that way — at one time I revered them as somehow supernatural and then life’s experiences led me to snacking on them, and then including them in my diet.
But I think we could argue that our leaders (particularly local ones) are bound by the Church Handbook, by the fact that they have High Councillors in their meetings reporting what they do to the SP. And the SP’s also have higher ups watching them. And then, you have the cultural values that dedicated members promulgate. It doesn’t leave them with a lot of wiggle room in some cases.
And we’ve seen some ex-Bishop’s here (rarely, if ever, former SP members) who struggle with some of the things they must do to comply with policy. They are doing the best they can as volunteers in a highly scripted leadership environment.
SilentDawning wrote:I think Ray makes a good point. I think over the years I’ve learned to eat the leaders, so to speak. it wasn’t always that way — at one time I revered them as somehow supernatural and then life’s experiences led me to snacking on them, and then including them in my diet.
But I think we could argue that our leaders (particularly local ones) are bound by the Church Handbook, by the fact that they have High Councillors in their meetings reporting what they do to the SP. And the SP’s also have higher ups watching them. And then, you have the cultural values that dedicated members promulgate. It doesn’t leave them with a lot of wiggle room in some cases.
And we’ve seen some ex-Bishop’s here (rarely, if ever, former SP members) who struggle with some of the things they must do to comply with policy. They are doing the best they can as volunteers in a highly scripted leadership environment.
Great point! It is relatively easier for me to give any individual some latitude (TSM, BKP, BRM). But I do have a habit of being critical of the organization as a whole.
On one hand, it seems fairly liberating to be able to say that an organization (church, government) is man-made and flawed and will always be this way so quite focusing on the flaws.
OTOH, It seems that this entails a degree of apathy about the organization. To really care, is to want the organization to improve (in ways that you perceive that it might improve) until it hurts in some way.
There may be a delicate balance between working for change, and having patience for the slow pace of change, and realizing that what you see as improvements may be threatening to others, and that “they” have just as much claim to the organization as you do and will probably always hold the majority.
I geuss the emitomy of “eating” the organization is to make complaints of the organizational flaws without being willing to put in the blood, sweat, and tears, to make your own little corner of the garden a bit brighter.
Quote:
I guess the epitomy of “eating” the organization is to make complaints of the organizational flaws without being willing to put in the blood, sweat, and tears, to make your own little corner of the garden a bit brighter.I don’t know…do you really think the efforts of one person can alter those aspects that are objectionable? Particularly in a culture of top-down obedience and people willing to cry apostasy fairly quickly? And when personal objections put you into the silent minority?
I see the ability to criticize now and then as therapeutic within limits. It also helps a person develop their own philosophy of how things should or could be. This then provides a basis for teaching certain attitudes at home. It also brings a certain amount of personal peace as you grow your independence from the unconsciously assimilated, and sometimes, harmful practices and attitudes you learn at church (not that these are necessarily the norm, but they do exist).
Quote:Do you really think the efforts of one person can alter those aspects that are objectionable?
Absolutely – in some situations and for some people. Depends on the situation and the person.
Quote:Particularly in a culture of top-down obedience and people willing to cry apostasy fairly quickly?
Yes – but with the same disclaimer as above. It works sometimes; it doesn’t work sometimes. It’s great when it does; it sucks when it doesn’t.
Quote:And when personal objections put you into the silent minority?
It’s hard to alter anyting, in the moment, through silence. I’m not saying it’s best always to speak (since it’s not), but it’s really hard to affect change through silence – except, inronically, in the LDS Church sometimes, since leadership changes regularly and silence can keep you in the game for the next round.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.