- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
SD, where does your friendship stand since this happened? Assuming you’re still friends, how will this affect your relationship in the future? It is difficult for me to understand what it takes for someone to call a “friend” to repentance. I’m sure he thinks he’s doing it out of love &
concern. Calling a “friend” to repent has the connotation of “I know what’s right & you don’t”. Or “I’m in a position to judge right & wrong & you
are definitely wrong & need to change.”
The church just changed HT & VT to “ministering”. It seems like a kinder & more compassionate program in theory.
There is also the Recovery Program. When someone confesses that they have a specific problem, are they called to repent?
Of course not. (I could be wrong.)
The more I think about this, the angrier I get. I hope you’re not going in this direction.
Minyan Man wrote:
Calling a “friend” to repent has the connotation of “I know what’s right & you don’t”. Or “I’m in a position to judge right & wrong & youare definitely wrong & need to change.”
Personally, I think it can be useful and a sign of a solid friendship, if one feels comfortable enough to call the other to “repentance”. There are times when, out of a sense of politeness, no one will mention a glaring flaw or difficulty, that’s apparent to everyone but the “sinner”. For lighter examples, “your fly’s undone”, “your breath stinks”, “you’ve got gunk stuck in between your teeth”. It takes a real friend to point something out like that. Harsher, but more important examples could be “You’ve been a real jerk to _______”, “You’ve been neglecting your family lately”, “You never paid me back”. I’ve heard those friends referred to as a “Dutch Uncle”. They are INVALUABLE friends. I’d much rather have friends who’d “call me to repentance”, than those who always pretend everything is fine, even when it’s not.
What would bug me, is if someone called me to repentance on account of my subjective, metaphysical beliefs (or lack there of).
Minyan Man wrote:The church just changed HT & VT to “ministering”. It seems like a kinder & more compassionate program in theory.
There is also the Recovery Program.
When someone confesses that they have a specific problem, are they called to repent?Of course not. (I could be wrong.)
The more I think about this, the angrier I get. I hope you’re not going in this direction.
To the highlighted part, I think leadership roulette comes into play, and perhaps in the vein of this thread even “member roulette.” There’s a ward I visit from time to time where I could definitely see the bishop calling someone to repentance should they confess to him. There’s actually no doubt in my mind he would do so – he’s hardcore old school. And let’s not even talk about some of the BYU student ward bishops. Seriously, don’t get me going. And some wards are much more open and tolerant than others and that’s where members come into play on this calling to repentance part. I actually have a related story, but I’m unwilling to share it publicly at this time.
A major theme in this thread has been judgementalism. I agree it’s a problem and I think it might be more of a problem in the LDS church compared to most others although it certainly happens in other churches. Part of the issue in our church is that some of the things we consider to be sins are not sins in other churches or are less serious in other churches. For example, many Protestant churches don’t really care about cohabitation and even in the Catholic church most would probably not say anything to or about the casual member cohabiting. That of course brings us around to the idea that there are no casual members of the LDS church – but maybe there should be. And, some of those things we consider sinful that other churches don’t consider sinful (WoW for example) are somewhat visible. In our church some people notice if someone doesn’t take the sacrament, in Catholicism it’s no big deal and it’s even more apparent who doesn’t take it.
DarkJedi wrote:
And yet all those people – paying on net or gross as long as they declare themselves full tithe payers – are still in the minority. Under 25% of members are tithe payers of any kind (full or not). That number is far lower outside the US and Canada. There are very likely in your ward a few active members who have seen the inside of a bar this week or tip the bottle at home and there are likely a few more than that who have visited a Starbucks or had a lemon tea at home. Frankly, the list could go on and on. I know a guy in my own ward who was a high councilor for many years who frequented a “gentleman’s club” (as they are known in these parts) and was known to have had a lap dance or two – and he is married. Our current WML openly admits for years that he has struggled with coffee, and a counselor in the EQP often talks about his addiction to porn.
I just meet up with an old friend. Just a solid good guy that anybody would like to have as a friend. He is currently a bishop’s counselor. Once I told him I was no longer a believer he said he believes in the power of the priesthood, but also drinks a few beers a week and he feels he is just fine as the WoW says it is OK.dande48 wrote:
Minyan Man wrote:
Calling a “friend” to repent has the connotation of “I know what’s right & you don’t”. Or “I’m in a position to judge right & wrong & youare definitely wrong & need to change.”
Personally, I think it can be useful and a sign of a solid friendship, if one feels comfortable enough to call the other to “repentance”. There are times when, out of a sense of politeness, no one will mention a glaring flaw or difficulty, that’s apparent to everyone but the “sinner”. For lighter examples, “your fly’s undone”, “your breath stinks”, “you’ve got gunk stuck in between your teeth”. It takes a real friend to point something out like that. Harsher, but more important examples could be “You’ve been a real jerk to _______”, “You’ve been neglecting your family lately”, “You never paid me back”. I’ve heard those friends referred to as a “Dutch Uncle”. They are INVALUABLE friends. I’d much rather have friends who’d “call me to repentance”, than those who always pretend everything is fine, even when it’s not.
What would bug me, is if someone called me to repentance on account of my subjective, metaphysical beliefs (or lack there of).
I think you can point out a perceived flaw in a person without calling them to repentance. There is a difference in saying “You’ve got a little something right there on your cheek” and “You need to clean that up right now slob.” Just saying. We were typing our last posts at the same time, but while I was typing I was questioning whether were I SD would I continue this friendship. There are members I am friends with but do not discuss church with and perhaps that would be my answer were I SD, but I also can’t imagine any of them asking me how my testimony is partly because we both know we have disagreements. There are plenty of other things to talk about, so in some ways I suppose it comes back to not discussing religion or politics in polite conversation – even with religionists and politicians.
Minyan Man wrote:
SD, where does your friendship stand since this happened? Assuming you’re still friends, how will this affect your relationship in the future?
The relationship is still good. Those interactions represented only a small portion of the 3 days we spent in the wilderness together. Much of the time was invested in logistics of meeting our needa for shelter, food, rest etcetera, finding out way in the trails, getting from point A to B and discussing neutral topics like financial planning, family situations, politics, our roots. And those times were good. Plus he makes me laugh with his approach to life, which is heavy on energy conservation.
I think the relationship has remained relatively strong for these reasons.
1. I’m comfortable in my own skin as an unorthodox Mormon.
2. I think he’s blinded by what he’s been taught to the point he can’t see abuse or gaps in the lds narrative, although I never say that to him. So when he comes out with harsh judgments against me, I eventually take them with a grain of salt.
3. I apologize if I ever, in his view, cross a line.
4. At times he’s offended me deeply with some of his harsh statements, and I just don’t call him until the sting goes out of the bite. In other words, I don’t hold a grudge.
5. We have a lot of common interests.
6. I don’t have many other long term friends – we have been friends for 26 years in spite of living in different countries for 15 of those years. As you age, you start to realize how uncommon it is to have a friend with whom the relationship lasts decades. This tends to encourage forgiveness in me when it comes to him.
Quote:
The more I think about this, the angrier I get. I hope you’re not going in this direction.
No, if anything, I’m a bit sad that brought up Fanny Alger or some of my unorthodox views with him. I do believe that if Mormonism is working for someone, you should support them in it. Not tear down their faith. Whether the LDS philosophy is correct or not, I believe happiness is the goal of being alive, and if believing in Mormonism makes a person happy, it’s inconsistent with my world view to tear that down.
I’m a do no harm guy also SD. If he brought up Fanny Alger I’d talk about it. And I might fall into the a trap if he were “baiting” me to talk about my unorthodox/heterodox views by being very assertive with his orthodox views. I think your earlier assessment of just avoiding religious discussion with him is good, I’m just not sure how to do that when he’s the one bring it up. Excuse yourself to go to the bathroom and come up with something else to talk about while your gone, or just hope the subject changes on its own? I can see myself getting stuck in such a conversation with no apparent polite way out. DarkJedi wrote:
I’m a do no harm guy also SD. If he brought up Fanny Alger I’d talk about it. And I might fall into the a trap if he were “baiting” me to talk about my unorthodox/heterodox views by being very assertive with his orthodox views. I think your earlier assessment of just avoiding religious discussion with him is good, I’m just not sure how to do that when he’s the one bring it up. Excuse yourself to go to the bathroom and come up with something else to talk about while your gone, or just hope the subject changes on its own? I can see myself getting stuck in such a conversation with no apparent polite way out.
The relationship is such that I could say ‘I have a lot of respect for your commitment to the church — and it works for you — it makes you happy. And I want to support you in it. I feel badly when you indicate I wear you down regarding my unorthodox views, and I would hate for the way I see the world to make you unhappy, weaken your testimony, or anything. furhter, I value the fact that we’ve sustained a 26 year friendship — that is highly uncommon, and I’d be disturbed if I ever did anything to jeopardize that.
So, I think we should talk about aspects we have in common in the church, the positive aspects, and steer clear of those areas where I may be further “left” in my church beliefs — is that OK?”.
He would likely agree, and hold me accountable, as would I hold him accountable, and neither of us would have a problem with it. It’s when it goes unmanaged that problems seem to emerge.
SilentDawning wrote:
The relationship is still good. Those interactions represented only a small portion of the 3 days we spent in the wilderness together. Much of the time was invested in logistics of meeting our needa for shelter, food, rest etcetera, finding out way in the trails, getting from point A to B and discussing neutral topics like financial planning, family situations, politics, our roots. And those times were good. Plus he makes me laugh with his approach to life, which is heavy on energy conservation.I think the relationship has remained relatively strong for these reasons.
1. I’m comfortable in my own skin as an unorthodox Mormon.
2. I think he’s blinded by what he’s been taught to the point he can’t see abuse or gaps in the lds narrative, although I never say that to him. So when he comes out with harsh judgments against me, I eventually take them with a grain of salt.
3. I apologize if I ever, in his view, cross a line.
4. At times he’s offended me deeply with some of his harsh statements, and I just don’t call him until the sting goes out of the bite. In other words, I don’t hold a grudge.
5. We have a lot of common interests.
6. I don’t have many other long term friends – we have been friends for 26 years in spite of living in different countries for 15 of those years. As you age, you start to realize how uncommon it is to have a friend with whom the relationship lasts decades. This tends to encourage forgiveness in me when it comes to him.
It was in the movie: The Godfather. “Don” Corleone taught his son Michael:
Quote:you keep your unorthodox friends close but you keep you orthodox friends closer.
(A little joke.)
I’ve said it before & I will say it again, I want & expect to be challenged (concerning my beliefs) at church & among my close friends & family.
I am not the smartest guy in the room. I always leave room to change my beliefs. There has to be compelling reasons for the change & a spiritual confirmation. The gospel is all about challenge & change. IMO.
Having said that, I am very careful what I say, when I say it & to whom I say it. If I’ve hurt feelings, I quickly apologize. There are friends where I don’t need filters. There are others where I definitely need & use filters on a regular basis.
I try to have friends from many walks of life & a cross sections of the community. (Inside & outside the church.)
The part I have difficulty with is calling someone that I consider a close friend to repent. That takes cajones. (that can be edited if it
offends.)
Minyan Man wrote:
The part I have difficulty with is calling someone that I consider a close friend to repent. That takes cajones. (that can be edited if itoffends.)
In that respect, I’m not blameless. ONCE, I pointed out that although I believe the church does a lot of good for people, one negative effect of having a common code is that it can turn people judgmental — and unchecked, they can adopt that trait and not even know it. Then I pointed out some of the judgmental attitudes he had shown in the prior year or so. Not toward me, but to others, particularly based on sexual-orientation.
He said nothing, but then brought it up a few times afterwards. I can’t remember what he said, but I remember it being both questioning (wanting more details about what I meant), and then some kind of justification for his statements. So, for a time, it bothered him. He continues with the behavior. I don’t want to share what he would say about others as I know it would offend everyone here. But he continues to do it.
But for a while, it bothered him.
That was the closest I came to calling him to repentance. Although traditional believers may have a host of criticisms to level at people who are unorthodox, one thing they have to be super-on-guard for, is judgmentalism.
Excellent. This is really a good example of how we can disagree in a constructive way, keep our dignity & a friend. In the process you don’t have to get angry.
A thought that has occurred to me is that so much of the orthodoxy policing in church is because members see it as their responsibility to be PR for the church, that every member is always an example of the church to non-members, that all we do is not a reflection of self, but of the collective membership. There was a recent online discussion in which someone shared that she had used a swear word in a post about the difficulty of parenting, and many of her friends, members and non-members alike, agreed with humor and used the same wording she had used to describe parenting. One friend said that while he agreed that parenting was challenging, he said she should not use profanity because she represents the church and others will see her bad example and not be interested in the church or will also use profanity. That exchange felt particularly Mormon to me. Do Catholics caution other Catholics about having to represent the whole church to random strangers at all times? No, because they are well established in numbers. Because we are from a smaller religion, one that actively recruits, we are each seen as part of a sales force–as both the product and the sales people. It puts everything we do under a microscope for those who take that charge seriously.
Personally, though, I don’t for two reasons: 1) I am a human being, not a product sample of Mormonism, and 2) even if I were a product sample, certainly the kind of person I’d want to attract to the church is one who wouldn’t need a fainting couch and smelling salts over a little appropriately-used profanity.
hawkgrrrl wrote:
if I were a product sample, certainly the kind of person I’d want to attract to the church is one who wouldn’t need a fainting couch and smelling salts over a little appropriately-used profanity.
Agree.
Also…I tend to think most people outside the church don’t frankly care, but as members, we worry so much about things that others don’t even pay attention to. And if they are the kind that are looking to nit-pick at mormons…there isn’t much you can do to keep them from finding something.
We often think we are clinging to the iron rod and the whole Great and Spacious Building is fixated on watching us and mocking us and hoping we fail … but in reality…there is a whole bunch of stuff going on in that building and most of them don’t even notice some iron rod or a small group of travelers along one certain path they don’t care much about.
[this is a queue for nibbler…pssst…persecution complex rant…bring it!]When talking with Traditional Believers…I always try to remember their view is just one view among many.
Fowler wrote:Stage 5 – “Conjunctive” faith (mid-life crisis) acknowledges paradox and transcendence relating reality behind the symbols of inherited systems. The individual resolves conflicts from previous stages by a complex understanding of a multidimensional, interdependent “truth” that cannot be explained by any particular statement.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.