- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I keep running into this lately. The church has had so many limitations, in my view, for so long, my orientation toward it isn’t completely positive all the time. Lately, they have made a lot of positive changes Combining HP and EQ
Ministering rather than checkbox Home Teaching
Plans for a new Hymn Book
Inclusiveness of female-oriented auxiliaries in core decision-making and ministering programs
Teacher’s Councils to improve gospel teaching
The Gospel Topics Essays that disavow certain practices believed to be doctrine, or at least acknowledge parts of our history that needed addressing and acknowledgement
Tools for your cell phone to help leaders do their jobs better.
But I still have this less than positive feeling about it. I look at all this and think “It’s about time! Why do you move so slowly!!! Do you know how some of these policies made me suffer for so many decades?? (like having to administer HT, and others). Do you remember when I suggested some of these things years ago and you rebuked me as questioning God?”
When I should be running the cheer leading squad in thanking and appreciating the changes.
This is kind of bugging me really. I wonder if it will take a return to TBM attitudes to get rid of it. Which doesn’t seem in the cards in the next week or so…
Anyone else run into this?
I try hard to recognize and celebrate all good when it happens, no matter how small. I can go on continuing to work for more change, but I can’t let myself become hardened to the celebration of good. I have had to work consciously on that. It doesn’t come automatically. It isn’t “natural”.
I can totally relate SD. This exact phenomenon has been on my mind for the past few months so thanks for articulating it. I think for a lot of critics the church is “damned if they do, damned if they don’t” and I feel myself playing in to that sentiment. Of course I should be ecstatic when the church makes positive changes but I find myself resenting the fact that the church wasn’t perfect to begin with (like I was previously led to believe). I appreciate and am encouraged by your example of choosing to celebrate the positive Curt.
I know what you mean, SD. The Church made a huge to-do last month over the 40th anniversary of the ban against Black men holding the priesthood. They had a big program in the Conference Center with the Tab Choir and a number of well-known Latter-day Saints (like Alex Boye) participating. I can remember so clearly the day in 1978 that the announcement was made and how absolutely thrilled I was about it, so when I first heard about this “celebration,” I thought, “This is something I don’t want to miss!” Then I started thinking about it and started asking myself why I would want to be a part of such a celebration. We were discriminating against Black members of the Church for years and years and years. The lifting of the ban was a big deal, but since I don’t believe the ban was ever authorized by the Lord in the first place, I don’t know why we should be patting ourselves on the back because we finally stopped treating Blacks like second-class citizens. It helps me sometimes to look at the LDS church as a somewhat strange and esoteric social club. This makes it easier to say to myself, “oh well, their club – their rules” when the church moves in a direction that I do not like. I also feel more free to say, “good for them!” when they move in a direction that I do like. This is called the perfectionist fallacy. This is the one that those against the church fall for most often. Example: The LDS church has a very poor track record with regard to treating LGTB fairly, Therefore the church should not be praised or even recognized for the good they do. Sheldon wrote:
This is called the perfectionist fallacy. This is the one that those against the church fall for most often. Example: The LDS church has a very poor track record with regard to treating LGTB fairly, Therefore the church should not be praised or even recognized for the good they do.
I agree with this. The Church is a mixed bag; There’s a lot of good and a lot of bad. The good they do does not compensate for the bad, and the bad does not diminish the good. The past does not erase the present, and the present does not erase the past. The same could be said for every organization and every person.
To follow what Sheldon said, I love the simple statement: Quote:Perfect is the enemy of good.
A very recent example:
Affirmation (the primary LGBTQ advocacy organization in Utah) asked the LDS Church for $25,000 to implement suicide prevention training on a broad scale. The Church donated the money requested.
Immediately, lots of people condemned the Church for donating such a “small” amount and/or called it hypocritical to give toward an issue it helped create. So many people wanted their perfect solution (more money or a massive shift in current doctrine) that they couldn’t celebrate, applaud, or even accept a very good thing – that was exactly what Affirmation requested.
The problem, for me, seems to be giving adulation when there are so many thing I believe are left undone, and I have experienced so much hardship because of my involvement in the church. I thought today that perhaps the solution to the problem is to give the adulation, and let my own “path” be my only symbol to myself as my reservations of what remains undone — and what has happened in the past. In other words, my lack of commitment remains as my final quarter. I can praise, celebrate, and complement all I want, but my commitment level remains as the residual effect of my concerns. Only when I’m completely satisfied with the experience of a Mormon will I give that back again. The lack of commitment is for me; and I give it up as I please.
SilentDawning wrote:
Only when I’m completely satisfied with the experience of a Mormon will I give that back again.
Do you think this possible? What would it take?
dande48 wrote:
SilentDawning wrote:
Only when I’m completely satisfied with the experience of a Mormon will I give that back again.
Do you think this possible? What would it take?
I need to qualify ‘completely satisfied’ to say “satisfied enough”. What would it take?
1.
A testimony boosting experience that convinces me the church is all it says it is again.My experiences in the church have battered my testimony to the point I hang on to agnosticism in case it happens to be true at some point. At this point, TBM’s would say “a wicked or adulterous generation seeketh a sign”. I am not seeking a sign, but if God wants me to believe fully, I think I need my own Road to Damascus or other convincing experience if He chooses to give it. I haven’t given up on Mormonism. 2.
Time.I am wounded from the repeated abuse I’ve received from “members in good standing” and also church leaders. The thought of returning to the “member as unappreciated, neglected, unsupported church employee” model I have experienced continues to sicken me when I think of it. Time and reframing these past experiences would have to happen.The memories are still sharp, and although specific details have faded with time, the “hum” of the pain associated with the abuse is still deafening to me. 3.
My fill of community and other service outside the church.This part is odd. For years, I stayed in front-line positions in my career, even though I’m capable of leadership. Sometimes I refused opportunities to lead, other times, when I sought them, I was rejected…. It was a kind of angst for me, NOT to have been invited to take on this kind of role in the past when it was significant. So I was always thirsting for a different kind of leadership than I have experienced in the church or community. Recently, within the last six months, I was asked to take on a significant admin role, involving leadership to about 3 dozen people. It’s been taxing, but rewarding. I feel way more relaxed now, at peace with my career, to the point further progression seems unnecessary for me. I feel like the lion who doesn’t have to roar. He knows he can, based on my experiences in the last six months, and therefore, doesn’t need to express himself further.
Well, after I have my fill of the leadership opportunities I never had throughout my life (including community service and paid leadership), I think this would encourage me to settle down to the church leadership experience again — provided other factors above were allowed to materialize (#1, and #2).
There is one additional factor but I don’t want to say it unless I invite life to make it happen.That is what I think it would take. Notice how I didn’t say anything that causes the church to change. If I re-engage, it will have to be with acceptance of the church as it is — warts and all. This is because the core values/policies it holds that bother me are likely never to change in my lifetime. It will have to be on the strength of revitalized testimony, and the feeling that all leadership experiences have been explored and enjoyed.
The change will have to come from within.
That’s a good list, SD. I think my list would look similar. With point #3, though, I’m interpreting that to mean the Church has not, and most likely will not be able to fulfill your needs (specifically, your need for leadership and meaningful service). Is it possible to be “satisfied enough”, if the Church isn’t meeting those needs? Because service and leadership (priesthood) are both core fundamentals of the Church. If the Church itself is not able to fulfill those needs, can you be “satisfied enough” with the Church, even if those needs are filled elsewhere?
SilentDawning wrote:
1. A testimony boosting experience that convinces me the church is all it says it is again…If I re-engage, it will have to be with acceptance of the church as it is — warts and all.
I feel like what the Church is (warts and all) and what the Church claims to be are pretty different. I think for this to reconcile, the Church would have to change what it says it is.
SilentDawning wrote:
I can praise, celebrate, and complement all I want, but my commitment level remains as the residual effect of my concerns.
A big part of my previous answer is a sense of distance. There is open space, gaps, or a buffer zone between what the church teaches and what I believe or do. I can shrug my shoulders or shout “hooray”, But whatever I do I will do it from my side of the divide.
IOW, there was a time when my identity was very tied up in my belonging to the group. This gave me a sense of belonging, meaning, and purpose and it was good. Over the course of my life experiences (and my FC) my identity has become more individual and independent (which is also good). I just do not see that going back the way it was before under any circumstances. I have grown and changed, there is no way to stuff myself back into my former understanding and faith.
Roy wrote:
SilentDawning wrote:
I can praise, celebrate, and complement all I want, but my commitment level remains as the residual effect of my concerns.
A big part of my previous answer is a sense of distance. There is open space, gaps, or a buffer zone between what the church teaches and what I believe or do. I can shrug my shoulders or shout “hooray”, But whatever I do I will do it from my side of the divide.
IOW, there was a time when my identity was very tied up in my belonging to the group. This gave me a sense of belonging, meaning, and purpose and it was good. Over the course of my life experiences (and my FC) my identity has become more individual and independent (which is also good). I just do not see that going back the way it was before under any circumstances. I have grown and changed, there is no way to stuff myself back into my former understanding and faith.
I can relate to this.
My husband and I are cautiously exploring what the open space or gaps are between what church teachings we are going to cling to and teach our children, and what our personal beliefs about church teachings are. Added is a social component (and expectations) that drive us nuts. We are non-traditional introverts with additional nearly invisible needs – so we don’t fit the standard social norms easily.
My boundaries with the church were made easier in the last 10 years because I was never given heavy-duty callings. I used to think it was because others “needed” them more than I did – but now I am pretty sure that I was not socially connected enough to be considered for the callings at a ward level. Since we arrived in our branch 3 years ago, the leadership got the message to minimize the calls being offered due to our unique family circumstances. My main “calling” right now is making sure that I get our 2 girls to church on the Sundays when my husband has meetings, and cheer him on in his calling as executive secretary. I have taken on the personal assignment of being the nursery leader every Sunday that we are in church and they don’t have a leader. Also, due to the whimsies of my toddler – I wind up taking her most Sundays when they have a leader and/or sitting in as an assistant because my toddler shrieks like a banshee while attending nursery without me these days. I also more or less function as a board member of the Achievement Day committee in the hopes that I can be a part of the solution to include my daughter in the social programs put on the by the church.
I say in jest that my family is a 2-talent family in a 5-talent branch because what my family can contribute to the church organization is less than most families can – but I believe that we are trying, and that our efforts are appreciated by God just as much as the higher producing families. Some of it is that we are not motivated to do more, and some of it is that we don’t have the resources to do more. But there is a component that strongly believes that taking care of my family is an essential part of my personal calling from God.
If you want a positive experience, practice giving kudos 5 times more than you criticize it. Focusing on the good will help you see it, and feel it. If you don’t care, then it doesn’t matter.
If you are finding negative things 5 times as often as something good, you are sure to suffer more while there.
It’s more than just a Positive Mental Attitude…it is more about what you are focused on. There is good and bad in the church. “Kudos” are a reflection of your mind, as well as criticisms.
The church won’t change whether you give kudos or not, so it comes down to what you want to experience, and if kudos or criticisms will give you what you want.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.