- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I have not yet watched any of the videos, I have only read the Deseret News article http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865665355/LDS-Church-leaders-offer-counsel-on-diversity-love-and-inclusion-in-new-video-series.html ” class=”bbcode_url”> http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865665355/LDS-Church-leaders-offer-counsel-on-diversity-love-and-inclusion-in-new-video-series.html Quote:“The diversity we find now in the church may be just the beginning frankly,” Elder Christofferson said in the video featuring him. “I think we’ll see greater and greater diversity. In the ancient church there was tremendous diversity and it’s not just diversity for diversity’s sake but the fact that people can bring different gifts and perspectives. The wide range of experience and backgrounds and challenges that people face will show us what really is essential in the gospel of Christ. And much of the rest that’s been, perhaps, acquired over time and is more cultural than doctrinal, can slip away and we can really learn to be disciples.
Quote:“I know people who come to church every Sunday so that they can be inspired and uplifted and who just simply walk away feeling judged and unloved, unneeded, like there is no place for them at church,” Sister McConkie said. “We need to do this differently.”
The pessimistic (dark?) side of me says most members probably won’t watch the videos. Yet, even if some do, especially those who lead, I think there can be some progress toward more inclusive and Christ-like love.
This article includes links to each video:
https://www.lds.org/church/news/leaders-in-video-series-affirm-all-have-a-place-in-christs-church?lang=eng ” class=”bbcode_url”> https://www.lds.org/church/news/leaders-in-video-series-affirm-all-have-a-place-in-christs-church?lang=eng I think this is kind of funny, really. The church is typically many, many years behind society, even when societies trends are good. I don’t think I’ve heard the word “diversity” mentioned in the decades I’ve been a member of the church. And when they start having talks on it (if this is more than a flash in the pan), people will be carrying on about how progressive the church is — when in fact, it’s been in the dark ages for so many years. I saw it when they came out with the new teaching program for the youth. Everyone was excited about how progressive the church is with technology, and how great it was that interactive lessons were replacing one-way, top down communication in those lessons.
For me, those kinds of teaching techniques had been around since before the millenium. They were part of my DNA since I started teaching in the early 1990’s. Yet, everyone heralded it as some new revelation that was evidence the church is true….
Anyway, we need to applaud the church on wanting to embrace diversity. Now that I’ve had my say. Better late than never, right?
I agree it is a small and late step – but it is a step. As I said in Relief Society last week. And I as I say it anywhere I can. “They (whomever) are welcome to sit by me.” Been my motto for 40 years.
Going to be with me till I die.
I’ll bite. Advance warning, this is going to be a little rough around the edges. I guess this means the leaders will be striking the November policy from the books any day now… leading by example and all.
With the November policy (and should you be on the fence in accepting it, here’s a friendly reminder in the October Ensign that it is indeed a revelation, so you can’t sit on that fence anymore) Christofferson’s video came across as a diversity training video HR puts together at the workplace that is targeted at the rank and file… but there are no female or minority CEOs or managers.
From my viewpoint the people at the local level are leading the way on diversity and inclusion and it feels like most of the resistance comes from the top down. That’s not to say that the leaders of the church wouldn’t fight for more inclusiveness, we have these videos after all, but what do you say in the case of a BP that wouldn’t call a gay couple to a disciplinary council if left to their devices but feels inclined to do so out of adherence to a policy?
How does being more inclusive square with the counsel to not use outside materials when preparing classes? Diversity… correlated diversity?
We all have different definitions to things. What does diversity and inclusion mean to the brethren? It’s a little confusing. We want diversity and inclusion but we insist on homogeneity in belief. The devil is in the details. We can’t simply say “be more inclusive” and think that we’ve done our part. Those are just words. How about some examples:
1) Someone in RS talks about their support for gay marriage.
2) An apostle of the church grows some facial hair.
3) A general authority wears a color shirt during conference.
4) An RSP serves faithfully and is open about not believing that Jesus was divine.
5) While discussing a general conference talk during EQ people are free to disagree with a point raised in the talk.
etc.
What does diversity and inclusiveness mean?
1) We’re friendly to the sister but tattle to the BP. Or do we fully accept their support of gay marriage.
2) Time to get that year supply in order, end times are near.
3) Time to stockpile ammo, end times are near.
4) The RSP is released the Sunday after people learn about her beliefs or do local leaders allow her to continue serving because of the good job she’s doing?
5) People continue to say hi to the brother in the hallway but insist that his opinions are dead wrong in PH because he said something that was contrary to what was said in GC.
How do you enforce purity of dogma and be more inclusive? With an, “I accept what you are saying but the revealed truth is…” Which is probably where we’re at right now. What do you do for the people that feel like church is one long, 3 hour session of people saying “you’re wrong?”
What does diversity and inclusiveness mean? The devil is in the details.
I’d love to see a more diverse church… in more than just appearances. I sure hope I don’t get in trouble for wanting to be included at church, because that’s what I feel I’m up against.
nibbler wrote:The devil is in the details. We can’t simply say “be more inclusive” and think that we’ve done our part. Those are just words. How about some examples:
How about a simple one to start with: a single man goes to Sacrament meeting, sits down and the people within 3-4 seats of him don’t suddenly realize they need to sit with someone over there, or the A/C vent is blowing right on their seat, or whatever? How about if they treat him like a valued member of the Church family instead of like that odd cousin who shows up to funerals in overalls?
Sometimes it feels like they’re stretching their “inclusiveness” to the limits to not label a drinking fountain and a set of bathrooms “married only.”
I certainly agree that inclusion and recognition of diversity are far more advanced at the local level than at the upper levels of church leadership. That may actually be cultural to some extent. I’m sorry Elder Ballard, but you do live in a bubble. That doesn’t mean you don’t see things the rest of us see, but what you see is most often filtered and vetted by others. Even outside that, Utah wards are mostly made up of white middle class families. I recognize there are tons of Latinos, Polynesians, and Asians there – and they are most often members of wards made up of other Latinos, Polynesians, and Asians. And when church leaders travel to Africa, Europe, and South America they likewise encounter mostly members who are parts of branches, wards, and stakes made up of their own ethnicities. Perhaps these videos are the beginning of a recognition that the church is not culturally homogeneous everywhere. I would also hope the discussion on diversity goes beyond race, ethnicity and socio-economic status and includes diversity of thought and cultural traditions. Quote:How do you enforce purity of dogma and be more inclusive? With an, “I accept what you are saying but the revealed truth is…” Which is probably where we’re at right now. What do you do for the people that feel like church is one long, 3 hour session of people saying “you’re wrong?”
I agree that the majority of the membership is in that place right now – but I also see light and a growing number of people who believe otherwise. I have spoken of this myself in stake councils and it has been well received. Just today the bishop of the ward I was visiting said something about focusing on basic gospel principles and letting go of some of the other teachings which may not be totally correct or doctrinal (he was not specific about what those might be).
Nibbler – You forgot one – A non-white member of the Q15. I realize Uchtdorf isn’t fully “normal’ for the pack. But looking at their pictures all lined across the classroom wall, we are a long way from Oz on the color wheel. I watched them. Swallowed hard. Then walked away. My ward is more inclusive already.
I like that more than one of them said something to the effect of, “We need to change, ” or “We need to do better.” I like that one of the most quotable quotes came from Sis. McConkie,
Quote:“The gospel of Jesus Christ does not marginalize people. People marginalize people.”
And churches?
I do think this is encouraging stuff. I liked the visual of the mom angry with her grown child, but later coming back and embracing him.
mom3 wrote:Nibbler – You forgot one – A non-white member of the Q15. I realize Uchtdorf isn’t fully “normal’ for the pack. But looking at their pictures all lined across the classroom wall, we are a long way from Oz on the color wheel.
I watched them. Swallowed hard. Then walked away. My ward is more inclusive already.
I agree having a non-Caucasian in the Q15 would go a long way in demonstrating acceptance of diversity, and it would go a long way in offering a different point of view in the group. I had such high hopes last go-round when there were three openings. Surely one of them could have been other than white bread. I was truly disappointed. Not that I don’t like the three new guys, and I may not have liked a different choice – but that’s just the way things are (I don’t like all the current ones as it is).
And my ward is more inclusive already as well. We do have some racial and ethnic diversity as well as some socio-economic differences in our ward, and we have a couple more free thinkers like me. What we don’t have is an active gay member, although we do have parents of inactive adult gay children. Frankly I think the majority of members in my ward would be fine with an active gay person, and they could sit by me – but I also think there would be some, including some in leadership, who would not be quite as accepting. Along that line, I really liked Sr. McConkie’s remarks.
After having watched all the videos, in addition to McConkie and Christofferson, I also really liked Holland and Oaks.
DarkJedi wrote:I agree having a non-Caucasian in the Q15 would go a long way in demonstrating acceptance of diversity, and it would go a long way in offering a different point of view in the group.
Too expensive; they’d have to hire a white guy to act as the filter for him.
NightSG wrote:DarkJedi wrote:I agree having a non-Caucasian in the Q15 would go a long way in demonstrating acceptance of diversity, and it would go a long way in offering a different point of view in the group.
Too expensive; they’d have to hire a white guy to act as the filter for him.
No need to hire anybody else – correlation is alive and well.
DarkJedi wrote:I also really liked Holland and Oaks.
I agree. The talk from Elder Holland about being saved as individuals is interesting In many ways we believe in being saved in family units. “In an eternal sense, salvation is a family affair.” ETB
However, like many things there are probably two sides to this coin depending on the issue and the emphasis the speaker is giving to it. If the topic is about families then “salvation is a family affair”. If the topic is about building a relationship with Christ or personal righteousness then it becomes an individual/personal accountability issue.
Based on what I have heard recently in GC, I was prepared to hate Elder Oaks talk on Love and the Law. I thought that he would say that mercy cannot rob justice and that unconditional love is not a biblical concept. He really surprised me by saying that we can/must love others even when they are not following our understanding of the law. We should follow the example of our Savior in how he reached out to people that were not seen as followers of the law.
I like the general message. baby steps maybe.
Quote:baby steps maybe.
I for one am tired of waiting. I am up and running, and have been about inclusion since I was a teen. At that time LGBT didn’t even exist. They are welcome to join me if they like.
mom3 wrote:Quote:baby steps maybe.
I for one am tired of waiting.
Ditto. Most people that really know me tell me I am one of the most patient people they know (I realize some of you on this site may not think so as this is where I vent the most). But I feel I only have a short number of years left and I want to make a difference for others with that time I have.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.