- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I’ve been working on the following thoughts and wondered what kind of response I might get, if I posted them here: The process of defining an ‘us’ based on any set of characteristics, by definition, creates a ‘them’. By drawing a circle around ‘us’, a ‘them’ is automatically created and is comprised of those outside of the circle.
The general purpose for defining an ‘us’, is to raise the status of ‘us’ as opposed to the general population, and thereby the definition actively or passively reduces the status of ‘them’.
Defining ‘us’ and ‘them’ is always about elevating a social, racial, religious, political, professional or material status by including ‘us’ and excluding ‘them’.
‘Us’ can be singular. The process is the same and it a feeds the ego by saying that the individual is better than others.
At a rather innocuous level, a club or fraternity is based on the same idea. Include some. Exclude others. Grant privileges to some. Deny privileges to others.
The inequity created by ‘Us’ always creates enmity and resentment among ‘Them’. There are literally hundreds of examples. The unrest in the Arab World is caused by the exclusion of the ‘Have Nots – them’ from the ‘Haves – royalty, despots, tyrants, controllers of wealth – Us’. Terrorism has its roots here, as does racism,social unrest religious intolerance and religious exclusivity .
“We are the Chosen People” rings in our ears. “Our path is best.” “Join us.” “Lo here.” “Lo there.” This is true of most religions of which I am aware.
All large-scale conflict in the world revolves around this principle in some way or another.
As a Family of Man, we can only approach peace and unity by removing ‘Us’ and ‘Them’ boundaries individually and collectively.
There really is only one ‘us’. While our differences may be deep, our common needs, interests and humanity are deeper.
Absolutely, ss – and, unfortunately, that tendency probably is the single strongest “natural” tendency humans have. It’s rooted in protective biology, and it runs really, really deep. One of the reasons I really love the “macro-theology” of Mormonism is that it does posit, at the purest level, that all of us are equal children of God – even if we humans always take that baseline concept and mutate it by adding the chosen people phraseology. It’s inevitable, but it’s sad.
silentstruggle wrote:…By drawing a circle around ‘us’, a ‘them’ is automatically created and is comprised of those outside of the circle…The general purpose for defining an ‘us’, is to raise the status of ‘us’ as opposed to the general population, and thereby the definition actively or passively reduces the status of ‘them’…The inequity created by ‘Us’ always creates enmity and resentment among ‘Them’. There are literally hundreds of examples….
Terrorism has its roots here, as does racism,social unrest religious intolerance and religious exclusivity…As a Family of Man, we can only approach peace and unity by removing ‘Us’ and ‘Them’ boundaries individually and collectively…There really is only one ‘us’. If you look at some cult checklists, one of the warning signs they often mention is a strong emphasis on the distinction between “us and them” and/or the idea that we are right and everyone else is wrong. One thing I really get tired of hearing about from the Church is how we need to be separate and different from “the world” because it is supposedly so evil and wrong. Not that this tendency to think that whatever groups we belong to are superior to others is really all that unusual; in fact, it seems like it’s almost human nature for people to get caught up in this kind of thinking not just in the case of religion but also things like ethnic background, politics, etc. as well. Some of this disrespect and fear of outsiders can really start to look ignorant and pointless once you know a few of “them” personally. That’s one reason why I don’t think the whole “in the world but not of the world” policy is going to work very well over the long run because an increasing number of members will start to realize “the world” is not nearly as bad as the Church likes to pretend that it is.
SS, it sounds like you might be in the mood for some Eckhart Tolle. “A New Earth” especially explores this issue. DA, I think that when disciples combine Master teachings about “the world” with the culty idea of “our group” having “the only truth”, we get trouble. The reality is that “our group” neither holds the truth uniquely nor even holds it at all. That’s because the Truth isn’t something that can be held by a structural group; it’s something we individually experience and share in common across time and space.
I think that if you strip away the idea of special and held truth, then the idea of “the world” can be very useful. The world is within me and around me, as the Kingdom of God is within me and around me. I am in the world. But I am invited/permitted to be not of the world. That is the good news.
So as it turns out, worn out phrases like the following actually embody deepest truth:
“We have seen the enemy and it is us.”
- “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.”
- “No matter where you go, there you are.”
I think the LDS have the vision of creating one us, but in our theology, it will be done by aligning everyone we can with ‘our way’, rather than by breaking down boundaries and definitions. We have wonderful teachings about accepting others and about recognizing the truth found in other ways. I remember aping those phrases to investigators on my mission. In practice though, our human side takes over and we often view our church as that exclusive fraternity that makes us better. How often have I heard ‘Well, he’s not a MEMBER, but he’s a great person’? Two implications here; first that a member makes you ‘better’ and two, that we are in the back of our minds almost surprised that anyone who is not a member can rise above their base origins to be of value. Still, if they would just join . . . .
Yeah, ss – that’s the humanization of the divine. I really do believe we have the divine at the foundation of our theology (or “pure Mormonism”), but there simply is no way for humans to “package” it for a group (within an organization) without humanizing it. ( There also is almost no way to describe something – to truly describe it fully, without comparing it to something else.That’s a key point to make in a discussion like this.) That (the humanization of the divine), for me, is the purest definition of “apostasy” – and that’s why I really like the allegory of the vineyard in Jacob 5 that says, in my own words, the purpose of God is fulfilled only as the human error that always, inevitably springs forth over time is rooted out of the kingdom.
Our purpose isn’t to “find” Zion; it is to help “create” Zion institutionally and “become” Zion individually. That’s a never-ending process, since “decay” or “bastardization” is a natural, never-ending process in mortality.
That’s also why I have reached the point where I don’t wail and pound my fists and throw a fit very often over the fact that “dung” exists in the Church. I expect it and believe it can’t be any other way – so I do my best to take the dung and turn it into fertilizer in my own part of the vineyard. Learning how to do that is a process and takes conscious focus and effort, but it’s worth it in the long run.
To tie that back to the central point of the post, I try not to speak of “us” and “them” in any way that isn’t necessary. I also try to mention something I’ve learned from someone else as often as I mention something we can teach others. It’s hard in ANY organization, but I try.
SS- I really appreciate your insight on this topic. I hope you don’t mind but I read your post to my gospel doctrine class yesterday (I did not tell them the source I only said a friend wrote it) and they really liked it. We had a great discussion about how we create barriers in our lives that keep us from showing Christ like love to our fellow men. Everyone recognized that we in the church create an US all the time and the problems that causes with our neighbors. Thanks again for the great post I hope you don’t mind I used it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.