- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Reuben we have a dear family friend who is a shunned JW. So no I am not playing Zen Master. I have also read about Amish family members (much less shunning but rejection all the same, just kind of the other way around). And yes religions shun. They have, they will, they do. Reddit exmo is pages of stories that sound familiar. Catholicism used to severely shun. Ours is a mixed bag. You yourself have been on the lucky end in many respects.
The topic is about Rocky Family Relationships. Not just religions alone.
No one here is dismissing their pain. We are only acknowledging the fact that Family Relationships hurt all the time. Especially when there is a religious separating for whatever reason and whatever faith you put in the mix.
Shunning was the impetus for Nathaniel Hawthornes S
carlett Letter. Shunning sucks. The Zen Master side is trying to keep perspective. **********
MOD Note – Don’t throw out lines like
Quote:Are you Zen masters saying what I think you’re saying?
and
Quote:This is just unreal.
Or I will pull your comment. And I’ve had my green smoothie for the day. You get mega support – don’t start casting stones.
Reuben wrote:Are you Zen masters saying what I think you’re saying?
Go read up on the JW doctrine and discourse surrounding shunning. Then browse reddit.com/r/exjw for a while. Then come back here and state, completely honestly, that their religion wasn’t a huge aggravating factor in all the pain they experience.
This is just unreal.
That’s an interesting takeaway. Maybe they aren’t saying what you think they’re saying?
My only point was that the JW religion is just another “something” in our lives.
What if you met the love of your life at a steakhouse (not stake center, steakhouse, so my grandmother would actually get it right for once). Your shared love of all things meat drew you and this other person together. You eventually got married and enjoyed your weekly standing appointment to go out to eat steaks at the steakhouse every Friday night. For 30 years you didn’t miss a single Friday night, not even when on vacation. Then out of the blue one of you decides to become a vegan. Now there’s no more Friday nights at the steakhouse and there’s discord in the home because one person wants to go out to eat steaks and the other is unwilling because there’s no vegan options on the menu. Maybe the couple even resorts to trying to convert one another to their preferred diet and they reach an impasse.
I don’t mean to trivialize the JW religion by saying it’s just another thing, religion is important to people, which is kind of the point. People hold things like religion, politics, even dietary philosophies to be so central to how they define themselves that often disagreements in those areas can become deal breakers. It makes sense that topics like religion, politics, etc. can cause rifts in families, that’s how sacred those subjects are to people.
But is it the religion itself? What of the people that leave their religion and it doesn’t affect family relationships? Maybe religion wasn’t as large a part of their identity.
I don’t doubt that exJWs, ewMos, etc. face all sorts of pain. Heck, I’ve felt it myself. This site wouldn’t exist if there wasn’t pain associated with those types of transitions. I can also appreciate how the pain can be magnified in cultures like the Mormons and JWs because they’re both high demand organizations that fixate on their exclusive access to god’s stamp of approval. I’m guessing people in a religion like that are more likely to make their religion a large part of how they identify themselves. I think the exclusive authority and high demand environment creates a breeding ground for the pain one experiences when losing their tribe. Expectations are high, which means there’s that much more air to get sucked out of the room when something comes along to threaten those expectations.
I agree that it’s humans being human. I get that. Its a big part of how I cope. What I’m absolutely bewildered by is the sentiment that
it has nothing to do with religion– that it’s justhumans being human. I have two problems with it. 1. Is there a StayDodgers.com? RemainDemocrat.org? KeepCarnivore.net? Why not? Because there’s something qualitatively different about religion. It’s the only kind of institution where you’re taught that an infinite cost is associated with going against the group. Because of this, it has more power over people’s beliefs and actions than anything except biology. Also, because of this trait and others such as assuming absolute truth, a religion’s tenets have more momentum than the tenets of any other kind of institution.
Based on this alone, I honestly can’t fathom how someone could try to remove religion from a discussion of causes and effects about
losing faith in a religion. 2. An analogy: suppose I said that it’s not
marriagethat keeps couples together, but peoplethat keep couples together. That’s self-evidently true. It’s also reductive to the point of meaninglessness. But if I were to say that, why would I? It would be because I want to remove marriage from consideration in a discussion of causes and effects.
Mom3, believe it or not, I’m holding back. The way this discussion turned is somehow triggering. Here’s an attempt at explaining why. To me, “it’s not religion” is so self-evidently absurd that I have trouble not thinking of it as willful ignorance at best. When two discussion participants in a position of power say the same apparently absurd thing, it makes me extremely uncomfortable. It feels like the whitewashing at church. It makes me want to fight or leave, and I struggle to find a middle ground.
We all have things that trigger us Reuben. I generally try to stay away from threads (or people) who trigger me. I get what you’re trying to say and agree that the thread is about religion and family relationships. Some people here lost familial relationships when they joined the church, other lost them when they left or expressed that they wanted to leave. I have been fortunate in joining the church, I only lost friends and friends come and go in our lives anyway. Likewise, I am the only member in my family and I have a wife who has shown me what eternal and selfless love really means.
But we also can’t say that only religion plays a part in these relationships. Religion plays a smaller role in most people’s lives than in prior times especially with so many young people eschewing religion altogether. I do know people who have split with their families over politics. I know families who have disowned their gay family members. I know others who have split over drug/alcohol/tobacco use. And I know some cons and ex-cons who would love to have their family relationships back. In the end it really is people who keep marriages and families together, reductive or not.
I have lived in this same ward for almost 30 years. I married shortly after coming here (we were already on that road) and there were several other young families here at the time. Our ward has aged and I have seen these families grow up. Some of them were quite large (at least three with 8 kids). None of them have families (grown children with children of their own and generally living elsewhere) that are totally active, and some are almost all inactive. Yet, the cases are really very few where those less active adult children (and there are a few gay ones) that have been shunned and left out of their families. I will note that there are a couple children who have chosen not to associate with the parents/siblings, not the other way around. I recognize this is anecdotal and a small pool of subjects and that we live far out here in the “mission field” amongst the nasty Gentiles. I think there certainly are stresses in those family relationships, but there are stresses in all family relationships because none of us are perfect. The idea that earthly family life is the laboratory for heavenly family life makes a great deal of sense to me.
I think the problem is that in discussions like this we tend to make generalizations, and sometimes here (and other places) we want to blame something for all our troubles and that blame sometimes ends up on the church whether or not the church really had anything to do with it. I have been observing that “the church teaches” much less than most people think it does – but people in the church certainly seem to have a lot to say about things we know very little about.
I know the power of the Dark Side Reuben. Maybe you need to step back and take a breather from this particular thread.
I read your posts Reuben and find myself agreeing with them. Language is symbolic as well. I do enjoy your perspective. Reuben wrote:What I’m absolutely bewildered by is the sentiment that
it has nothing to do with religion– that it’s just humans being human. I have two problems with it. I don’t know that I’d go so far as to say it has
nothingto do with religion as you state. I just question whether there’s another aspect to this that goes alongside religion, perhaps something at the root of it all, in order to try to think about human nature. The tread title is ‘Rocky Family Relationships after Faith Crisis not Unique to Mormonism’ When I parse the title I come up with:
Rocky family relationships – people not getting along harmoniously.
Faith crisis – which to me implies a change of some sort.
Not unique to Mormonism – not unique to Mormonism, that doesn’t have to be some other religion, it could mean something not unique to religion.
And come away with: people not getting along harmoniously when one person in the relationship changes.
And I stripped out the context of religion, even though “faith crisis” is right there in the title, but I did it in an attempt to see if I could deconstruct something about human nature, the same deconstruction process I applied to my faith, if I could go lower than human I’d deconstruct that as well.
We may have been having two different conversations that overlapped in a few areas. When talking the subject of religion, yes I agree. Religion can get its hooks in like none other. People can and do put religion above relationships, which is silly (IMO)… but it most certainly happens.
Rueben Quote:Mom3, believe it or not, I’m holding back.
Me, too. Thank the other Mods for stepping in.
I am very protective of our corner of the world. It’s a Mom thing.
[Admin Note]: Whenever someone reacts strongly to something in a fairly complicated discussion, It is important for that person to take a breath and re-read the thing to which they reacted strongly. Chances are reasonable that they reacted to something they interpreted, rather than to something that actually was said. Even if it was said, here at this site it is important to try to speak with as much charity as possible – and to think about the implication of the words we type on a screen to people we can’t see. Reuben, nobody in this thread said religion has nothing to do with rocky family relationships. In reality, everyone agreed religion plays a role (and often a huge role). Most of us are well aware of how Jehovah’s Witnesses shun. However, the title of the post wasn’t focused on JW only, even though the link was about them. The title said that rocky relationships after a faith crisis are not limited to Mormonism – and that is where the conversation went. The conversation wasn’t about JWs exclusively, because the title broadened the scope – and, I think, because pretty much everyone understood that the JWs have a serious problem with rocky relationships. So does the LDS Church – and atheism – and Catholicism – and political parties – and most families (especially extended and in-laws) – and on and on and on.
In that light, what was said was that religion doesn’t account for all rocky relationships – that rocky relationships are part and parcel of human and family life and that religion is one cause among many. It is a huge factor for many, but it also is not a factor (or not as big a factor) for many others – especially for those whose religions do not shun like the JWs do. Heber’s comment came the closest, as worded, to removing religion from the equation, but, in context, it is pretty clear what he meant – and what was meant by the follow-up comments about it.
Religion is not the only contributor to rocky familial relationships. That is factual. It is true. It really is logically incontrovertible. It doesn’t downplay religions’ roles in strife; rather it puts it in context.
For example, this site exists because religion is a contributing cause to rocky relationships. It would be stupid for us to claim what you charged, so we don’t claim it. Never. Ever. Ever.
Finally, insulting people here (or appearing to insult people here) is not what we do. Don’t do it.
We all love your contributions here. Please understand, this simply is an admin note – and that almost all of us long-timers (including I) have received such a note at some point during our time here.
As a perfect example, look at what happens to many people who identify as one political party or another when their entire family identifies with a different party. I know I can’t talk with my family about politics, since what I have shared in the past has caused issues with some of them. A few basically have stopped talking proactively with me completely. They can do that, since I live multiple hundreds of miles from them. Is there a StayDemocrat.com? I doubt it, with that exact name – but there literally are hundreds of sites that try to keep people aligned to the Republican or Democtratic party. Literally hundreds. They often are vicious – truly, appallingly vicious.
I am grateful it is not as bad in the Church (or most religions) as it used to be. I’d hate to be living in Brigham Youngs time, when he was telling the membership that the only way they can be forgiven of apostasy is through shedding their blood. I once read that “The Religious are the biggest nerds”. The point was that nerds can obsess over a book (or TV series, or game), to the point it consumes their life. They can’t understand why anyone else wouldn’t absolutely love their book! And they can argue for days and days amongst their own kind, over the hidden meanings of obscure passages, and what the author “really meant”. Outside of their group, they can get into major discussions over which “book” is best, or whether Kirk or Picard was the best starship captain (we all know it’s Picard). And when it comes to sports, where a single game can ruin a persons day… where death threats are made against a ref or a player for “not doing their job”, where saying “I prefer the Yankees over the Red Sox” in some areas can get you beat up… I would say it is clearly human nature.
Old Timer wrote:
rocky relationships are part and parcel of human and family life and that religion is one cause among many. It is a huge factor for many, but it also is not a factor (or not as big a factor) for many others
This is where my heart and mind is going in regards to this topic. Sometimes certain issues are not very personal to me and I can be almost clinical or academic about them (which BTW is one tactic to help StayLDS). Other issues are extremely personal and the power and emotionality of my experience leads me to feel and react very strongly.
Honestly, part of my StayLDS strategy has been to minimize and manage the LDS footprint in my life. I believe that the church occupies less than 10% of my social interactions. For a person like me with a more diversified social life it can be hard to completely empathize with someone whose entire world (including family) is tied up in the church and they lose it all.
I suppose there is a scale or religions with the highest barriers to exit. I think of the “lost boys” of FLDS that are literally cast out of their communities with no money, no support, and very little in the way of marketable skills. That is certainly an extreme. The JW’s and their shunning is something less extreme but still quite onerous.
I am also aware that these church’s with the highest barriers to exit also make it very hard for an individual to back away slowly or reduce/manage involvement as I have done in the LDS church. They can enforce “all or nothing” expectations that would make it very difficult for people to remain that were not fully committed.
Anyway, everyone brings their own perspective to these discussions. We may disagree with some perspectives (even strongly) but as a general principle we are stronger for the diversity of thought and feeling.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.