- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Heber13 wrote:
I simply process what I think they are saying…which I hear them saying:“The Church is perfect (to me), the people aren’t (to me)”.
I can’t argue that they think it is perfect. That’s what they see when they focus on all the good things they love about it.
I don’t usually see a need for a response in a classroom setting to that.
I don’t want it to become:
“No it isn’t”
“yes it is”
“No it isn’t”
Except I don’t think that’s usually what they are saying. I might think like that and others (like you) might think like that but I think generally what they are saying is “This is the true church set up exactly as it was in Jesus’s time by Jesus who directs it through the prophet today. Therefore we cannot possibly question anything the church does or is. People do stupid unChristlike things and make mistakes because they aren’t perfect but we need to overlook that because the church is perfect.” I certainly wouldn’t get into a childish argument, but I think there must be tactful, perhaps even funny, ways to point out that the church is not perfect. I don’t want to turn this into a conversation about “The Policy” but it is a good example. Any change is a good example – if the church were perfect policies wouldn’t need to change.
I think it’s one of those pseudo doctrinal things we sat because it sounds good. Kind of like “I never says it would be easy, I only said it would be worth it.” Jesus never actually said that! 
Joni wrote:I think it’s one of those pseudo doctrinal things we sat because it sounds good. Kind of like “I never says it would be easy, I only said it would be worth it.” Jesus never actually said that!
That one bugs me, too. I hear “The church is perfect….” much more often though.
In all reality that saying doesn’t make sense. The church is made from people. If there were no people in the church, there wouldn’t be a church. So if people aren’t perfect and the church is made of people, that means the church isn’t perfect. At what point is there a line between the two? Prophets are people and prophets have changed things about the church, so it is not the same as it was when Christ was around. There are plenty of things that aren’t that great about the church that someone could argue is from people, but what those people enforce is now part of the church, so their point is invalid. Those are the things that go through my head about that saying. Always Thinking wrote:In all reality that saying doesn’t make sense. The church is made from people. If there were no people in the church, there wouldn’t be a church. So if people aren’t perfect and the church is made of people, that means the church isn’t perfect. At what point is there a line between the two? Prophets are people and prophets have changed things about the church, so it is not the same as it was when Christ was around. There are plenty of things that aren’t that great about the church that someone could argue is from people, but what those people enforce is now part of the church, so their point is invalid. Those are the things that go through my head about that saying.
I do not like this saying and I personally do not like using the word perfect because it is just too absolute. However, I think I know what people that use this are trying to express. I believe that they are saying that people can be frustrating and offensive and boneheaded. Church members are not immune to these irritating quirks. Even church leaders can and do make mistakes that might offend individuals. However, the church organization is still the only place where you can go to find the divine power and authority for salvation/exaltation.
I still wish that they would just say that and leave this perfect business out of it, but people can be frustrating and offensive and boneheaded at times.
DarkJedi wrote:Except I don’t think that’s usually what they are saying. I might think like that and others (like you) might think like that but I think generally what they are saying is “This is the true church set up exactly as it was in Jesus’s time by Jesus who directs it through the prophet today. Therefore we cannot possibly question anything the church does or is. People do stupid unChristlike things and make mistakes because they aren’t perfect but we need to overlook that because the church is perfect.” I certainly wouldn’t get into a childish argument, but I think there must be tactful, perhaps even funny, ways to point out that the church is not perfect. I don’t want to turn this into a conversation about “The Policy” but it is a good example. Any change is a good example – if the church were perfect policies wouldn’t need to change.
I think I get what you are saying, DJ. Those speaking in class might really believe it literally as they are saying it…black and white without nuance or equivocation. They think in their minds if you walked into Christ’s church when he was alive (he didn’t set one up when he was alive), that you would find relief society classes and deacon’s quorums and the same church. They believe in the restoration of all things.My response is not a passive one to avoid confrontation. Nor is it to suggest no response is the best response.
Simply a strategy for one hearing stuff that makes your hairs stand up on the back of your neck to stay in the church when others talk that way. Because….I don’t think it is a good strategy to try to convince them otherwise. How they view it is how they view it. That’s great. I think they are wrong. That’s great. That’s why I go to church…to hear what others think so I can consider it and process it and seek learning and the spirit. Maybe I offer views to help others too, I don’t know.
But…your quote is exactly makes my point which can be hard sometimes for us to give ourselves permission to shift thinking about it.
DarkJedi wrote:People do stupid unChristlike things and make mistakes because they aren’t perfect but we need to overlook that because the church is perfect.
You see…by acknowledging people in the church say and do stupid things…the person making that statement or suggesting that thinking is agreeing with my thinking. We are more in agreement than disagreement on this.
The person who is saying that, is also part of the group that (s)he is saying should be
overlooked. What (s)he is saying might be stupid…to suggest the church is perfect when I know very well it keeps changing and therefore imperfect. Perfect in my mind isn’t focusing on the same things perfect in his/her mind. Therefore…responding may not always be productive since the problem is in the deeper level of definitions and semantics that would take longer to explore than the class allows…and any other response is just the “My view (no it isn’t) vs your view (yes it is)” level of discourse. And therefore not needed when the understanding lies beyond the scope of the class. THat isn’t to say avoid responding always. More just what to think while sitting there thinking what to respond with.
If you want to respond to share a different view, that’s cool. But a response to change someone else’s paradigm won’t happen in a 40 min sunday school setting. Right? So the approach should consider that…how do I handle myself in the situation and environment I’m in?
Something to consider when people say, “the church is perfect, the people aren’t” or “Jesus didn’t say it would be easy, he said it would be worth it”.
I appreciate the exchange…don’t intend to feel like I’m debating it with you, just explaining my post and viewpoint. Part of being at church for me is practicing how I process what others say, and I think my views are as valid as theirs. I think you get it…hope I didn’t belabor the point.
submit> Joni wrote:I think it’s one of those pseudo doctrinal things we sat because it sounds good. Kind of like “I never says it would be easy, I only said it would be worth it.” Jesus never actually said that!
There’s a lot of stuff that Jesus likely never said but we attribute to him anyway, even the things that got written down.
:shifty:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.