This article broke my shelf

[Anonymous]

In my first decade in the church, in the area I was baptized there was a story that if you left the church, you’d lose your job, your family, and you your life would be in tatters.

I am not sure if it’s considered abuse to say that, but to tell people that if they leave the church life will conspire against them certainly is manipulative, at least.

I think we all know that the “life in tatters” story is not true. Now, it’s true that in our church, spouses seem to think they need each other in an active, temple marriage to have salvation, so if one person leaves the church, I think it does increase the risk of divorce. But that is a cultural phenomenon, with a church cause behind it.

I agree though, that truly Christlike, liberating, positive environments respect the individual’s right to choose. Kind of like the difference between free democracies and and controlling nations. The free democracies allow such freedom that everyone wants IN to the country. No one stops you if you want to leave. The controlling nations have to put up walls and stiff punishments if you try to leave.

That’s why I like about StayLDS — if people decide leaving the church is the way to go for them to find happiness, normally we wish them well, positively, and sincerely hope they find happiness. And they are welcome to stay and post and be part of the community without censure. In many ways, it’s more Christlike than what we see in the church.

Good think I don’t hear much fire and brimstone about people leaving the church anymore. I know BY used to preach it when Saints were leaving the Valley during the Gold Rush. I think truly inspired leaders place no bars on people if they decide it’s time to move on.

[Anonymous]

Thank you to all that have helped me to think harder on this subject. I am reminded of an old discussion on organizational abuse.

http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2474&p=30734&hilit=organizational+abuse#p30734

Roy wrote:

So, IMHO, organizational abuse up to and including excommunication is a virtual certainty for someone, somewhere, sometime. To be fair, I believe that all organizations suffer from “organizational abuse” and that there is always the dichotomy of the needs of the individual vs. the needs of the group. To the degree that the needs of the group usurp the needs of the individual organizational abuse exists.

Cwald wrote:

One of the sections I have highlighted in the How To StayLDS article says something to the effect, “only you can prevent organizational abuse. Only you can prevent the church from taking advantage of you.” If the church is taking advantage of you – stop it. (easier said than done, right?)

I think an important question that anyone facing the aftermath of an excommunication must ask his/herself is: How does this affect my relationship with God?

Thinking about the September six in context of organizational abuse I have some questions.

Does the church have the right to revoke membership for reasons it deems important?

Does the church have the right to tell its own story or narrative?

Does the church have the right to determine its own beliefs or doctrines?

Does the church have the right to revoke membership from members that are contradicting the church’s narrative?

Does the church have the right to revoke membership from members that are promoting doctrines that are different from what the church teaches?

Does the member have the right to baptize his children?

Does the member have the right to attend their child’s wedding?

Does the member have the right to have their own beliefs and understandings separate and apart from the church?

Does the member have the right to become a professional historian and extensively research the narrative of the restoration?

Does the member have the right to publish or publicly espouse their belief that is different than church teachings (perhaps on the internet)?

Does the member have the right to publish a scholarly research article that calls into question long time church narratives about founding moments in church history?

There could be many more questions but I believe that these are enough to introduce to concept of competing needs/rights and organizational abuse.

[Anonymous]

mom3

You have been so kind, thank you for responding. I actually do meditate but I only average about once a week. I know that it is something you need to do consistently to get any benefit so I do want to try to do it more often. I am seeing a counselor that really has helped me over the past couple of months. She has helped me not to be so critical of myself.

Beefster

I can’t leave, so I am trying to find the right middle ground that won’t push me over the edge but that my husband can deal with also. It’s a hard process.

Silent Dawning

I so wish others could be happy for you if you have found a path that helps you feel peace. It just seems that the church has created an environment where you are 100 percent wrong if you are on a different path. It doesn’t matter if it affects your health (mental or physical), you have been deceived if you choose another way. It does seem like it would be more Christlike to just be happy for someone who feels like they have found what is right for them.

Roy

I loved the questions you came up with. These are the type of circumstances that are so troubling to me. I am going to save these for a day when I am trying to explain why I feel the church is damaging to me. It articulates it much better than I can when I am emotional and flustered. Thank you!

[Anonymous]

kate5 wrote:

Reuben, thank you for kind words. I’m sorry for the abuse that you suffered when you were growing up. As I told Nibbler, I hope that my use of the word doesn’t offend you. I obviously haven’t feared for my safety in the church as you had to do daily. When I talk about spiritual abuse I’m not even really talking only about things that I have experienced but for what others have experienced also. I feel that the culture that is created is toxic to some.

I’m not offended. I’m also not about to play gatekeeper on the word “abuse.” Besides, I think you’re using it correctly.

I realize now I didn’t make my intentions clear. I didn’t describe my abuse to illustrate what “real abuse” looks like. (It was moderate anyway, all things considered. I generally felt safe at home, at least.) My point was that I understand.

The worst effects of almost all abuse are emotional. I was physically harmed maybe 5 times in 7 years. Always feeling isolated, alone and undervalued was worse than that. Never being able to trust anyone with who I truly was was worse than that. Spending so much time living in fear was worse than that.

The very worst thing about the aftermath of my faith crisis was feeling exactly like that again. So I call the division and isolation that the Church systematically carries out from the top down what I think it is: abuse.

“Our weakly supported claims are the absolute truth! You’re only safe if you’re absolutely certain of them! If you let yourself believe them less, you’re morally broken! We’ve done terrible things, but we can’t lead you astray! Up is down and black is white, and if you can’t believe that, you’re a radioactive apostate! You could at least have the common decency to mourn the death of your identity by yourself. Don’t infect the rest of us.”

Kate, you don’t sound whiny. Putting up with this, and maintaining good relationships with people who buy into it, is really, really hard.

And this is the hardest thing:

Quote:

Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.

I’m still coming up very short in this respect, but I’m giving myself lot of time to do it.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for sharing our thoughts Kate, and for everyone else sharing their thoughts and stories. What is motivating and uplifting to one person, can be destructive and abusive to another. In some cases…what was uplifting to me previously is now damaging and hurtful to me…even the same person (me) with the same words that were previously helpful for me where I was at. So…it can even be so for the same individual.

As a support forum…I think it is less about if we agree something is or is not categorically abuse…but if someone feels their experience with the church is abusive to them…then they should not continue subjecting themselves to abuse of any kind. We determine that ourselves. We all have to learn to protect ourselves and our families and set boundaries that can allow for healthy relationships.

The church exists to help you and your family, Kate…not your family exists for the church. It either is a tool to help you grow spiritually, or it isn’t. And I think many of your experiences are showing you that.

Whether people in the church are intending to abuse or not, should you feel abused…you need to act and shield yourself from it.

I have found peace by letting go of many things…and thinking “they can’t hurt me if I don’t let them.” Perhaps it has morphed to…”the church can’t hurt me as much if I don’t need it.”

And I don’t need it, if I’m focused on the gospel, and focused on my direct relationship with God. Then I can let go of a middle man between us.

Once I arrive there…I can return to deal with church in it’s proper sphere and influence in my life. It is a tool to help me practice the gospel, not something that I exist for in order to make the church work. It works just fine with or without me (I’ve tested that…it holds true). It doesn’t need me to function…and that is the ah-ha moment for me…the reverse is also true…I don’t need it to function. Everything else falls in and around that paradigm.

That has just been my approach. It may not work for others.

[Anonymous]

Beefster wrote:

The way I see it, the purpose of religion is to find happiness and truth. If you don’t feel like you’re getting much of either, maybe it’s time for a new faith, or at least a new approach to the one you already have.

Exactly. That’s the way I see it too, Beefster.

When you came to that realization…did it scare you or empower you?

[Anonymous]

Here’s another thread where the same subject is addressed. I’m not saying we should move the conversation there, I’m only linking to the thread to provide additional information: Why the Church abuses

Reuben wrote:

I’m not offended. I’m also not about to play gatekeeper on the word “abuse.” Besides, I think you’re using it correctly.

I realize now I didn’t make my intentions clear. I didn’t describe my abuse to illustrate what “real abuse” looks like. (It was moderate anyway, all things considered. I generally felt safe at home, at least.) My point was that I understand.

The worst effects of almost all abuse are emotional. I was physically harmed maybe 5 times in 7 years. Always feeling isolated, alone and undervalued was worse than that. Never being able to trust anyone with who I truly was was worse than that. Spending so much time living in fear was worse than that.

The very worst thing about the aftermath of my faith crisis was feeling exactly like that again. So I call the division and isolation that the Church systematically carries out from the top down what I think it is: abuse.

“Our weakly supported claims are the absolute truth! You’re only safe if you’re absolutely certain of them! If you let yourself believe them less, you’re morally broken! We’ve done terrible things, but we can’t lead you astray! Up is down and black is white, and if you can’t believe that, you’re a radioactive apostate! You could at least have the common decency to mourn the death of your identity by yourself. Don’t infect the rest of us.”

Thanks Reuben. You said what I was trying to say. Both about recognizing things in the culture that reminded me of abuse and my motives in sharing that realization.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

Beefster wrote:

The way I see it, the purpose of religion is to find happiness and truth. If you don’t feel like you’re getting much of either, maybe it’s time for a new faith, or at least a new approach to the one you already have.

Exactly. That’s the way I see it too, Beefster.

When you came to that realization…did it scare you or empower you?

It totally empowered me. I felt now I have a litmus test against which to test all the “should’s” of our religion. And around the time I made that realization, I read a book called “The life changing magic of tidying up”. Written by a Japanese home organizer, she says the first thing you do is discard stuff in your house. Your test of whether to keep anything is whether it brings you joy.

The two things happening at the same time — the realization that church is there to make you happy (not selfish happiness, but wholesome happiness, and that means sacrifice sometimes) along with the book popping up in my life, was a major realization.

I feel free of the burdens of the church, yet free to keep those things that bring me happiness. It’s truly an empowering realization that the church is there to bring happiness to us.

I know people will want to qualify that statement — it sounds a bit like I am saying “the church is there to serve US”. Not so. At least, not completely. It’s there to help us understand principles that bring joy, to provide opportunities to serve in ways that bring joy, etcetera. And good joy comes from living rightly, serving others, etcetera. But which principles, which kinds of service, in what intensity are up to the individual to decide.

[Anonymous]

SilentDawning wrote:

I know people will want to qualify that statement — it sounds a bit like I am saying “the church is there to serve US”.

Well technically, the church is there to serve US – 4 fold mission of the church:

Proclaim the Gospel (teaching and learning = for US),

Redeem the Dead (actions designed to build a relationship between US and our ancestors)

Perfect the Saints (teaching US how to draw closer to Christ and be better people)

Serve Others (we do it for OUR Growth and to show love towards others who are like US in different circumstances)

SilentDawning wrote:

Not so. At least, not completely. It’s there to help us understand principles that bring joy, to provide opportunities to serve in ways that bring joy, etcetera. And good joy comes from living rightly, serving others, etcetera. But which principles, which kinds of service, in what intensity are up to the individual to decide.

I agree with this statement as well.

[Anonymous]

I would say church is there to serve us similar to a hospital is there to serve us. Hospitals provide services to heal people and provide healthcare.

While doing that service, they also make money to function, provide jobs to people, and a lot of other things that go along with it. So it does lots of things … some out of necessity in order to function to achieve it’s purpose and some of those are administrative and not directly related to serving sick people. Hospitals serves us, but also has other competing objectives in serving owners, stakeholders, and others.

In serving us…that doesn’t mean they give us anything we ask for. Some go to hospitals to get opioids. Its a problem in our country. But hospitals can say no they serve…because it is complicated. Healthcare professionals have to try to make choices and give patients care based on outcomes for patients, not treat patients like country club members who get whatever they ask for. The service is given in the way the medical profession deems is appropriate for those they serve. It involves judgment from a mortal in a position of power, hopefully with good intentions.

A hospital might do things to an individual that they feel abused by it, especially if it was a dysfunctional organization. For example, a doctor at a hospital may have such an ego that nurses and staff and even patients are abused in various ways by how the doctor treats them or tries to control them.

Another example might be that the hospital has rules and a patient ends up feeling they were abused by the system, denied services they think they need or are given low cost options when other options should have been given. Or perhaps a unintentional mistake (like that commercial on TV where a cell phone is inside the patient and the doctor answers it through the patient’s stomach). Or perhaps by negligence a patient gets exposed to a sickness in the hospital they would not have gotten outside the hospital not by anything an individual did but by the hospital not having proper sterile precautions in place (or sometimes just bad luck). All these things happen. It doesn’t make it right because it is unintentional. It doesn’t make it excusable. Malpractice suits are common because it is not excusable.

And as an individual, I would be careful to avoid risks, ask questions, go to the best facilities to protect myself. Sometimes we need to get a second opinion. Sometimes we have to be informed ourselves about our healthcare to try to make better decisions of which doctors and hospitals to go to and what we should question or push for in order to get what we need or avoid being abused in some way…so we take measures to protect ourselves and to have an open market to compare services and shop around for what benefits us best.

Abuse CAN happen. At church, at work, at hospitals, with police in the community, and elsewhere. Actions need to be taken to expose abuse and avoid it and get far from it.

It doesn’t equate to all hospitals abuse, and we should all avoid hospitals.

Neither does church always abuse people. But sometimes it does or feels that way to someone, and anyone feeling like that, I would not advise them to just “stick it out” or “the problem is you” or “you don’t have a choice, for eternal salvation you can’t leave.” Individual situations require unique adaptation and choice. Similar to divorce. I don’t recommend married couples divorce, but try to resolve issues. It can feel abusive. It sometimes is exactly abusive. Sometimes a split is necessary to establish boundaries.

With hospitals or with church, sometimes shopping around a bit or taking a break is not a bad idea. Sometimes the choice is a choice between 2 painful options:

1) Stay and keep trying to make it work which is causing pain

2) Leave and go through the pain it brings to change.

You try to go with the less painful option, even if there is a no pain option available.

[Anonymous]

I very much appreciate the thoughts shared so far. Love the conversation.

[Anonymous]

Heber, I think you summarized it best for me personally, thank you.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

…I would not advise them to just “stick it out” or “the problem is you” or “you don’t have a choice, for eternal salvation you can’t leave.” Individual situations require unique adaptation and choice…

When it comes to church I think one of the challenges is that the voice that says “the problem is you” isn’t necessarily external, it’s often an internal voice. If you have complete faith that salvation only comes through the church you’re going to do what it takes to stick it out, even when it hurts. It’s almost like you have to have a faith crisis of sorts to break out of the cycle.

I mean, I have trouble imagining a scenario where someone speaking during general conference would say, “Sometimes your best option is to leave the church.” or, “The church doesn’t work for everyone, but we’re here if you need us.” Just like the voice that keeps you in, the voice that finally gives permission to leave is probably going to have to come from within.

AmyJ wrote:

Well technically, the church is there to serve US …

And we’re the church. We serve one another. IMO it’s not the best program (and I won’t be getting into reasons), but take HT/VT as an example. It’s a program for the members, by the members. You get out of it what you put into it. I see many church programs this way. Many programs do feel like busywork with no tangible benefit to people (sorry, just my opinion) but other programs serve us because we serve in the program.

There is one area where I feel there is a great imbalance; lots of take, little give… tithing. But I don’t have the books so I have no way of knowing. Still, having a building and the maintenance costs of the buildings aside, members often pour lots of money into a system that gives them penny filings on the dollar as yearly budgets. But here again, who really knows? It’s hard to have that visibility (in the information age no less, self inflicted I guess). It’s hard for us folk in the Sandy, UT 109th Ward to see how our contributions directly benefited the Kinshasa Congo 1st Ward. (we do get to see a mall go up though, just sayin’)

One disconnect is that people are not always in a position to give, sometimes we find ourselves in the position of needing to take, and I think that’s where the church machine breaks down. People sacrificing to keep the machine going, even when they need a break… but it can be like The Jungle, Bro. WornOut fell into the meat grinder but we can’t stop, it would have a negative impact on productivity. The church will move forward with or without you. Lots of words to say that I agree, there could be a better balance.

And when we say the church is there to serve us, another way of interpreting that is not comparing give and take but asking whether what the church provides is something that we truly need. Does the church serve [our needs]?

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

When you came to that realization…did it scare you or empower you?

I’m not sure it has completely sunk in. But I feel empowered thus far.

[Anonymous]

kate5 wrote:

I don’t blame the church for my depression and anxiety problems however when I read an article such as this about spiritual abuse, I realize that the church has been a contributing factor. At the very least, it doesn’t provide me with any help or comfort.

There are many other articles and books that describe spiritual abuse the same way. I am just curious as to what opinions the great people on this site have as to what constitutes abuse.

http://www1.cbn.com/biblestudy/beware-of-%26quot%3Bspiritual-abuse%26quot%3B

ETA: Here is another article that resonates with me

https://www.charismamag.com/spirit/spiritual-growth/33517-have-you-noticed-these-14-warning-signs-of-spiritual-abuse

These are wonderful articles. I bet that the majority of those who subscribe to this group have an example of these circumstances in their lives. It is perhaps, my greatest struggle with the church.

Have you ever read “Thought Reform and The Psychology of Totalism,” by Robert Lifton?

He is/was a psychologist who interviewed escapees from communist prison camps in the 50’s and 60’s. His work led him to define what a cult is. Much of his beliefs are displayed in the article on Spiritual Abuse.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Author]

Posts